Climate Change
and
Equity
Sivan Kartha
Stockholm Environment Institute
Reducing Inequality in a Sustainable World
Berkeley, California
5 March 2015
IPCC AR5 (2014):
“We can keep warming
below 2°C.”
~4-5°C
~3°C
IPCC AR5 WGIII, SPM, Figure SPM 4
> 100 techno-economic scenarios illustrating low emissions development paths
2
(blue range) that keep warming likely to remain below 2°c.
Climate and Equity: a bird’s eye view
Annual emissions (GtCO2e/yr)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2000
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
Climate and Equity: a bird’s eye view
Annual emissions (GtCO2e/yr)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2000
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
Climate and Equity: a bird’s eye view
Annual emissions (GtCO2e/yr)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2000
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
Climate and Equity: a bird’s eye view
Annual emissions (GtCO2e/yr)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2000
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
Climate challenge … in the midst of a development crisis?
• Nearly 2 million per year die from lung diseases due to
cooking smoke
• About 800 million people chronically undernourished
• More than 1 billion have poor access to fresh water
• 2 million children die per year from diarrhea
• 30,000 deaths each day from preventable diseases
• 3 billion people without access to clean cooking fuel,
electricity, or both
7
When do emissions have to peak and start falling?
IPCC AR5 WGIII, Ch. 6 Figure 6.7
No. America/W. Eur
Japan/Aus/New Z
Asia
Latin America
Middle East/Africa
Economies
in Transition
Emissions peak, globally and in all regions, in next ~10
years in the “likely 2°C” category of paths.
→ Broad low-GHG transformation underway in all regions.
8
Income in year that emissions peak
$-
Norway
United States
Canada
Australia
Japan
EU27
Russia
Ukraine
Korea, Rep.
China
Mexico
Brazil
South Africa
Iran
Indonesia
India
LDCs
$10,000
$20,000
$30,000
$40,000
$50,000
Income in
2010
Projected income
range 2015 - 2025
Sources: World Development Indicators Databank (World Bank, May2013); Incomes in PPP US$
Why a global climate response must be fair to be effective:

No single country can protect “its own” climate by reducing its own
emissions

No country can solve its own climate problem for itself.

Countries must persuade other countries to help it solve its climate
problem

A country thus reduces its own emissions – and cooperates in other ways
– for the sake of inducing reciprocal effort (that is, getting other countries to
do likewise).

A country is more likely to be successful if it is perceived as doing its fair
share of the effort.

