{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026077700904736562, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004257583821181479, 'mean_word_length': 5.308724832214765, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Further uses for the luxury/subsistence distinction: Impacts, ceilings, and adaptation

First, I want to note a deep appreciation for Henry Shue’s contributions, both the broad contributions to the climate justice literature, his particular proposal to differentiate – normatively and in policy – between subsistence and luxury emissions, and on his specific reflections on that earlier idea in this Breakthrough symposium. I also want to note and appreciate the acknowledgement at the start of this piece of how his own work built on that of Agarwal, Narain, and others’ insistence on the ‘right to live’ (e.g. Agarwal and Narain, 1991). The difference between the emissions of those seeking basic needs versus those spewing carbon pollution from gas-guzzling cars of the comparatively rich was initially raised in the context of the concerns of developing nations in climate negotiations. These contributions to the basic idea that we should value different kinds of emissions in different ways have helped to clarify questions of justice, rights, and climate policy over the last quarter-century. Importantly, they have also made it easier to critique universalising, or difference-denying, concepts such as the ‘anthropocene’ which can be read to blame all of humanity equally for environmental damages, no matter their station. The nature, quality, and reasoning behind differential contributions to ecological harm by individuals, states, and corporations are now regularly part of theoretical and pragmatic discussions in the climate justice literature. We owe Shue appreciation for his part in setting this norm. In the current Breakthrough article, Shue (2019) reflects on the development of the differentiation between luxury/subsistence emissions, and on various applications of the idea since its original publication. He then turns to a discussion of the new era the