tag:theconversation.com,2011:/us/topics/climate-equity-23023/articlesClimate equity – The Conversation2022-02-10T16:21:53Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1752242022-02-10T16:21:53Z2022-02-10T16:21:53ZHeat waves hit the poor hardest – calculating the rising impact on those least able to adapt to the warming climate<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/444362/original/file-20220203-25-nadrok.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C8%2C3000%2C1985&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Banana plantation workers in Panama find shade under a vehicle during a break.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/indian-migrant-workers-rest-in-the-shadow-of-a-transport-news-photo/156543327">Jan Sochor/Latincontent/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Spend time in a developing country during a heat wave and it quickly becomes clear why poorer nations face some of the greatest risks from climate change. Most homes <a href="https://www.iea.org/commentaries/helping-a-warming-world-to-keep-cool">don’t have air conditioning</a>, and even <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheh.2018.01.004">health clinics can get overheated</a>.</p>
<p>These countries tend to be in the hottest parts of world, and <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-why-africas-heatwaves-are-a-forgotten-impact-of-climate-change">their risk</a> of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(21)00079-6">dangerous heat waves</a> is <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-08070-4">rising as the planet warms</a>. </p>
<p>In a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2021EF002488">published study</a>, our team of <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=S1J4kAoAAAAJ&hl=en">climate</a> <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=tGGNDyUAAAAJ">scientists</a>, <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=044CgyIAAAAJ&view_op=list_works">economists</a> and <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ZaW8ZbsAAAAJ&hl=en">engineers</a> found that the poorest parts of the world are likely to be two to five times more exposed to heat waves than richer countries by the 2060s. By the end of the century, the lowest-income quarter of the global population’s heat exposure will almost match that of the entire rest of the world.</p>
<h2>Capacity to adapt to rising heat is crucial</h2>
<p>Heat waves are often assessed by how frequent or intense they are, but vulnerability involves more than that. </p>
<p>A key factor in the amount of harm heat waves cause is people’s capacity to adapt with measures like cooling technology and the power to run it.</p>
<p>To assess how heat wave exposure is changing, we analyzed heat waves around the world over the past 40 years and then used climate models to project ahead. Importantly, we also incorporated estimates of countries’ ability to adapt to rising temperatures and lower their heat exposure risk. </p>
<p>We found that while wealthy countries can buffer their risk by rapidly investing in measures to adapt to climate change, the poorest quarter of the world – areas likely to be slower to adapt – <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2021EF002488">will face escalating heat risk</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/444125/original/file-20220202-23-1kgsye4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Charts show increasing heat wave exposure for low-income people" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/444125/original/file-20220202-23-1kgsye4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/444125/original/file-20220202-23-1kgsye4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=448&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444125/original/file-20220202-23-1kgsye4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=448&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444125/original/file-20220202-23-1kgsye4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=448&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444125/original/file-20220202-23-1kgsye4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=562&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444125/original/file-20220202-23-1kgsye4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=562&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444125/original/file-20220202-23-1kgsye4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=562&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The highest exposure to heat waves is expected in the lowest-income countries.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2021EF002488">Mohammad Reza Alizadeh</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Poverty slows the ability to adapt to rising heat</h2>
<p>Heat waves are among the deadliest climate and weather-related disasters, and they can be destructive to crops, livestock and infrastructure. Currently, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3322">about 30% of the global population</a> lives in areas where heat and humidity levels can be deadly on at least 20 days a year, studies show, and the risk is rising.</p>
<p>Adaptation measures, such as cooling centers, home-cooling technology, urban planning and <a href="https://www.vox.com/22557563/how-to-redesign-cities-for-heat-waves-climate-change">designs focused on reducing heat</a>, can lower a population’s heat exposure impact. However, a country’s ability to implement adaptation measures generally depends on its <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.565">financial resources, governance, culture and knowledge</a>. Poverty affects each. Many <a href="https://www.oecd.org/env/cc/2502872.pdf">developing countries struggle to provide basic services</a> let alone protections from escalating disasters in a warmer future.</p>
<p>The compounding effects of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.565">economic, institutional and political</a> factors cause a lag in low-income countries’ ability to adapt to the changing climate.</p>
<p>We estimate that the poorest quarter of the world lags the wealthiest in adapting to rising temperatures by about 15 years on average. This estimate is based on the pace of preparation and support for adaptation plans described in the <a href="https://www.unep.org/resources/adaptation-gap-report-2020">U.N. Environment Program’s Adaptation Gap Report</a>. The actual lag will vary because of wealth inequities, but that estimate provides a broad picture of the rising risks.</p>
<h2>Heat risk is up globally, but more in poor regions</h2>
<p>Looking back over recent decades, we found a 60% increase in heat wave days in the 2010s compared with the 1980s. We defined a heat wave as extreme daily temperatures above the 97th percentile for the area, for at least three consecutive days. </p>
<p>We also found that heat wave seasons were getting longer, with more frequent early- and late-season heat waves that can increase heat-related deaths.</p>
<p>Our analysis showed that people’s average heat wave exposure in the poorest quarter of the world during the 2010s was more than 40% greater than in the wealthiest quarter – roughly 2.4 billion person-days of heat wave exposure per year compared with 1.7 billion. A person-day is the number of people exposed to the heat wave times the number of days.</p>
