[U of T submitted assignments]
Introduction
2017 was a year that was marked with multiple extreme weather events, such as the European heat wave called “Lucifer” (The New York Times, 2017), record high temperatures in various states in the western United States of around 47 degrees Celsius (Park, 2017), as well as many more droughts, flooding events, typhoons, and wildfires throughout Africa and Asia (AON Benfield, 2017). It should also be noted that 2017 was the hottest non- El Niño year, and the third hottest year on record (McKenzie, 2017). This is but a taste of what is to come as the Earth continues to warm up as a result of anthropogenic climate change. It can be seen through events like these that the whole world is vulnerable to the effects of climate change; however, it is notable that a disproportionate amount of countries most at risk to climate change are developing countries, such as Haiti, Zimbabwe, Sri Lanka, Vietnam (Eckstein et al., 2017), as well as the Central African Republic, and the Democratic Republic of Congo (Verisk Maplecroft, 2016). The question now is who do we hold accountable for these effects, and how do we hold them accountable?
Although we all have a shared responsibility to the welfare of our planet, I posit that developed countries, who have been producing more greenhouse gases (GHGs) since the Industrial Revolution, are supposed to bear more responsibilities for the effects of climate change; however, that does not mean that developing countries should be fully reliant on dole outs, technological advances, and climate change responses made by developed countries. Instead, I hold that developing countries should also strive to both mitigate and adapt to the effects of climate change on their own.
In writing this paper, I assume that you, my reader, have a basic knowledge and understanding of what climate change is, what causes it, and what mechanisms can be used to prevent it.
Common, but Differentiated Responsibilities
The most common defense made by developed countries is that it is unfair for others to place on the blame and responsibilities for climate change on them. This perhaps was most encapsulated in the refusal of the 2001 U.S. Senate and then-president George W. Bush to ratify and follow the Kyoto Protocol, stating that it was unfair for the Protocol to demand that Annex 1 (developed) countries like the U.S. lower their carbon emissions while developing countries are not required to do the same (Plumer, 2015). Another argument Bush had was that in order to ensure both a decrease in carbon emissions without “harming the economy and hurting American workers,” the U.S. would have to use more natural gas as fuel to replace coal, something that he claims is impossible for the U.S. to do (Reynolds, 2001). However, these claims made by Bush can be countered; for example, his claims that it is impossible for the U.S. to shift to natural gas was debunked in 2016, when the U.S. economy grew by 1.6 percent while its CO2 emissions have decreased by 3 percent (Waldman, 2017). Also, the claims that it is unfair for developed countries to take on more of the responsibilities for climate change has already been countered by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), written in 1992, which states:
Noting that the largest share of historical and current global emissions of greenhouse gases has originated in developed countries, that per capita emissions in developing countries are still relatively low and that the share of global emissions originating in developing countries will grow to meet their social and development needs. (p.1)
Simply put, the UNFCCC had already recognized that developed countries are responsible for global warming and climate change and that it is unfair to expect other developing countries to sacrifice their development by imposing the same strict regulations on them.
This statement by the UNFCCC is also supported by a paper by Göran Duus-Otterström entitled “The Problem of Past Emissions and Intergenerational Debts” (2014). In this paper, Duus-Otterström recognizes that all “agents” are allowed to emit a certain amount of carbon in a view that he calls the “quota-based polluter pays principle (qPPP)” (p.449). He then posits that the problem with qPPP is that it cannot put into account emissions that were made by “agents that were no longer in existence” (p.449). The author then states that in order for us to be able to compensate for these past emissions, some of the present “agents” must have extra responsibilities, which may translate to lower emissions. But who should bear these extra responsibilities? Duus-Otterström then proposes the Inherited Debt Principle, which states that “The currently existing people [or nation-states], whose holdings (of…resources) stem from uncompensated overuse of the atmospheric commons, have a duty to take on extra burdens” (p.456). Upon analysis, one can realize that this exact situation could be applied to our current “blame-game” situation between the developed and developing countries. Since we know that around 70% of the total CO2 produced from 1800-2010 was from developed countries (Yamada & Galat, 2014) and that it is in this emission of CO2 that the economies of these countries were grew, it is then logical to assume (using the Inherited Debt Principle) that these developed countries have to bear more responsibilities.
However, I concede that George Bush was partially correct. The lack of limitations on the emissions of developing countries like China and India led to an increase in total global emissions, essentially cancelling out the emission cuts other developed countries had made (Plumer, 2015).
Related Links:
Part 2: On Climate Change: An Insight into Climate Justice [UofT docs 2018]
Part 3: On Climate Change: An Insight into Climate Justice [UofT docs 2018]