BRUSSELS - Rich industrialised countries owe a ‘climate debt’ for causing global warming that is mostly impacting the poor and vulnerable of the world. This view is gaining ground as the international community heads for the United Nations climate change conference Dec. 7-18 in Copenhagen.

The concept of a debt related to climate change has been advanced by Bolivia and other countries in several rounds of United Nations climate negotiations. It is finding support of an increasing number of heads of state, government ministers, officials, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and social movements -- representing indigenous peoples, development and gender activists, organised labour – as well as environmental and social justice groups in Africa, Asia, Latin America, Europe and North America.

The climate debt of developed countries comprises ‘emissions debt’ and ‘adaptation debt’. They have run up an emissions debt to developing countries for over-using and substantially diminishing the Earth’s capacity to absorb greenhouse gases (GHGs), denying it to the developing countries that most need it in the course of their development.

The industrialised nations have also accumulated an adaptation debt to developing countries for the adverse effects of excessive GHG emissions contributing to the escalating losses, damages and lost development opportunities confronting developing countries.

EMISSIONS DEBT

The extent of developed countries’ emission debt reflects an excessive use of shared environmental space in the past, at present and in the foreseeable future. With less than 20 percent of the population, developed nations have caused more than 70 percent of historical emissions since 1850. This is far more than their fair share of emissions proportionate to their population.

“After diminishing the Earth’s environmental space -- denying it to poor countries and communities -- the same rich countries now propose consuming a disproportionate share of the remaining space through until 2050 when compared to an equal per-capita share,” notes the eminent Third World Network (TWN) in a paper circulated by Friends of the Earth International at a workshop in Brussels.

TWN says in ‘Climate Debt: A Primer’: “Developed countries representing a minority of people have appropriated the major part of a shared global resource for their own use -- a resource that belongs to all and should be fairly shared with the majority of people.”

ADAPTATION DEBT

The proponents of climate debt say, while freeing up an environmental space, developed countries must accept responsibility for the adverse effects of their historical and continuing high per-person emissions on poor communities and countries. The hardest hit include: farmers and farming communities; indigenous and local communities; women, poor communities; people relying on scarce water resources; and communities susceptible to health impacts.

As a result of global warming, rain-fed agriculture in some countries is expected to drop by up to 50 percent by 2020, leaving millions of people without food.

Indigenous peoples and local communities are harmed by changing eco-systems and threats to traditional livelihoods.

The significance of the impact on women is underlined by the fact that 70 percent of the world’s poor are women. Women provide half of the world’s food. They are hardest hit by climate change and must be at the centre of any solution, according to the climate debt concept.

The concept takes into account estimates that between 75 and 250 million of people are likely to face increased water stress by 2020 due to climate change. Also, the health of millions of people is expected to be affected through increased malnutrition, mounting disease burden and death and injury as a result of extreme weather events.

The proponents of climate debt point out that it is a component of a larger ecological debt, reflecting the excessive pollution and over-use by the wealthy of the goods and services provided by nature. Over-consumption of food, water, minerals, forests, fisheries and other goods by a minority is contributing to excessive use of scarce resources.

ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT: USA VS. CHINA AND INDIA

The ecological footprint per person of the United States -- measured as the productive land and sea required to provide resources and to absorb wastes -- is more than four times the globally sustainable level. It is more than four times China’s and more than nine times India’s.

Says the TWN primer: “Globally, our ecological footprint exceeds the Earth’s capacity to regenerate by about 30 percent. If present trends continue, by mid-2030s we will require the equivalent of two planets. Of this, our carbon footprint forms a large and growing part.”

Subsequently, any effort to advance the cause of climate justice must be rooted in a broader effort to promote ecological and social justice between rich and poor, developed and developing countries.

The climate debt activists say the wealthy industrialised world must take responsibility for repaying the full amount of their climate debt. “Doing so is not merely right; it also provides the basis of an effective climate solution.”

A fair and effective climate solution should in their view consist of at least the following components:

Developed countries repay the full measure of their adaptation debt to the developing countries and communities who did little to cause climate change and are its first victims. They must provide financing and technology to ensure full compensation for losses suffered, and the means to avoid or minimize future impacts where possible. They should commit to fully repay their adaptation debt to developing countries, commencing immediately.

Developed countries must repay the full measure of their emission debt to developing countries and communities. There will be no sustainable climate solution if developed countries seek to continue polluting at 70 percent or more of their 1990 levels all the way through until 2020 (consistent with 30percent cuts).

To avoid deepening their debt, developed countries must seek to become carbon neutral and more. Reflecting their historical responsibility, their assigned amounts of atmospheric space in any future year should be even lower. They must take a lead in cutting emissions through deep domestic reductions, and by accepting assigned amounts that reflect the full extent of their historical emissions debt.

Developed countries must provide the financing and technology required by developing countries to live under the twin constraints of a more hostile climate and restricted atmospheric space. They must honour their obligation to provide the full incremental costs of emission reductions undertaken in developing countries.


IDN