Sufficientarianism and the economics of climate change

Dominic Lenzi

Politics, Philosophy & Economics, 2026, vol. 25, issue 2, 208-234

Abstract: Can economics reflect climate justice? Although the scenario forecasts of climate economists are key inputs to IPCC assessments, their ethical assumptions fail to reflect important considerations of justice. This is clearest regarding sufficientarian justice, which requires that no person falls below a minimum level of well-being. This view is reflected in an important strand of climate diplomacy and activism that highlights the plight of those most vulnerable to climate harms. However, I show that sufficientarian justice is largely incompatible with predominant approaches to climate economic modelling. I then examine the prospects for a sufficientarian climate economics, considering dual discounting approaches, well-being ‘guardrails’ approaches and basic needs modelling. I find that the latter two are closest to sufficientarianism, although they reflect different interpretations of its core claims. Finally, I consider whether climate sufficientarianism requires economic ‘degrowth’, as some have claimed. I argue that sufficientarianism is compatible with periods of economic growth, but is likely to be incompatible with the indefinite pursuit of growth due to the ecological impacts this would entail. Since growth is a standard assumption in climate economics, this reiterates the need for new economic approaches in the pursuit of a just and sustainable future.

Keywords: sufficientarianism; climate justice; climate ethics; climate economics; degrowth (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2026
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1470594X251340973 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:pophec:v:25:y:2026:i:2:p:208-234

DOI: 10.1177/1470594X251340973

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Politics, Philosophy & Economics
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().