<p>This heat wave risk in poor countries has often been <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-why-africas-heatwaves-are-a-forgotten-impact-of-climate-change">overlooked</a> by the developed world, in part because <a href="https://theconversation.com/extreme-heat-is-a-threat-to-lives-in-africa-but-its-not-being-monitored-149921">heat deaths aren’t consistently tracked</a> in many countries.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A man in shorts and a T-shirt sits in a store selling electric fans." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/444365/original/file-20220203-15-8b4t59.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/444365/original/file-20220203-15-8b4t59.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444365/original/file-20220203-15-8b4t59.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444365/original/file-20220203-15-8b4t59.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444365/original/file-20220203-15-8b4t59.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444365/original/file-20220203-15-8b4t59.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444365/original/file-20220203-15-8b4t59.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Fans can help, when people have electricity to run them. A man in India waits for customers on a day in 2020 when parts of the country expected to reach 122 degrees Fahrenheit.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/man-waits-for-customers-displaying-fans-at-his-store-amid-news-photo/1215441006">Jewel Samad/AFP via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>By the 2030s, we project that the lowest-income quarter of the world’s population will face 12.3 billion person-days of heat wave exposure, compared with 15.3 billion for the rest of the world combined. </p>
<p>By the 2090s, we estimated it will reach 19.8 billion person-days of heat wave exposure in the poorest quarter, almost as much heat wave exposure as the three higher-income quarters together. </p>
<h2>Climate justice and future needs</h2>
<p>The results provide more evidence that investing in adaptation worldwide will be crucial to avoid climate-driven human disasters.</p>
<p>The world’s wealthiest nations, which have produced the lion’s share of greenhouse gases driving climate change, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-02846-3">promised over a decade ago to direct US$100 billion annually</a> by 2020 to help the poor countries adapt to climate change and mitigate its effects. <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/climate-finance-roadmap-to-us100-billion.pdf">Some of that money is flowing</a>, but wealthy countries <a href="https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/frances-macron-says-leaders-finalised-accord-on-$100-bln-in-climate-finance">have been slow to meet the goal</a>.</p>
<p>Studies meanwhile have estimated that economic loss from future climate damage in developing countries will reach <a href="https://us.boell.org/en/unpacking-finance-loss-and-damage">between $290 billion and $580 billion</a> <a href="https://oxfamilibrary.openrepository.com/bitstream/handle/10546/582427/rr-impacts-low-aggregate-indcs-ambition-251115-en.pdf;jsessionid=C2BF26E9CF0705630671F3821B7C7AE9?sequence=1">a year</a> by 2030 and continue to escalate.</p>
<p>Increasing international assistance can help poorer countries adapt to the harm caused by climate change. Companies and innovators can also play an important role by developing low-cost microgrid electricity and cooling technology to help poor countries survive escalating heat waves.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/175224/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The risk from heat waves is about more than intensity – being able to cool off is essential, and that’s hard to find in many low-income areas of the world.Mojtaba Sadegh, Associate Professor of Civil Engineering, Boise State UniversityJohn Abatzoglou, Associate Professor of Engineering, University of California, MercedMohammad Reza Alizadeh, Postdoctoral Researcher in Environmental Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/932872018-03-14T03:22:42Z2018-03-14T03:22:42ZIPCC cities conference tackles gaps between science and climate action on the ground<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/210201/original/file-20180313-131591-3n8dga.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The IPCC's first cities conference revealed the challenges in bridging the gaps between scientific knowledge and policy practice, and between cities in developed and developing nations.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://twitter.com/cities_ipcc">Cities IPCC/Twitter</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Some 600 climate scientists, urban researchers, policymakers and practitioners attended the International Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) first ever <a href="https://citiesipcc.org/">conference on cities</a> last week. Hosted in Edmonton, Canada, it was organised as a forum to share knowledge and advice in support of the sixth IPCC Assessment Report (AR6) due in 2021.</p>
<p>The significance of a UN-organised global scientific conference on climate change and cities should not be underestimated. Urbanisation has been a United Nations <a href="http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/1917(XVIII)">concern since 1963</a>. Policy attention strengthened in the 1970s when the <a href="https://unhabitat.org/un-habitat-at-a-glance/">UN Habitat</a> agency was established. This focus was redoubled in the mid-2000s when <a href="https://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/695_filename_sowp2007_eng.pdf">it was reported</a> that more than half of the global population was now urban.</p>
<p>Climate change has been a topic of <a href="http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/43/53">UN action since 1988</a>, with policy attention intensifying in the late 1990s and mid-2010s. Appreciation has since grown that with <a href="https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.URB.TOTL.IN.ZS">55% of the world’s people now living in cities</a>, this is where where efforts to mitigate and adapt to climate change must be focused.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/this-is-why-we-cannot-rely-on-cities-alone-to-tackle-climate-change-82375">This is why we cannot rely on cities alone to tackle climate change</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>A collision of science, practice and politics</h2>
<p>By venturing onto urban terrain the IPCC faces some interesting scientific questions. To a large degree biological or physical systems can be studied as objective phenomena that behave according to discoverable and predictable patterns. Carbon dioxide objectively traps solar radiation leading to climatic warming; biological species die at temperatures above their tolerance.</p>
<p>By contrast cities are riven with historical, social, economic, cultural and political dynamics. The theoretical and conceptual frames that scientists apply to cities are subject to many biases. </p>
<p>We certainly can calculate the emissions a city produces and chart the likely impacts on it from a changing climate. But the reasons why a city came to emit so much and how it responds to the need to reduce emissions and adapt to impacts are highly contingent. Objective validation and verification are difficult. Identifying causality and forward pathways is very difficult.</p>
<p>There is also a vast divide between the physical and social science of cities and the policymakers and practitioners who shape urban development. Research shows that most urban professionals simply <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08111146.2014.994741">do not read urban science</a>. Instead they draw on practice knowledge acquired from peer practitioners via an array of non-scientific channels and networks.</p>
<p>These difficulties were observable at the IPCC cities conference. It was scientific in purpose but a subtle politics was at play. Rather than being convened by a scientific body, the conference was co-ordinated as an instrument of the world’s national polities and the IPCC, organised by a <a href="https://citiesipcc.org/about/partners/">mix of UN organisations and NGO networks</a>, and sponsored by a local, provincial and national government. </p>
