Climate change is a global issue, but it undoubtedly affects some more than others. The poorest populations are worst affected by droughts, floods and failed harvests. They are also least responsible for the carbon emissions which cause them. Without ambitious policies to tackle inequality and climate change together, rising temperatures could undo decades of development work.
The COP 21 climate change conference in Paris has been hailed as the world’s greatest diplomatic success. Bringing together 196 countries for two weeks of negotiations, it produced an agreement which requires developed and developing countries alike to limit greenhouse gas emissions to keep global temperatures rises well below 2°C. Developing countries will receive support to cut emissions and adapt to the effects of climate change, and the agreement will be revisited every five years, with a view to increasing its ambition.
But many worry that it is not enough. The emissions targets are not legally binding, and even though every country had an equal say in the talks, the needs of the most vulnerable communities were not fully secured.
“The people who are most affected are the poorest and most vulnerable in the world,” said Celine Mias, EU representative of CARE International. “Addressing climate change means addressing deeply ingrained systemic issues of power imbalances and inequality in the world, and these are massive challenges to tackle.”
These are coupled with an overarching financial test: mobilising the money to turn the words of the agreement into actions. The Paris conference renewed the goal of raising $100bn a year of climate finance for developing countries – a figure proposed six years ago, with disappointing results so far. A new and higher collective goal is to be set by 2025.
“The funding challenge beyond 2020 is enormous,” said Elina Bardram, head of International and Institutional Relations in the European Commission’s Climate Directorate. “The majority will not come from limited Overseas Development Assistance sources. Those can be useful, they can catalyse, but the main transformational investment and shift needs to come from the energy sector, from infrastructure investment. It has to be a paradigm shift in the way we think, and businesses and the private sector have a key role to play.”
There are three main areas to fund: mitigating further damage to the environment; helping vulnerable countries adapt; and supporting communities already affected by climate change.
Mitigation
Over 160 countries outlined their plans to lower emissions from 2020 ahead of the Paris talks. These INDCs – intended nationally determined contributions – were “an unprecedented showing of countries’ willingness to transit to low carbon,” said Bardram. “We’ve never seen anything like this. But it’s not enough, and that needs to be clear.”
Without upping ambition, the emissions caps in the Paris agreement are likely to lead to warming of 2.7°C to 3°C above pre-industrial levels, according to the Guardian. And the distribution of the ‘carbon budget’ – how much can be emitted collectively – risks perpetuating inequalities between developing and developed nations.
“Rich nations must acknowledge, they got rich because when they started to industrialise, they had access to fossil fuels, and polluted freely,” said Dr Stephan Singer, director of Global Energy Policy at WWF. “There’s no way they can do their fair share of mitigation just through reducing emissions now.”
Bearing in mind their historical emissions of carbon dioxide, which can linger in the atmosphere for 1,000 years, “the EU and US would need to go to zero emissions by 2025. Which might be equitable and fair, but keep on dreaming. We must pay.”
One suggestion is for developed nations to supplement their own climate pledges with funding for clean energy and technology in developing countries. This could address climate change and inequality simultaneously: besides reducing emissions and being water-efficient, green energy creates jobs.
Renewable resources make up about a tenth of the world’s energy supply, compared to 85% from fossil fuels. Yet they employ 9.2 million people – compared to only around 13 million in oil, gas and coal put together.
“Countries which focus on one commodity become very unequal domestically, with no benefits for the local population,” said Singer. Oil-exporting Nigeria, an OPEC country, cannot provide electricity to half its population. Supporting jobs in renewables would spread wealth more effectively within countries, improving equality, at the same time as fighting climate change.
Supporting vulnerable communities to build climate resilience
Another suggestion is for developed countries to support the communities which depend on natural resources for their living. Fisher folk, forest-users and farmers in developing countries are particularly vulnerable to climate change, and already suffering its effects. Their success or failure has huge implications for regional food security, poverty and migration.
A host of organisations are already supporting adaptation measures, including the EU. It backs wide-ranging projects from farmer field schools in Africa to high-tech weather forecasting. Read more about the EU GCCA+ flagship initiative supporting climate resilience and other EU projects to support smallholder farmers and other vulnerable communities.
CARE is also engaged in helping farming communities adapt to climate change. “We work with local communities to help them to become more resilient by building the capacity of small farmers, most of whom are women,” said Mias. “But in some cases, it’s too late for mitigation or adaptation. Look at Kiribati.”
Loss & Damage
The Pacific island of Kiribati, whose plight was highlighted during the Paris talks, is in danger of disappearing. Already its freshwater resources are inundated by seawater, and its atolls are eroding. “We need recognition of the urgent need to support countries unable to adapt to climate change, where the impact has gone too far,” said Mias.
A mechanism for addressing ‘loss and damage’ for impacts beyond the reach of adaptation was discussed in Paris, and eventually anchored in the agreement. It gives prominence to supporting people whose homes and livelihoods are damaged beyond repair by extreme weather conditions, who are often uninsured.
Doing justice to those most affected requires recognising responsibility. “We all live in this world together and we have joint responsibilities and challenges,” says Singer. “There’s a direct link between being overly rich and causing emissions. Those who have more – and much more – must contribute more.”
The COP will reconvene in Morocco next year. The issues are now firmly in the public and political consciousness, with Kiribati a stark emblem of things to come.
“There’s still time to be ambitious, and make strong commitments to limit warming to 1.5°C, and to address the needs of the most climate-vulnerable countries,” says Mias. “The world has the resources – we just need the political will, and we saw the beginning of that in Paris.”
| The EU considers the success of the Paris climate conference historic: A moment when global partners succeeded in opening a new chapter in international climate action. A robust and dynamic multilateral framework was agreed to help achieve climate neutrality during the second half of century and support global climate resilience. The ambitious outcome corresponds to EU priorities. The agreement includes a common goal for global ambition, strong commitments to achieve it, and a comprehensive solidarity package. |
Group
Image Credit: Dennison Uy, Creative Commons license
Log in with your EU Login account to post or comment on the platform.