Scholarlink

<p>The top 10% of global consumers is disproportionately responsible for transgressing planetary boundaries, causing damages for which broader society bears the costs. Here we monetise the climate change, biosphere integrity, biogeochemical cycles and freshwater-use footprints of these consumers using prices of the Environmental Prices Handbook. We find annual damages owed by the global 10% to be $1.7–$5.7 trillion, equivalent to $2.3k–$7.5k per person (in $2017). This surpasses international climate and biodiversity financing gaps. The top 10% US consumers see a bill of $19k–$63k, equal to 6–20% of their income or 0.8–3% of their wealth. The two biggest contributors to the damage bill are biodiversity loss at 47–56% of the total and climate change at 36–45%. These costs highlight the mitigation responsibility of the top 10% and illustrate the potential revenue of environmental taxes if the polluter-pays principle is adopted.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Environmental damages of the top ten percent consumers exceed global climate and biodiversity funding gaps

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年6月18日

查看全文
  • Inge Schrijver,
  • Rutger Hoekstra,
  • Paul Behrens

摘要

The top 10% of global consumers is disproportionately responsible for transgressing planetary boundaries, causing damages for which broader society bears the costs. Here we monetise the climate change, biosphere integrity, biogeochemical cycles and freshwater-use footprints of these consumers using prices of the Environmental Prices Handbook. We find annual damages owed by the global 10% to be $1.7–$5.7 trillion, equivalent to $2.3k–$7.5k per person (in $2017). This surpasses international climate and biodiversity financing gaps. The top 10% US consumers see a bill of $19k–$63k, equal to 6–20% of their income or 0.8–3% of their wealth. The two biggest contributors to the damage bill are biodiversity loss at 47–56% of the total and climate change at 36–45%. These costs highlight the mitigation responsibility of the top 10% and illustrate the potential revenue of environmental taxes if the polluter-pays principle is adopted.