<p>Fewer than two-thirds of delegates were scientists; the remaining 40 per cent were policy officials and practitioners. The problem of connecting scientific and practice knowledge was often on display. </p>
<p>Many cities have accepted the clear scientific evidence on climate change and accompanying global targets. These cities are striving at the local scale to cut emissions and adapt to changing climate patterns. For many, their main need is for knowledge of practical policies and programs, rather than more evidence of climate change impacts or mitigation technologies.</p>
<p>Often these cities are racing far ahead of slow and certain science. They are sharing practical experience of mitigation and adaptation strategies via self-organising peer-city networks. Finding ways to link inventive but unsystematic practice knowledge with the formal peer-reviewed processes of orthodox science will be a critical task for climate change scientists and policymakers.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-american-cities-and-states-are-fighting-climate-change-globally-88460">How American cities & states are fighting climate change globally</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Policymakers are also grappling with how to implement global agreements within complex international arrangements. There face myriad tiers of national, regional, city and local governance, involving a plethora of discrete public, private and civic actors. </p>
<p>For this group, their priorities at the IPCC cities conference concerned policy processes and institutional design, political commitment and implementation instruments. Their needs are for policy, institutional and political science as much as for further scientific detail on climate change. </p>
<h2>What did these encounters reveal?</h2>
<p>The conference generated many fascinating insights. One major theme was the question of informality.</p>
<p>Many cities beyond the developed world are weakly governed. Multiple dimensions of urban life, including housing and infrastructure, are organised via informal institutions. Achieving effective action in these circumstances is a considerable policy problem.</p>
<p>A related problem is the gross geographical imbalance in scientific effort and focus on urban climate questions. Most research focuses on the cities of the developed West. And most of those are comparatively well resourced to respond to climate change.</p>
<p>In contrast, the cities of the developing world lack a systematic data and research base to enable effective and timely climate action. Yet these are the cities where many of the most severe climate impacts will be felt. Resolving this inequity is a fundamental international scientific challenge, as is growing the capacity to build a better evidence base.</p>
<p>Another question the IPCC needs to navigate is the boundary between science and politics in urban climate policy. During conference plenaries, the moderator — a former city mayor — excluded questions about specific political representatives’ stances on climate change according to apolitical IPCC rules. Yet questions about the effects on cities of neoliberalism were deemed permissible. </p>
<p>Urban scientists will require an especially nuanced framing of their research agenda if they are to address the very material politics of urban climate policy via theoretical abstraction alone.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/while-nations-play-politics-cities-and-states-are-taking-up-the-climate-challenge-78839">While nations play politics, cities and states are taking up the climate challenge</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The conference also provided some memorable highlights. William Rees, the originator of <a href="https://www.britannica.com/science/ecological-footprint#ref1203326">ecological footprint theory</a>, lambasted delegates for not adequately appreciating the absolute material limits to resource exploitation. And the youth delegates received a standing ovation as the cohort who will be grappling with urban climate effects long after their older peers have departed.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/7XKGVsdkOCk?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">William Rees explains the origins of the ecological footprint.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>An agenda for urban climate action</h2>
<p>The conference released a <a href="https://citiesipcc.org/news/press-release-world-scientists-local-leaders-map-research-agenda-for-cities-and-climate-change-for-coming-years/">research agenda</a>. This outlines the urgent need for inclusive and socially transformative action on climate change, improved evidence and information to support climate responses, and new funding and finance mechanisms to make this possible. It’s a very high-level guide for climate and urban scientists seeking to better understand climate change impacts on cities.</p>
<p>The conference appears to have met the IPCC’s needs to compile and review a large volume of scientific and practice insight for its assessment reporting. Whether it will have a wider effect on climate policy and action in cities remains unclear. </p>
<p>The participating scientists and practitioners certainly shared a general commitment to advancing the urban climate agenda. But it remains uncertain whether methodical scientific processes will be timely enough to meet the accelerating and expanding demands of urgent urban climate action.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/93287/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jago Dodson was a presenter at the IPCC Cities Conference and has previously worked with conference co-sponsor UN Habitat. </span></em></p>The first IPCC conference on cities has highlighted the challenges of reconciling science, urban practices and politics. But it was an important recognition of cities’ leading role in climate action.Jago Dodson, Professor of Urban Policy and Director, Centre for Urban Research, RMIT UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/914422018-02-09T17:03:31Z2018-02-09T17:03:31ZThe EU wants to fight climate change – so why is it spending billions on a gas pipeline?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/205470/original/file-20180208-180813-ifievy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:TAP_in_Albania.jpg">Albinfo/Wikipedia</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Over the past few years there has been <a href="https://www.enelgreenpower.com/media/news/d/2017/12/renewables-exponential-growth">exponential growth</a> in clean energy investment – while fossil fuel assets are increasingly considered to be <a href="https://www.fsb-tcfd.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/FINAL-TCFD-Annex-062817.pdf">risky</a>. Yet, on February 6, the European Investment Bank, the EU’s long-term lending institution, voted to provide a <a href="http://www.eib.org/infocentre/press/releases/all/2018/2018-030-eib-backs-eur-6-5-billion-energy-sme-transport-and-urban-investment">€1.5 billion loan</a> to the controversial Trans Adriatic Pipeline (TAP).</p>
<p>The TAP is the Western part of a larger Southern Gas Corridor proposal that would ultimately connect a large gas field in the Caspian Sea to Italy, crossing through Azerbaijan, Turkey, Greece and Albania. And while gas might be cleaner than coal, it’s still a fossil fuel. </p>
