Tackling climate change also about equity

ADDRESSING COP26, David Attenborough, one of the world’s great authorities on nature, asked, “Is this how our story is due to end?” He went on to add, “A tale of the smartest species doomed by that all too human characteristic of failing to see the bigger picture in pursuit of short-term goals. If working apart, we are a force powerful enough to destabilise our planet, surely working together, we are powerful enough to save it.” The wisdom of Attenborough’s aspiration of humankind coming together to avoid the looming catastrophe of anthropogenic climate change is obvious. Not so clear is how the human ‘story’ will unfold in the decades and centuries to come.

If the last three decades are a guide, only the incorrigibly optimistic will remain hopeful of the destiny of the Homo sapiens. None of the commitments given by the leaders of the advanced world on climate change have been fulfilled. Worse, they have been replaced by resiling from the basic principle of ‘common but differentiated responsibilities’. Is there, therefore, any reasonable hope that the brave declaration adopted by the G20 leaders in Rome on October 31 and the fine words and commitment of the leaders of developed countries at Glasgow at the beginning of COP26 will not prove to be worthless?

This question may seem cynical but the fact is that the world continues to be guided by national interest and is therefore divided. That is obvious from the absence of the Chinese and Russian presidents from both meetings. Hence, for all the call for multilateral approaches to global problems, the truth is that there is little global appetite for serious and effective multilateral solutions. Certainly, there is no evidence of multilateral cooperation that requires a sacrifice of growth and power that the developed countries will necessarily have to undertake if climate change has to be controlled and other issues that require global cooperation effectively addressed.

Without its annexures, the Rome Declaration of the G20 leaders is 15 pages long and contains 63 paragraphs of commitments to meet the challenges arising out of the full range of issues confronting it on the global economy and society. These stretch from the pandemic to climate change, and the stability of the financial markets to financial flows, from the developing world to digitisation, and from problems of cyber security to corruption and gender equality.

The promises are many and are all encouraging. For instance, on the challenge of Covid-19, this is what the leaders said, “Reaffirming that immunisation is a global public good, we will enhance our efforts to ensure timely, equitable and universal access to safe, affordable quality and effective vaccines…” The fact is that many developed countries have till now hoarded vaccines far in excess of their needs. They have begun giving booster doses to what they believe are vulnerable sections of their population despite the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) pleas that instead of booster doses, the global priority should be to cover all people as early as possible. Thus, can these high commitments be taken seriously in the absence of any consensus on as vital an issue as vaccine coverage of those who have been neglected so far?

There is no doubt that the actions of the United States will determine the fate of the international response to climate change. It is the world’s largest per capita emitter of greenhouse gases. Yet, it has been reluctant to shoulder its responsibility to reduce emissions, transfer technologies and commit to financing green growth in the developing world. It has gone back on its commitments in the past to the extent that former president Donald Trump took the country out of the Paris Accords. Now, President Joe Biden is seeking to assure the world that his country will assume the leadership of global efforts to combat climate change. That was his basic message in Glasgow. He repeatedly spoke of limiting global warming to 1.5°C and of the ambitious steps that the US will take to make it a net-zero emission economy by 2050. His words were eloquent, but is there a firm and binding consensus in the US political, strategic and industrial classes to go on the path which Biden is showing his people and the world? There is no clear evidence that it is so. Hence, the US and the Western nations’ credibility on climate change control, adaptation and mitigation has necessarily to be woefully low.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi delivered India’s statement at COP26. He did well to forthrightly say, “We all know this truth that the promises made till date on climate finance have proved to be hollow.” He went on to add, “India expects developed countries to provide climate finance of US $1 trillion at the earliest.” He asked that pressure be exercised on countries that have not met their targets on climate finance. This was a clear reaction to the pressure on India to do more on climate change and commit to a net-zero target which Modi did, but deferred it to 2070. Modi also gave an account of the steps India has taken to reduce carbon intensity in its national life. And, all this when it has 17% of the world’s population and accounts for only 5% of global carbon emissions. This said, it is a vain hope that the affluent countries will transfer financial resources in any major way to the developing countries for transforming their economies.

At the heart of combating climate change lies equity. Yet, the Western countries are focusing not on it, but raising issues of security and sustainability. Of course, growth should be sustainable and the species has to be made secure from the impact of climate change. However, so long as issues of equity are not effectively addressed and the advanced countries place emerging technologies within the matrix of preserving their power, it would be impossible to achieve the target of global temperatures rising below 1.5°C and the world will continue its downward slide into catastrophe.