So, international cooperation with equitable effort-sharing is more likely to
be agreed and successfully implemented.
“Outcomes seen as equitable can lead to more effective
cooperation.” [IPCC, Summary for Policy Makers, 2014]
Principles, Article 3.1, UNFCCC, 1992
“The Parties should protect the climate
system for the benefit of present and future
generations of humankind, on the basis of
equity and in accordance with their common
but differentiated responsibilities and
respective capabilities.”
11
Principle 7, Rio Declaration, 1992
“In view of the different contributions to
global environmental degradation, States
have common but differentiated
responsibilities. The developed countries
acknowledge the responsibility that they
bear in the international pursuit of
sustainable development in view of the
pressures their societies place on the
global environment and of the technologies
and financial resources they command.”
12
“Countries will be asked to meet different
requirements based upon their historical share
or contribution to the problem and their relative
ability to carry the burden of change. This
precedent is well established in international law,
and there is no other way to do it.”
Al Gore
13
Income and Capacity
14
Emissions and Responsibility
fossil CO2 (cumulative since 1990 showing portion defined as “responsibility”)
15
National fair share of the effort
based on national “capacity” and “responsibility”
Responsibility
%
RCI
(obligations)
%
28.8
22.6
25.7
33,754
26.1
19.8
22.9
1.5
17,708
2.7
2.8
2.7
Norway
0.07
52,406
0.54
0.26
0.40
United States
4.5
45,640
29.7
36.4
33.1
China
19.7
5,899
5.8
5.2
5.5
India
17.2
2,818
0.66
0.30
0.48
0.7
10,117
0.6
1.3
1.0
LDCs
11.7
1,274
0.11
0.04
0.07
Annex I
18.7
30,924
75.8
78.0
76.9
Non-Annex I
81.3
5,096
24.2
22.0
23.1
High Income
15.5
36,488
76.9
77.9
77.4
Middle Income
63.3
6,226
22.9
21.9
22.4
Low Income
21.2
1,599
0.2
0.2
0.2
World
100%
9,929
100 %
100 %
100 %
Population
%
Income
($/capita)
EU 27
7.3
30,472
- EU 15
5.8
- EU +12
South Africa
Capacity
%
16
National fair share of the effort
based on capacity and responsibility
2010
2020
2030
Population
(% of global)
GDP per capita
($US PPP)
Capacity
(% of global)
Responsibility
(% of global)
RCI
(% of
global)
RCI
(% of
global)
RCI
(% of
global)
7.3
30,472
28.8
22.6
25.7
22.9
19.6
- EU 15
5.8
33,754
26.1
19.8
22.9
19.9
16.7
- EU +12
1.5
17,708
2.7
2.8
2.7
3.0
3.0
0.11
39,181
0.60
0.27
0.44
0.37
0.30
United states
4.5
45,640
29.7
36.4
33.1
29.1
25.5
Japan
1.9
33,422
8.3
7.3
7.8
6.6
5.5
Russia
2.0
15,031
2.7
4.9
3.8
4.3
4.6
China
19.7
5,899
5.8
5.2
5.5
10.4
15.2
India
17.2
2,818
0.66
0.30
South Africa
0.7
10,117
0.6
1.3
1.0
1.1
1.2
Mexico
1.6
12,408
1.8
1.4
1.6
1.5
1.5
LDCs
11.7
1,274
0.11
0.04
0.07
0.10
0.12
Annex I
18.7
30,924
75.8
78.0
77
69
61
Non-Annex I
81.3
5,096
24.2
22.0
23
31
39
High Income
15.5
36,488
76.9
77.9
77
69
61
Middle Income
63.3
6,226
22.9
21.9
22
30
38
Low Income
21.2
1,599
0.2
0.2
World
100%
9,929
100 %
100 %
EU 27
Switzerland
0.5
1.2
2.3
0.2
0.3
0.5
100 %
100 %
100 %
Fairly sharing the global emission reduction effort
among countries according to Responsibility and Capability
18
Fairly sharing the global emission reduction effort
among countries according to Responsibility and Capability
19
“Fair” reductions for the United States
“Fair” reductions for the United States
“Fair” reductions for the United States
Summary Comments
• The science is unambiguous. The climate is changing, and it presents severe
risks.
• It is technically and economically possible to reduce emissions rapidly
enough to keep warming below 2°C. It would mean carbon-based
development is no longer an option in the North, nor in the South.
• A global transition to low emission future is likely to be achieved only if it is
done cooperatively and in a way that is widely perceived to be fair.
• In the developed countries, deep emissions reductions are important and
necessary. But only part of the story…
• Earnest efforts to enable the climate transition to occur globally, through
cooperation with the developing countries through technology & financial
support are equally crucial. (And won’t ruin our economies.)
• This isn’t just about equity and justice… it’s about being realistic about what is
needed to preserve our own futures.
23
Some questions
• Trade-offs or interdependencies? Where are there indeed trade-offs
between environmental sustainability and equity? Where is one dependent on
the other?
• Is there a “tech-fix?” Can questions of lifestyle, behavior, and distribution be
put aside? Can an environmentally sustainable world co-exist with radical
disparities in consumption? (Does environmental sustainability look like
hydrogen-fueled Hummers driving between elite enclaves)?
• Is there a “policy tweak”? Can we avoid questions of political and economic
structure? Do disparities in political and economic power need to be
corrected? (Can we achieve environmental sustainability with a nominal
carbon tax and better informed consumers?)
• Cooperative or competitive futures? At what point does a cooperative
global solution move out of reach? What will make us tip toward a “we’re all in
this together” response versus “devil take the hindmost” response?
• What do we do now that is setting the stage for one future or the other?
24
Thank you
www.sei-international.org
www.ClimateEquityReference.org
•
National fair shares: The mitigation gap – domestic action and international support
•
National Fair Shares (SEI Discussion Brief)
•
The North-South divide, equity and development
•
The Right to Development in a Climate Constrained World: The Greenhouse Development Rights
Framework
25