<p>So how does the EU’s support for this major project fit in with its supposed goal of addressing climate change?</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/205365/original/file-20180207-74487-1cg5u8d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/205365/original/file-20180207-74487-1cg5u8d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/205365/original/file-20180207-74487-1cg5u8d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205365/original/file-20180207-74487-1cg5u8d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205365/original/file-20180207-74487-1cg5u8d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205365/original/file-20180207-74487-1cg5u8d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205365/original/file-20180207-74487-1cg5u8d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205365/original/file-20180207-74487-1cg5u8d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The proposed Trans Adriatic Pipeline will run nearly 900km from Greece to Italy.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Trans_Adriatic_Pipeline.png">Genti77 / wiki</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Influencing investors</h2>
<p>A key problem is the message this sends to the private sector, where renewable energy is increasingly seen as a good investment. Technologies once perceived as too risky and too expensive are now delivering worthwhile returns thanks to reduced costs and breakthroughs in energy storage. The price of electricity generated by solar, wind or hydro is now comparable with the national grid. Over the past decade, investor meetings have shifted from discussing whether the transition to a low carbon economy will start before 2050, to whether it will be completed in the same period. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"949194987337650176"}"></div></p>
<p>But there is still not enough money being spent on renewables. While clean energy investment in 2017 <a href="https://about.bnef.com/blog/runaway-53gw-solar-boom-in-china-pushed-global-clean-energy-investment-ahead-in-2017/">topped US$300 billion for the fourth year in a row</a>, this is far short of what is needed to unlock the technology revolution necessary to tackle climate change. There is clearly a gap between what is required and what is being delivered. </p>
<p>The private sector will continue to invest significant capital into energy projects over the next few decades, so one issue facing policy makers is how to influence investors away from fossil fuels and <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421511005064">towards renewable projects</a>. To really scale up investment into renewable infrastructure, <a href="http://www.unepfi.org/fileadmin/documents/Investment-GradeClimateChangePolicy.pdf">long-term and stable policy is required</a> – which investors <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652615006277">see as clearly lacking</a>. </p>
<p>By funding the Trans Adriatic Pipeline, the EU’s investment bank is hardly signalling to the private sector that governments are committed to a green energy transition. </p>
<h2>Risky business</h2>
<p>If Europe really was to follow through and successfully switch to green energy – and such a transition is partially underway – then the pipeline project may even represent a risk to public finances.</p>
<p>Studies on climate change point to the need for a greater sense of urgency and ambition and, to stay within its “carbon budget” under current agreed emissions targets, the EU needs to be <a href="http://www.foeeurope.org/sites/default/files/extractive_industries/2017/can_the_climate_afford_europes_gas_addiction_report_november2017.pdf">fossil fuel free by 2030</a>. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/HSKcvoBKYxc?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>So any large oil and gas infrastructure projects with investment returns beyond 2030 are saddled with risk. In just a decade or two, super-cheap solar and wind power could mean that gas pipelines such as TAP would no longer make financial sense and would become worthless “<a href="https://www.carbontracker.org/terms/stranded-assets/">stranded assets</a>”. Yet TAP backers are touting economic benefits for countries such as <a href="http://www.oxfordeconomics.com/Media/Default/economic-impact/economic-impact-home/Economic-Impact-trans-Adriatic-Pipeline.pdf">Albania</a> extending to 2068 – well beyond the date when Europe must entirely ditch fossil fuels.</p>
<p>The EU’s official stance is to hail natural gas as a cleaner “bridge fuel” between coal and renewables. But <a href="http://science.sciencemag.org/content/343/6172/733.summary">high leakage rates</a> and the <a href="http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/uploads/WGIAR5_WGI-12Doc2b_FinalDraft_All.pdf">potent warming impact</a> of methane (the primary constituent of natural gas) means that the Southern Gas Corridor’s climate footprint may be <a href="https://bankwatch.org/publication/smoke-and-mirrors-why-the-climate-promises-of-the-southern-gas-corridor-don-t-add-up">as large, or larger, than equivalent coal</a>. Abundant natural gas is also highly likely to <a href="http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/9/9/094008/meta">delay the deployment of renewable technologies</a>. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"952216497123835906"}"></div></p>
<p>For the first decade of this century Europe prided itself on leading the political debate on tackling climate change. Now, it appears to be losing its boldness. To drive through a new technology revolution, the public sector needs to lead from the front and take bold decisions about its energy strategy.</p>
<p>A gas pipeline is not a technology of the future. If California can release <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSKcvoBKYxc">YouTube videos</a> describing the importance of considering stranded assets during this energy transition, and New York City can announce plans to <a href="https://twitter.com/NYCMayor/status/952216497123835906">divest from fossil fuels</a>, then maybe it is time for the EU to turn off the TAP.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/91442/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Aled Jones does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The European Investment Bank’s funding of the Trans Adriatic Pipeline will harm the climate and makes little financial sense.Aled Jones, Professor & Director, Global Sustainability Institute, Anglia Ruskin UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/691112016-11-28T01:23:47Z2016-11-28T01:23:47ZDear Mr. Trump: Climate policy puts lives in your hands<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/147262/original/image-20161123-19689-1m5x579.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Drought, which affects food production, will become more common as the Earth heats up, which can cause deaths and destabilize societies. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/cafodphotolibrary/27265051540/">cafodphotolibrary/flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>President-elect Donald Trump has been unclear so far on how many of his campaign pledges he actually intends to see through. Hopeful Democrats and moderates have clung to this uncertainty as reason to hope that a Trump presidency wouldn’t be as bad as they feared.</p>
<p>And on climate change, Trump has sent some mixed signals. He famously called global warming fake in a <a href="https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/265895292191248385?lang=en">2012 tweet</a>. But in <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/23/us/politics/trump-new-york-times-interview-transcript.html?_r=0">an interview with The New York Times</a> on Nov. 22, he said that he has an “open mind” concerning a <a href="http://unfccc.int/paris_agreement/items/9485.php">global climate accord</a>, and that there is “some connectivity” between human activity and climate change.</p>
