Envisioning just futures

The study addresses a key question: how can philosophical ideas about distributional justice be applied to the way emission scenarios are developed? In this context, distributional justice refers to how the benefits and burdens of climate action such as access to energy, resources, or consumption opportunities, are shared across different groups in society and over time.

“Scenarios perceived as unjust will fail to motivate collective action,” explains lead author Karl Scheifinger, a researcher in the Integrated Assessment and Climate Change Research Group of the IIASA Energy, Climate, and Environment Program and PhD candidate at Imperial College London. “While all scenarios have justice implications, the underlying assumptions are often not made explicit, leaving the distribution of benefits and burdens unclear. There is no single fair future, but we hope that by making future distributions more transparent, scenarios can better inform action in the present.”

The authors show that justice principles can be translated into concrete “trajectory requirements,” making it possible to systematically evaluate the distributional implications of a given scenario. The findings show that this approach can be used both to assess existing scenarios and to develop new ones that are designed consistently with different theories and/or principles. By directly linking scenario pathways to theories of justice, the method provides a simple, theory-based tool that works in practice. It also opens the door to involving stakeholders in shaping scenarios that reflect the diverse societal perceptions of justice.

For example, the approach can be used to examine how everyday activities linked to greenhouse gas emissions are distributed across society, and to inform debates on how they could be distributed fairly. Questions such as a fair distribution of number of flight travels or housing space across income groups are emotionally fraught, but carry important energy implications. Another question is how the consumption of meat could be fairly distributed across the globe in future. By making these consumption patterns visible, the framework helps to clarify different answers to distributional questions.

As part of the study, the team applied the framework to scenarios assessed in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Sixth Assessment Report, looking specifically at the aspects mentioned above (energy use for housing and transport, and meat consumption). They found that many existing mitigation scenarios are consistent with a range of justice principles, often assuming that those who are currently worse off benefit most over time. They also found that only a limited number of scenarios explore futures that place limits on energy or meat consumption.

The study highlights important implications for policy and public debate. It enables policymakers to assess the distributional impacts of emissions pathways in a way that is consistent with theories of justice, while also supporting the design of new scenarios aligned with stakeholder approaches to justice.

The approach is also relevant for upcoming IPCC assessments, where it could help to systematically evaluate the justice implications of mitigation pathways and broaden the range of options considered for achieving climate targets.

Reference 
Scheifinger, K., Brutschin, E., Mintz-Woo, K., Zimm, C., Kikstra, J.S., Rogelj, J., Żebrowski, P., Schinko, T., Pachauri, S., Sovacool, B.K., Fritz, L., & Riahi, K. (2026). Exploring patterns of distributional justice in global climate change mitigation scenarios. npj Climate Action DOI: 10.1038/s44168-026-00364-4