SYDNEY, Oct 15 (IPS) – Climate justice recognizes the different impacts of the climate crisis on rich and poor, women and men, and older and younger generations. The Secretary General of the UN emphasizes António Guterres“As is always the case, it is the poor and vulnerable who suffer first and are hardest hit.” However, all people should have the freedom of choice to live a life of dignity. Climate justice therefore views the climate crisis through a human rights lens.
Climate justice thus synthesizes the recognition of rights and differentiated impacts. It states that every individual and every country has the right to development, and that the countries, companies and people who have become rich through the emissions of large amounts of greenhouse gases have a responsibility to help those affected by climate change, especially the most vulnerable countries and communities. , who are often those who have contributed least to the crisis.
Differentiated contributions and impacts
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports that between 2010 and 2020, human mortality from floods, droughts and storms increased fifteen times in highly vulnerable areas. The IPCC also finds that globally, the 10% of households with the highest per capita emissions contribute 34 to 45% of global household greenhouse gas emissions, while the bottom 50% contribute 13 to 15%. It warns that children and young people today will bear the full brunt of the consequences of climate change as they progress through their lives, even if they have not contributed significantly to the climate crisis.
The World Bank estimates that only a tenth of the world’s greenhouse gases are emitted by the 74 lowest-income countries (LICs), but they will be most affected by the impacts of climate change. The World Bank also notes that, compared to the 1980s, these LICs have already experienced about eight times as many natural disasters in the past decade. It warns that unchecked climate change could force more than 200 million people to migrate within their own countries by 2050, pushing up to 130 million people into poverty and reversing decades of hard-won development achievements.
Within the same country, the impacts of climate change can be felt unevenly due to structural inequalities based on race, ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic status. For example, women are more seriously affected; people with disabilities are at increased risk, including threats to their health, food security, access to water energy, sanitation and livelihoods; And Indigenous peoples face increasing threats and risks to their lives, livelihoods and traditional knowledge.
Six dimensions of justice
Climate justice “calls for a shift from a discourse about greenhouse gases and melting ice caps to a civil rights movement that centers the people and communities most vulnerable to climate impacts.” said Mary Robinson, former President of Ireland and former United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.
Climate justice thus includes ideas about fairness, equality and ethical responsibility. It goes further than just limiting CO2 emissions; and delves into the distribution of climate impacts, the participation of marginalized communities in decision-making, and the recognition of diverse perspectives and experiences regarding climate change.
A questionnaire of Australian environmental groups reveals six dimensions of climate justice: distributive justice, procedural justice, recognition justice, relational justice, intergenerational justice and transformative justice.
Distributive justice emphasizes that some countries and communities are disproportionately affected by climate change and its costs. Procedural justice requires involving affected countries and communities in decision-making processes.
Relational justice emphasizes the importance of fostering cooperative relationships among countries, groups and communities to advance climate justice. Fair, equal and respectful relationships are seen as essential for developing just responses to climate change.
Intergenerational justice expresses concern about the effects of climate change on future generations. Protests by hundreds of thousands of schoolchildren highlight the intergenerational injustice of climate change. They demand that world leaders act now to save the planet and their future.
Transformative justice addresses social and institutional inequities that drive and perpetuate climate change. Some argue that addressing climate justice requires a fundamental shift away from the capitalist global economic system. Others argue for a just transition to a low-carbon world, while creating jobs and stimulating faster and inclusive economic growth.
Climate justice highlights the overarching principle of ‘Live No One Behind’ of the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
Climate justice requires translating commitments into reality, enabling stronger and deeper cooperation, and meeting the greatest challenge of our time.
As Maria Robinson emphasized“By working together we can create a better future for current and future generations.”
Failed commitments increase the trust deficit
Unfortunately, if Oxfam attracts attentionThe continued failure of rich countries to deliver on their pledge of $100 billion in climate financing – made at the 2009 Copenhagen climate summit – threatens negotiations and undermines climate action. Oxfam also explains the claim of the OECD – a wealthy country club – that “developed countries have significantly exceeded their commitment of $100 billion in climate finance by 2022.”
Independent reviews from the World Resources Institute (WRI) and the Overseas Development Institute (ODI) show that such exaggerated claims are due to flawed accounting systems. After adjusting the data to eliminate double counting, this yields smaller numbers than the OECD. The division of responsibility per country shows that only a few contribute sufficiently.
Climate finance analysts criticized the quality of climate finance and the way the OECD calculates the figures. Harjeet Singh, a veteran climate justice activist, said the process of providing and accounting for climate finance “is riddled with ambiguities and shortcomings. Much of the financing is repackaged as loans rather than grants and is often intertwined with existing aid, blurring the boundaries of real financial aid.” Climate finance is still provided mainly in the form of loans, much of which is non-concessional. This has increased debt pressure.
Developing countries remain frustrated and skeptical as they have lost confidence as developed countries continue to fail to meet their total aid commitment of 0.7% of GNI, which they agreed more than half a century ago.
Common but differentiated responsibilities
In any case, the unfulfilled commitment of $100 billion expires in 2025. The $100 billion target is a fraction of what is needed to support developing countries in achieving climate goals the Paris Agreement.
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change states that developing countries will need at least $6 trillion by 2030 less than half of their existing nationally determined contributions.
Such as UNCTAD highlightsdeveloping countries face the dual challenge of simultaneously investing in development and in climate mitigation and adaptation, while addressing the costs of loss and damage.
The scale of this challenge is staggering when nearly 900 million people in the world lack access to electricity, and more than 4 billion people have no social safety net to rely on.
This challenge can only be met by truly upholding “common but differentiated responsibilities”. That is, when rich countries and communities recognize their non-immunity and respect the development rights of poor countries and vulnerable communities. Only then will a new spirit of cooperation emerge to achieve climate justice.
IPS UN Office
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram
© Inter Press Service (2024) — All rights reservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service