<p>As an ethicist who looks at issues around climate change, I’d like to take Trump at his word, and make the moral case that an open-minded president would not risk becoming responsible for the human suffering his proposed climate policies will cause.</p>
<h2>Climate policy and consequences</h2>
<p>During the campaign, candidate Trump said that he would “<a href="http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/donald-trump-pledges-rip-paris-climate-agreement-energy-speech-n581236">cancel</a>” the Paris Agreement, a deal signed by most of the world’s countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. As president-elect, he has said his <a href="https://www.greatagain.gov/policy/energy-independence.html">administration</a> will massively invest in coal and fossil fuels and cancel financial commitments to the UN for climate programs. These steps echo similar vows he made as a candidate, such as bringing back the coal industry and building the <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/18/politics/donald-trump-keystone-pipeline-support/">Keystone XL</a> oil pipeline. </p>
<p>Since the election, there has been significant analysis regarding <a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/could-trump-simply-withdraw-u-s-from-paris-climate-agreement/">how much of this agenda he can do</a>, and just <a href="https://theconversation.com/trump-may-dismantle-the-epa-clean-power-plan-but-its-targets-look-resilient-68460">how bad it would be</a> for emissions. But we cannot overlook that the climate policy agenda laid out by candidate Trump would be obviously bad to some degree. </p>
<p>Trump can’t “cancel” the Paris accords (even formally withdrawing takes 3-4 years), but he absolutely can signal his intent not to live up to the agreement – particularly by undermining Obama’s signature environmental achievement, the <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/topics/epa-clean-power-plan-17859">Clean Power Plan</a>. And while it’s also true that <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-trumps-vow-to-kill-obamas-sustainability-agenda-will-lead-business-to-step-in-and-save-it-68616">market forces will likely continue to push us toward renewable energy</a>, they will not do so fast enough.</p>
<p>Why? The Paris Agreement, as written, is already insufficient to prevent dangerous climate change. Indeed, <a href="http://web.unep.org/emissionsgap/">a recent report</a> reveals that full adherence to the agreement by all nations will limit warming only to 2.9-3.4 degrees Celsius – a far cry from the aspirational limit of 1.5 degrees set by the Paris Agreement itself. That means that <a href="https://theconversation.com/president-trump-could-kill-the-paris-agreement-but-climate-action-will-survive-68596">the agreement requires strengthening</a>, not weakening. </p>
<p>If the U.S. drops its commitment to cut national emissions, in the best-case scenario all nations other than the U.S. keep (and strengthen) their commitments. <a href="http://www.luxresearchinc.com/news-and-events/press-releases/read/trump-presidency-could-mean-34-billion-tons-more-us-carbon">Recent modeling</a> suggests that a Trump presidency results in “only” an additional 3.4 billion tons of carbon emitted compared to a Clinton presidency. </p>
<p>The worst-case scenario, however, seems far too realistic. Some of the nations of the world will almost certainly be required to act against their own self-interest to some extent; that is, the economic incentives alone will not push the world fast enough toward the ultimate goal of net zero (or negative) emissions. And when these nations see that America – the world’s second-largest emitter – is not doing its part, they will decide that it is not rational for them to prioritize low-carbon energy just so the Americans can work to undermine their progress. And the already-too-weak plan will weaken further.</p>
<h2>Human suffering in waiting</h2>
<p>President-elect Trump, then, is in a radically powerful position to do either good or harm. Because the current global agreements are already too weak, there is every reason to believe that we will cross the 1.5 degree (and likely the 2 degree) threshold. Already, climate change is causing problems, such as more extreme weather events and rising seas. Scientists have said pushing global average temperatures higher than 2 degrees above preindustrial levels will lead to “<a href="http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/why-2-degrees-celsius-is-climate-changes-magic-number/">dangerous</a>” changes with more severe effects. </p>
<p>The real question, then, is <a href="http://www.climatecentral.org/news/as-earth-swelters-global-warming-target-in-danger-20597">how long will global temperatures remain in the “danger zone”</a>? Asked another way: How many additional years would the world spend at dangerous temperature levels because of Donald Trump’s proposed policies? </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/147616/original/image-20161125-32049-hczh7g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/147616/original/image-20161125-32049-hczh7g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/147616/original/image-20161125-32049-hczh7g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/147616/original/image-20161125-32049-hczh7g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/147616/original/image-20161125-32049-hczh7g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/147616/original/image-20161125-32049-hczh7g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/147616/original/image-20161125-32049-hczh7g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/147616/original/image-20161125-32049-hczh7g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Climate change has increased the likelihood of storms such as the deadly floods this year in Louisiana.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/usdagov/28429216173/in/album-72157671670871901/">usdagov/flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Under the most optimistic scenario, it could be only a few – perhaps the rest of the world would rally and cap the damage that a rise in U.S. emissions causes. But under the less optimistic scenario, it’s not unimaginable that the needed, aggressive action on climate change could be set back by a decade <a href="https://croakey.org/no-time-for-trump-despair-on-climate-change-heres-a-bumper-call-to-action-post/">or more</a>.</p>
<p>Such a delay would be a moral catastrophe. Climate change is already having deadly effects, such as deaths from <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2016/09/07/climate-change-louisiana-floods/89954074/">climate-worsened storms</a>. The World Health Organization <a href="http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/134014/1/9789241507691_eng.pdf">estimates</a> that by 2030, climate change will cause 250,000 additional deaths per year, due to malnutrition, malaria, diarrhea and heat stress. This doesn’t include the deaths and suffering from other extreme weather events, displacement or <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-military-view-on-climate-change-its-eroding-our-national-security-and-we-should-prepare-for-it-65535">armed conflict</a>, nor does it account for those resulting directly from <a href="https://www.statnews.com/2016/11/14/climate-change-agreements/">air pollution</a>. Spending additional years at that level of warming, then, could result in literally millions more people dying.</p>
<h2>Moral responsibility</h2>
<p>For most of us, moral responsibility for the harms of climate change gets diluted, thanks to the sheer scale of the problem. When I drive my car, take a vacation or keep my house warmer than I need, I contribute infinitesimally to climate change through my emissions, and so it is reasonable to think that my responsibility for the consequent harms is relatively minor. Indeed, this is precisely the feature that makes climate change such a massively difficult problem to solve. </p>
