This article examines divergent conceptions of moral responsibility for climate change across Eastern (Confucian, Daoist, Buddhist) and Western (deontological, utilitarian, virtue ethics) philosophical traditions. Through comparative analysis, we identify how foundational ethical frameworks shape responsibility attribution: Western individualism emphasizes causal accountability and remedial obligations of discrete actors, while Eastern holism prioritizes relational harmony and cosmic balance through collective action. Indigenous philosophies further contribute intergenerational custodianship paradigms challenging anthropocentrism. The study reveals that integrating Confucian relational ethics with capabilities approaches offers a transformative path for just climate governance. We argue that effective climate action requires hybrid ethical frameworks reconciling individual agency with systemic interdependence, supported by institutional reforms embedding mutual responsiveness in policy design.