Poor countries bear the unequal burden of the impact of climate change, which is at the centre of the Global North versus Global South debate, which was a rare central theme in this year’s economic survey
Rishabh Shrivastava
A coal processing unit in India. Pic credit: The Migration Story
India in its recently released Economic Survey 2024 of India has described the approach of the West towards climate action as “flawed and not universally applicable”. The survey said the West has failed to address the climate villain of “overconsumption”, and that rich countries indulged in energy-intensive activities such as mining of critical minerals.
It cited India’s traditional way of living and behaviour change towards sustainable living as efforts to combat the climate crisis. It also mentioned the Indian government’s Mission LiFE that “aims to build a mass movement to adopt sustainable lifestyles based on mindful utilisation, minimising waste, and making green choices”.
The debate between developed and developing countries on who pays for the loss and damage caused by climate change runs deep.
On the one hand are countries that are classified as the global North, which are rich, highly industrialized, politically strong and have large access to resources. Countries that are poor, formerly colonized, less industrialized, politically and economically dependent and have lower access to resources are classified as the Global South countries.
The climate change politics between the two blocs is skewed: the Global North is responsible for nearly half of all the emissions since the Industrial Revolution that began in the 18th century. On the other hand, Global South countries have historically had low rates of carbon emissions owing to poor industrial growth, but are more exposed to brutal threats of climate change.
There is mounting pressure on coal-dependent countries like India to wean off fossil fuels to cut emissions. But even as India builds its renewable energy capacity with an ambitious target to achieve 500 GW in clean energy capacity by 2030, it is not an easy transition to make for the world’s most populous country that is eying energy security to meet its ever growing demand for power. Besides, India still has rich reserves of coal, a cheap fuel that has remained a reliable energy source to cater to peak summer power demand despite growing clean energy capacity.
The complexity of this transition in India has made the country a strong representative voice for the Global South, advocating for fair and equity-based solutions to climate change. It is a voice that seeks balancing of climate mitigation with livelihood protection. It speaks for other nations about the need for a fund from rich nations to build adaptation and mitigation capacities.
THE QUESTION OF EQUITY
India’s position in the global climate dialogue is not recent.
The participation of then Prime Minister, Indira Gandhi, in the Stockholm Conference (1972) in linking poverty and environmental degradation, signalled India’s position with respect to the interests of the Global South.
Later in 2002 in a UNFCCC meeting, former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee also highlighted the need to view climate change through the lens of equity, as, according to him, developing countries were at a greater loss due to climate threats.
These fears are a present-day reality with the World Meteorological Organization’s Report (2023) stating that Asia is one of the fastest-warming regions and has faced the most number of disasters in the year 2023. Pakistan has witnessed one of the most intense heatwave conditions this year. Cyclone Freddy ended up killing more than 200 people last year in Malawi in Africa. Heavy rains in Kenya have claimed more than 100 lives and affected more than 2 lakh people this year.
India was one of the first countries to ratify the Kyoto Protocol in 2002 which remains the only international climate change agreement that made it legally binding for the developed countries to limit and reduce carbon emissions.
Another reason why the Global North and Global South debate matters in climate change is the climate change modeling frameworks. These frameworks tell us how much carbon will be emitted into the environment from different regions based on various timelines. It also informs when the emissions will peak for different regions and countries.
These modelling frameworks are then used as evidence for designing policy actions that enable countries to set targets for curbing carbon emissions and introduce a slew of additional measures.
But researchers have pointed out that these frameworks are biased toward rich countries and fail to take into account the developmental realities of the Global South. These frameworks are not equity-centred, studies note, which means they do not take into account the poverty levels, energy requirements or other developmental indicators.
They have pointed out that rich nations such as the United Kingdom, United States, Switzerland and Germany need to put in six times the mitigation efforts if equity is considered as a factor while modelling. But if equity is not considered, the same burden of mitigation is two times more on poor countries such as Nepal, Kenya, and Burkina Faso, which would be violative of the equity-based principles enshrined under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC), which for the first time talked about limiting the levels of greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere in a time-bound manner.
LET’S TALK MONEY
A coal field in India. Pic credit: The Migration Story
Climate analysts say the Global North must fulfil its climate finance goals to facilitate poor countries make the clean switch, but in doing so, it must not seek profits.
A Reuters report this year noted that Japan, France, Germany, the United States, and other wealthy nations were “reaping billions of dollars in economic rewards from a global programme meant to help the developing world grapple with the effects of climate change”. The report based its analysis on a review of the UN and Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development data.
There is now a growing call amongst developing countries to seek a review of global commitments made by countries in the Paris Agreement and the role of rich nations in facilitating a just transition in developing economies by providing adequate climate finance and technology support.
In a recent interview to the Press Trust of India, Diego Pacheco, the spokesperson for Like-Minded Developing Countries, a coalition of 25 countries including India, said developing countries were implementing their national climate plans to achieve Paris Agreement goals or nationally determined contributions (NDCs) without “any support at all” from developed countries that have historically benefited from industrialization and contributed the most to greenhouse gas emissions.
“Developing countries cannot move forward with more commitments without the necessary financial support. After 10 years since the approval of the Paris Agreement, it is time to discuss the key issue for the implementation of the pact. If we cannot succeed in achieving a meaningful NCQG, all the agreements made in Paris are at stake,” Pacheco told PTI in an interview this week.
An assessment by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, an intergovernmental organisation, this year showed that developed countries had “provided and mobilised USD 115.9 billion in climate finance for developing countries in 2022, exceeding the annual USD 100 billion goal for the first time”, coaxing the countries to sustain the support.
But beyond climate finance negotiations, are also learnings for the Global South on how other countries have made the clean switch.
Denmark’s power sector has undergone a transformational shift over the past 30 years from coal-dominated generation to mostly renewable sources. The country phased down fossil fuels from 97% of its electricity mix in 1990 to a large extent due to the growth of wind and other zero-carbon energy sources.
A solar park in India. Pic credit: The Migration Story
Brazil too is promoting renewable energy-driven growth. Nearly 90 percent of Brazil’s electricity came from renewables in 2023, by far the highest among G20 economies and three times higher than the global average of 30%. Brazil’s success in reaching such a high share of renewables is primarily due to its robust hydroelectric base and the rapid expansion of solar and wind power in recent years.
However, India’s climate stand, and that of other developing countries, is reflective of the industrial growth it envisages in the foreseeable future, including in some of the most energy-intensive sectors like cement and steel, which are also major employers. Besides, a large number of Indians, from some of the most marginalised communities, lean on energy-intensive sectors for a living, and would be the most impacted from this transition.
For this reason, economic diversification of fossil fuel regions is a key focus of just transition policies in countries that have made the clean switch, notes a study by nonprofit climate research organisation iForest, in addition to a policy push.
Germany, for example, enacted a Coal Phase Out Act and Structural Development Act in 2020. As the names of the two laws suggest, they were aimed at phasing out of coal and the structural development of coal regions. The iForest study notes that Germany has in six decades formulated and implemented just transition measures, has in place laws, policies and programmes to navigate closure of coal mines and related industries.
Similar transition in the Global South will take time, but campaigners believe that work must now to achieve a just transition.
Rishabh Shrivastava is a researcher and writer working on issues of law, policy and development.
Resources & Further Readings:
Comments