<p>This will not be true, however, for Donald Trump. <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/11/what-president-trump-could-mean-for-climate-change/507098/">He has the power</a>, as an individual, to undermine or protect U.S. environmental policy. And so he also bears the moral responsibility for the death and human suffering that may occur as a result.</p>
<p>President-elect Trump has, as a result, an incredibly solemn task ahead. He can act as he indicated he would, with the predictable result that many thousands, if not millions, of people will die needlessly. Or, he can prove his open-mindedness and reconsider. </p>
<p>Would understanding his moral responsibility have any influence on the president-elect? It’s certainly possible that it would not. But we cannot allow him to act under the impression that his actions won’t have consequences or that his hands can remain clean if he causes great human suffering. </p>
<p>Every day until inauguration (and likely beyond), Donald J. Trump must be reminded of the awesome responsibility he has by virtue of his ability, nearly unilaterally, to decide the fate of our environmental policies moving forward. Lives depend on it.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/69111/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Travis N. Rieder does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Many thousands, perhaps millions, of lives depend on the direction of Trump’s climate policies.Travis N. Rieder, Research Scholar at the Berman Institute of Bioethics, Johns Hopkins UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/517852015-12-08T09:57:25Z2015-12-08T09:57:25ZThe ethics of climate change: what we owe people – and the rest of the planet<p>Ethics is a particularly relevant if underreported topic of conversation at the United Nations conference on climate change in Paris. While technical disputes grab the lion’s share of attention, we should not forget the moral reasons we must address global warming – because of the substantial harm it does and will do to the human and nonhuman world.</p>
<p>Climate justice refers to the disproportional impact of climate change on poor and marginalized populations, while climate equity refers to who should bear the burden of responsibility for addressing climate change.</p>
<p>These twin concerns have both intranational and international dimensions. Climate change will negatively and disproportionately impact poor and marginalized people <em>within</em> national borders as well as cause conflicts <em>between</em> nations, regions and cities that are more or less vulnerable to climate disruptions. </p>
<p>How should ethics inform these questions? </p>
<h2>Fairness and costs</h2>
<p>Any economic discussion regarding lowering greenhouse gas emissions needs to address <a href="http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/put-ethics-at-heart-of-climate-talks-vatican-says-at-paris-summit-94178/">social justice</a>. </p>
<p>For example, a <a href="http://www.worldbank.org/content/dam/Worldbank/document/SDN/background-note_carbon-tax.pdf">carbon tax</a> is recognized by economists as the most efficient means for pricing and reducing carbon emissions. As with all taxes, the cost of such a tax would be passed on from businesses to consumers. Who then should bear this cost? Should the tax be borne equally by all, or be paid by the wealthy and corporations who benefit most from dumping carbon into the atmosphere?</p>
<p>Similarly, islands and coastal areas close to sea level face the prospect of catastrophic inundation and storm damage from <a href="http://sealevel.climatecentral.org">rising seas</a> and the <a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-change-and-hurricane-katrina-what-have-we-learned-46297">increasing strength of hurricanes</a> and typhoons. These are communities geographically vulnerable through no fault of their own. </p>
<p>Should they bear the cost of building the infrastructure – sea walls, raised roads, pumping stations – to improve their resilience? Indeed, some island nations must be prepared to <a href="https://theconversation.com/most-kiribatian-households-are-mulling-climate-migration-and-thats-just-the-start-51627">evacuate their entire population</a>. Should they alone bear the huge costs and social risks of climate migration? </p>
<h2>Who shoulders the burden?</h2>
<p>With respect to climate equity, a heated debate has arisen over who should take the most responsibility for climate action. Historically, the global north of industrialized nations (the United States and western Europe) has contributed most to global warming. </p>
<p>Some in the global south, including India’s Prime Minister <a href="http://www.firstpost.com/world/full-text-pm-narendra-modis-speech-at-the-plenary-session-at-cop-21-summit-in-paris-2527862.html">Narenda Modi</a>, argue that <em>increasing</em> developing countries’ use of fossil fuels is necessary to lift millions out of poverty.</p>
<p>Indeed, India’s latest <a href="http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/energy-and-environment/cop21-paris-climate-conference-narendra-modi-cautions-against-unilateral-steps-in-combating-climate-change/article7933873.ece">negotiating position</a> is to demand that the global north make steep carbon cuts so that India may continue to pollute for economic development. India would reduce the “carbon intensity” of its economic activity, but would not make cuts for decades as its total greenhouse gas pollution grows. </p>
<p>Such a position has led to a <a href="https://theconversation.com/india-chooses-electricity-and-economics-over-emissions-goals-48666">great</a> <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/nov/23/paris-climate-talks-developed-countries-must-do-more-than-reduce-emissions">deal</a> of <a href="http://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2015/11/why-the-paris-climate-deal-is-meaningless-000326">bickering</a>, not only over who should shoulder the economic and social burden, but how <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/topics/sustainable-development">sustainable development</a> should move forward.</p>
<p>Moreover, the national commitments to reduce carbon emissions are essentially <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/03/un-wrong-track-plans-limit-global-warming-2c-top-scientist-climate-change">voluntary and self-policed</a>. Taken together, they do not <a href="https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn28612-paris-climate-summit-earth-may-warm-by-6c-even-with-a-deal/">limit global warming</a> to two degrees Celsius, a threshold we cannot exceed if we hope to maintain a planet of prosperous societies and flourishing biodiversity. Far preferable is to <a href="http://fortune.com/2015/12/05/climate-change-entrepreneurs/">draw down greenhouse gas emissions</a> for a safer 1.5C increase, a position that is not even being discussed. </p>
<h2>Inequalities of wealth and power</h2>
<p>There are a host of other moral issues related to climate justice and equity.</p>
<p>One is that <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/05/science/chief-of-house-science-panel-picks-battle-over-climate-paper.html?_r=0">conservative politicians</a>, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/elliott-negin/did-exxonmobil-just-admit_b_8625514.html">corporate interests</a> and their <a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/11/28/meet-the-climate-denial-machine/191545">think tank sycophants</a> have knowingly peddled climate denial for decades. This is straight-out malfeasance and malpractice in terms of political and research ethics. </p>
