Round The World
New Delhi, 2 December 2015
Paris Summit
TOWARDS
CHANGE OF CLIMATE?
By Dhurjati
Mukherjee
All eyes are on Paris. The historic climate change
conference, which is in session there, is expected to reach a global agreement
based on commitment by all nations to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.
Over 180 countries, amounting to 95 per cent of the world’s emissions, have
submitted their Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs), which
outline their commitment to reduce emissions between 2020 and 2030 through
domestic action. However, scientists who have analyzed these found that even if
these were implemented, which is unlikely, the global temperature would rise to
around 3 degrees by 2100.
The situation thus is indeed
disturbing. Various measures need to be taken to curb the incidence of greenhouse
gases and it is for the developed countries to take the lead. However till now
they have been reluctant. For example, India’s
INDCs is more ambitious than that of the US in terms of moving towards
non-fossil fuels.
Perhaps, a rewind of Pope Francis’
first speech at the UN General Assembly would be welcome, where he condemned
the ‘grave offence’ of economic and social exclusion. He stated: “A selfish and
boundless thirst for power and material prosperity leads both to the misuse of
available natural resources and to the exclusion of the weak and
disadvantaged.” He appeared to have echoed the sentiments of Mahatma Gandhi and
Dr. Martin Luther King, against the exploitation by the rich and powerful
through direct and indirect ways and grabbing more than normally due.
Francis criticized unbridled
capitalism in the two years of his papacy. The Argentine pontiff called on
government leaders to ensure that people enjoy the minimum means needed to
live. “In practical terms, this absolute minimum has three names: lodging,
labour and land”, he stressed. His observation has great significance, when
there is world-wide concern on the grave consequences of environmental
pollution and over exploitation of the Earth’s resources for an ever-increasing
population.
The Pope’s warning or advice should
have wide-ranging repercussions on political leaders across the world,
specially the West, where consumption standards are very high while large
sections of the population in Africa and South Asia languish in poverty and
squalor. How long should this be allowed to continue in a world where everybody
is talking about sustainability, equality and balanced development would be a
key concern?
A report of the Global Footprint Network revealed that humanity lived within the
Earth’s means till 1970 but driven largely by carbon emissions, it has steadily
been increasing debt ever since. It means humanity is on course to consume 1.6
Earths this year and, if the current course is maintained, we will be using the
resources of two Earths per annum by 2030.
While the consumption has been an
unsustainable burden on planet, over 60 per cent of the earth’s ecosystem has
been degraded or used unsustainably. Experts are unanimous that our current way
of life is unsustainable. The fast depleting oil reserves, the lack of fresh
air and shortage of water not to speak
of drinking water are obvious signs of unsustainable use by an ever-expanding
population.
A recent article by Julia Layton in Environment Science noted that if
everyone lived on Earth like a middle class American, consuming 3.3 times the
subsistence level of food and about 250 times the subsistence level of clean
water, the Earth could only support about 2 billion people. On the other hand,
if everyone on planet consumed what he or she needed, 40 billion would be a
feasible number. As it is, the people in the developed countries are consuming
so much that the other approximately 75 per cent of the population is finding
it difficult to live with what they barely need.
In his book ‘The Future of Life’, renowned Harvard University socio-biologist,
Prof. Edward O. Wilson has stated: “If everyone agreed to become vegetarian,
leaving little or nothing for livestock, the present 1,4 billion hectares (3.5
billion acres) would support 10 billion people”. Further, he explained that 3.5 billion acres
would produce approximately 2 billion tonnes of grains annually. This would be
enough to feed 10 billion vegetarians but would only feed 2.5 omnivores because
so much vegetation is dedicated to livestock and poultry in the US.
There is, however, a small section
of experts who believe that the world with its vast resources has the potential
to create a sustainable world where 100 per cent of the population can live
comfortably and in harmony with the environment. This is rather difficult to
believe as a drastic transformation in our mindsets and consumption patterns of
life and living doesn’t look possible in the coming years. Besides, it would
take a very long time to innovate in different fields to make available
hitherto unexplored resources and give these for human use.
The onus of change is primarily on
the political leaders of the G-5 countries though developing countries like China,
India, Brazil and South Africa have a major role to play. In addition, civil
society, the scientific community all have to join hands in the endeavour to
conserve resources, reorient consumption patterns, explore and innovate new
areas. But before this, the ever increasing greed of a section of humanity has
to be drastically reduced.
The orientation of our lifestyle,
our behaviour and our wants has to be in synergy with the strategy of
development. Development in Third World countries like India has to be so
geared that there is a grass roots approach, whereby all people are assured of
the basic necessities of life and living. Moreover, the planning strategy has
to take into account that growth does not affect the environment, i.e.
industrialization shouldn’t be allowed to pollute the planet.
Herein comes the question of
sustainability. Though there has been much talk of the need for a sustainable
world since the release of the Bruntland Commission report, there is little
that has been done. While the developed nations have paid lip service towards
controlling emissions and continued with conspicuous consumption, emerging
economies like China, Brazil, India etc. with their large populations have
failed to control pollution. Moreover, their growth has not been based on
environment-friendly models as a result of which pollution has grown
rapidly. .
Both groups accuse each other of not
adhering to environment-friendly norms. But it is a fact that the developed
nations have not given the resources promised to the Third World countries nor
transferred environment-friendly technologies to them so that their growth is
not hampered. The present INDCs of respective governments entail huge
expenditure which is extremely difficult to generate. For example, India’s post
2030 climate action plan would require around $2.5 trillion between now and
2030. With limited resources at their command, the developing countries have
not been able to achieve much while keeping pace with their development
objectives.
Recall, the Kyoto Protocol didn’t
achieve its desired objective and though a treaty or agreement may be signed in
Paris, at the end there may be little to cheer. The agreement to be signed is
not just about an accord to cut emissions but how the world will operationalize
equity. While we need to keep hope to save our mother Earth, the role of
environmental activists during and post the conference would be the key to keep
up the pressure at the national and international level. ---INFA
(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)
|