Advantageous comparison let both sides of the Kyoto dispute feel righteous

Evidence

The most consequential use of advantageous comparison is in many nations’ stiff resistance to making the lifestyle and economic changes needed to curb global warming. Mitigating concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere requires substantial reductions in emissions in the immediate future, that is, absolute reduction of emissions, not just slowing the growth rate. The disputes over the Kyoto Protocol, which was adopted in 1997 and went into effect in 2005, illustrate how, through exonerative comparison, both sides of the controversy feel righteous about their high output of greenhouse gases. This protocol required developed countries to cut their national emission of heat-trapping gases depending on their per capita output. But developing countries were exempted because they were minor contributors to the global climate problem. The United States and Australia rejected the protocol on the grounds that it would hamstring their economies and place their nations at a competitive disadvantage in the global marketplace. Opponents argued further that the protocol was unfair because large, developing countries, such as China and India, are surging ahead as competitive economic powers free of any emission limits. With their boom-ing economies raising consumption levels in huge populations, they have become major producers of greenhouse gases. — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement, 2660