<p>Add to that the rising <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/study-richest-10-are-causing-climate-change-2015-12">inequalities of wealth</a> at home and abroad. <a href="http://mashable.com/2015/12/04/neil-degrasse-tyson-climate-summit/#_JdNybbvx8qw">Global elites</a> will suffer few consequences and have little incentive to act for the good of the public or the planet. This will further exacerbate ethical and political fractures between climate haves and have-nots. </p>
<p>In addition, urban sprawl and ongoing <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/04/climate-change-population-crisis-paris-summit">population growth</a> will consume an area the <a href="http://phys.org/news/2011-09-cities-equaling-size-mongolia-years.html">size of Mongolia</a> by the end of the century, with all that entails for environmental degradation and the economic needs of the urban poor. </p>
<p>We will also see the geographical expansion of diseases, food insecurity, social unrest, resource wars, climate refugees and billion-dollar climate disasters, all at a huge cost to human life and suffering. Moral and political fatigue will slowly reduce our capacity to properly care and respond to this growing set of crises. </p>
<h2>Obligations to other species</h2>
<p>Yet, neither climate justice nor equity speaks to the other aspect of climate ethics, namely our moral duties to <a href="http://mashable.com/2015/12/05/climate-change-animals/#eNPJv..yxkqq">other animals</a> and the broader <a href="https://flipboard.com/topic/biodiversity/%27racing-extinction%27-sounds-the-alarm-for-vanishing-species/a-B4Dv-UsGTLqMX7RnYSMeXw%3Aa%3A140136171-a8b572ec4e%2Fapnewsarchive.com">community of life</a>.</p>
<p>Global warming is undoubtedly the product of human causes. We not only brought this problem on ourselves, but foisted it onto the natural world with nary a thought for the ethics of doing so. </p>
<p>The <a href="http://ethicsandclimate.org">dominant rhetoric</a> might decry what global warming will do to human societies, but it rarely speaks of what it does and will do to the creatures and ecosystems with whom we share the earth. Pope Francis’ <a href="https://laudatosi.com/watch">Ladauto Si</a> is a sterling exception in this regard. The <a href="https://theconversation.com/setting-aside-half-the-earth-for-rewilding-the-ethical-dimension-46121">intrinsic value of people, animals and nature</a> means that we have a <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-war-on-feral-cats-shaky-science-missing-ethics-47444">direct duty to the nonhuman world</a> to address climate change as a matter of moral urgency.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/104505/original/image-20151204-14451-1tcyqaf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/104505/original/image-20151204-14451-1tcyqaf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/104505/original/image-20151204-14451-1tcyqaf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=413&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/104505/original/image-20151204-14451-1tcyqaf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=413&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/104505/original/image-20151204-14451-1tcyqaf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=413&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/104505/original/image-20151204-14451-1tcyqaf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=518&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/104505/original/image-20151204-14451-1tcyqaf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=518&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/104505/original/image-20151204-14451-1tcyqaf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=518&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Other species of animals live in sophisticated social groups and, many argue, express emotions as people do. What is our moral obligation to them?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/martin_heigan/19175373854/in/photolist-vdsNA3-dZ9ZTe-d1bdo5-dLfEvG-a7RWd7-9k1oJ3-bp7jUK-p6gMtq-rMhR48-9qixXv-atJLJY-7oVMBc-ofUf1i-oppv1V-bD1u9c-bq6wX9-71jtgH-aMsPqv-sPSYLg-eX6ryg-kt6E5B-pPYPRp-rN7FPD-bRcWii-rAb2n6-aCrZq5-yoUfG-82wtbt-ahrECb-6cDtnB-nLiD74-8coHXE-5KGtf9-SnWtq-qb1cPc-8YjyFj-aXiSDR-e6EMp4-4vU4C5-auNqGn-vZQqUT-7YHNgW-igMi5D-isULxK-isUAkd-isU8q1-isUgNo-m4HRD-6r3Lg-agYj13">martin_heigan/flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Interspecies responsibilities also put questions of climate justice and equity into a <a href="http://geographical.co.uk/opinion/item/1390-the-ethical-imperative">larger moral landscape</a>, changing how we see our common and differentiated responsibilities to combat climate change. </p>
<p>Fights over climate justice and equity are essentially about what we owe each other as human beings. The rich, Western, industrialized countries should share the largest burden not only for historical reasons, but because they are wealthy enough to absorb the costs for the long-term well-being of themselves and the global south. </p>
<p>But arguing over what nation or social group should be held culpable can distract from the urgent need to act for the well-being of people and the planet now. </p>
<h2>The rest of nature</h2>
<p>Emergent industrialized economies like India’s also have a rapidly increasing responsibility to cut their own global emissions of greenhouse gases. <a href="https://flipboard.com/@william_lynn/climate-e99bsrghy/developing-nations-shift-emissions-stance-in-climate-talks/a-JaZwY1OARTWVvlWGY0s-Tw%3Aa%3A20118371-1c066b16b6%2Fapnewsarchive.com">Island nations</a> have made this point eloquently in the face of bickering between the global north and south. </p>
<p>And India’s current negotiating position seems more focused on better positioning the economy for the global stage, than it is in meeting its common if differentiated responsibilities. India is not alone in this. Its elites are simply outspoken in their anthropocentric self-interest. </p>
<p>The same critique applies to how we ought to care for other animals and the rest of nature. Their fate should not be hostage to a narrowing argument about culpability. It is rather a matter of <a href="https://theconversation.com/making-the-moral-case-on-climate-change-ahead-of-paris-summit-50888">responding morally</a> to the needs of others — human or nonhuman — in the face of climate crisis. What matters most is not apportioning blame and seeking advantage, but making things right.</p>
<p>Global warming threatens the well-being of people and the planet, raising crucial issues of ethics and public policy that we ignore at our peril. Left unchecked, or by doing too little too late, climate change will haunt future generations and leave a despoiled earth as our legacy.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/51785/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>William S. Lynn does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A narrow debate of what countries should pay to respond to climate change obscures a bigger moral discussion that touches on economics, ethics and people’s relationship to the natural world.William S. Lynn, Research Scientist, Clark UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/512522015-11-30T12:54:28Z2015-11-30T12:54:28ZTake no prisoners: the Paris climate talks need to move beyond ‘fairness’<p>For years now the climate talks have revolved around discussions who should bear the burden of cutting emissions, particularly between developed and developing nations. Much of Paris climate summit will be focused on this notion of equity and how to ensure that each country does its their fair share in the fight against climate change.</p>
<p>Developed countries (known as “Annex 1” in the United Nations’ lingo) now typically have falling emissions, but are responsible for the majority of historical emissions. Developing nations (known as “non-Annex”) often have increasing emissions, but are responsible for far fewer historical emissions. </p>
<p>Based on this, developing countries have argued strongly for differentiation. For them this involves developed countries taking the lead on reducing emissions and providing finance and assistance for developing countries undertaking a low-carbon transformation. Developed countries argue that equity means all countries taking action and adopting targets together. </p>
<p>Most of the national pledges that have been submitted for the summit make some mention of why the pledge is “fair” or equitable. Even Oxfam has been in on the action releasing a <a href="https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/file_attachments/ib-civil-society-review-climate-indcs-191015-en_2.pdf">Fair Shares equity review</a> of national climate pledges.</p>
<p>But this concept of a fair share is a large reason why Paris is at risk of failing to deliver a worthwhile deal. We will not solve climate change until we stop seeing emissions reductions as a burden to be equally shared.</p>
<h2>The burden of climate action?</h2>
<p>The way we talk about issues creates a frame in our minds. It bundles up different ideas to create a shared perspective. </p>
<p>For climate change, talk of equity has inevitably framed emissions reductions as a burden which needs to be “fairly distributed”, or as a penalty to atone for past sins. </p>
<p>Nations also talk of “capacity”, or the ability to reduce emissions and adapt to climate change. This of course depends on the state’s economy and politics. But it implies that reducing emissions comes at a high cost and is only worth undertaking if the right capacity is in place. </p>
<p>If there is one way to ensure that countries don’t act it is to frame mitigation as a burden. Luckily this just simply isn’t true. Reducing emissions, and mitigating climate change, is not a burden; it is one of our greatest opportunities. </p>
<h2>The benefits of climate action</h2>
<p>The economics of climate change has been slowly moving away from emphasising the costs towards recognising the benefits. This is not surprising given the history of environmental regulation. </p>
<p>Decreasing ozone-depleting substances was <a href="https://books.google.fr/books?id=fpMh3nh3JI0C&redir_esc=y">originally forecast</a> by industry to have catastrophic economic costs. It ended up being extremely cheap. </p>
<p>Industry initially complained of the potential costs of the Clean Air Act in the United States. But the <a href="http://www2.epa.gov/clean-air-act-overview/benefits-and-costs-clean-air-act-1990-2020-second-prospective-study">US Environmental Protection Agency</a> has estimated that the act saved the US economy US$2 trillion in avoided health and productivity losses by 2020. The estimated costs were just US$65 billion. The benefits were 30 times larger than the expected costs. </p>
<p>The same kinds of benefits are on offer when switching from fossil fuels to renewable energy. <a href="https://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/aer.101.5.1649">One US study</a> calculated the health costs of coal-powered electricity to be 0.8-5.6 times greater than the value added to the US economy. Earlier this year <a href="https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2015/wp15105.pdf">the IMF estimated</a> that when accounting for wider costs such as health, fossil fuels are subsidised globally by more than US$5 trillion per year. So even without accounting for climate change, in most cases fossil fuels cost more than they’re worth. </p>
<p>Renewable energy and climate mitigation has the edge over fossil fuels in most wider analyses.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://newclimateeconomy.report/">New Climate Economy Report</a> provides an overview of compelling studies and examples showing why mitigating climate change would be good for economic growth and general human well-being. </p>
<p>Importantly mitigation is already cheap and getting cheaper every year. <a href="http://awsassets.wwf.org.au/downloads/fs077_australia_can_cut_emissions_deeply_and_the_cost_is_low_21apr15_v3.pdf">A report</a> by Frank Jotzo and myself earlier this year showed how the different estimates of the cost of large emissions reductions in Australia range from 0.1-0.21% of annual GDP growth. Not exactly a big hit to the economy. And these are all still narrow analyses that don’t consider all of the co-benefits of mitigation.</p>
<p>Emissions reductions are not a burden to be handed out equally between countries. It is an opportunity that countries should be pursuing with or without an international deal. Talk of avoiding catastrophic climate change just strengthens an energy transformation which already makes economic and social sense. </p>
<h2>Breaking out of the prisoner’s dilemma</h2>
<p>Climate change has typically been seen as a <a href="http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/prisoner-dilemma/">prisoner’s dilemma</a>: a game where two rationally behaving actors will avoid cooperation and produce an outcome which is not in their collective interests. </p>
<p>Climate change has been viewed as a prisoner’s dilemma because each country thinks that climate action benefits everyone, but costs the individual country. So countries push for everyone to participate in negotiations to share this cost. It is particularly clear in Paris where there have been repeated calls for an agreement that is “applicable to all” and excludes no-one. </p>
<p>But this is not true, and many countries are beginning to realise this.</p>
<p>Looking around the world, the greatest action being taken against climate change is <a href="http://nationalclimatejustice.org/">not about altruism</a> or in the name of equity. They are being done for economic gain and to create better lives for the public. </p>
<p>China is installing vast renewable energy capacity and moving towards limiting coal consumption due to concerns over air pollution, energy security benefits and to <a href="https://theconversation.com/an-emerging-renewables-superpower-chinas-climate-pledge-guns-for-green-growth-44142">secure a head-start</a> in the booming renewable energy market. Germany is undertaking its famed “<em><a href="http://www.economist.com/node/21559667">Energiewende</a></em>” in order to secure a market advantage in renewable energy and kick-start its economy.</p>
<p>Countries are taking action not for equity or morality, but for their own national interest. </p>
<p>Realising the benefits of mitigation changes the game of negotiations. No longer would we focus on getting everyone on board and distributing “fair-shares”. Instead the aim would be to find ways to maximise collective benefits and opportunities.</p>
<p>Of course least developed countries should receive financial and technological aid. But that is because assistance should be given for any kind of development, not because a low carbon transformation is prohibitively expensive. Fairness does become a bigger issue when talking about other issues such as adapting to climate change impacts, but it shouldn’t be the main focus for reducing emissions.</p>
<p>Climate change is not a prisoner’s dilemma. It is not about equitably sharing a burden. That is a myth. There really is no dilemma when climate action has so many benefits.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/51252/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Luke Kemp has previously received funding from the Australian and German governments. </span></em></p>The sooner nations stop viewing emissions reduction as a burden to be shared, and more as an opportunity to be grasped, the sooner real climate progress will be achieved.Luke Kemp, Lecturer and PhD Candidate in International Relations and Environmental Policy, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.