The idea of zero net emissions by 2050 is being touted as a panacea for the evil of climate change. While the viability and effectiveness of this strategy for all countries is questionable, it is also rooted in the basic principles of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). At the same time, it undermines the achievement of a climate-just world.
The principles of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capacities (CBDR-RC) based on historical responsibility have been the basis of climate actions under the UNFCCC since 1992. These are also the central pillars on which the India’s call for climate justice .
The Paris Agreement on Climate Change was a step forward for the global community in many ways. Developed countries pledged to offer a higher financial commitment by 2025 and a more facilitative technology regime, in addition to leading mitigation actions. Developing countries agreed to assume the legal obligation to adopt national mitigation measures and report on their implementation as part of their nationally determined contributions (NDCs).
Climate justice gained momentum under Prime Minister Narendra Modi at the Paris COP. It was inscribed in the preamble to the Paris Agreement based on the articulation of India. Prime Minister Modi has set the example and motivated the Indian government to introduce climate sensitivity into domestic policies through interventions such as energy for all, housing for all, health insurance and health insurance. crops, along with calls to action like “clean India” and “give it”. up ”, popularizing yoga and sustainable lifestyle practices. Taken together, these initiatives ensure climate justice for the vulnerable and poor sectors most affected by climate change. While the rich were persuaded to move towards a sustainable life, the poor were provided with safety nets to fight climate change. Nowhere else in the world has such an experiment been launched on such a large scale.
The best of Premium Express
With India’s efforts, climate justice has become an important part of the discourse on climate change. However, few have been able to grasp the importance of this concept and the idea has been left open to interpretation. While people in all countries have a sense of justice, which is guided primarily by perceptions and social conditioning, addressing the moral values of justice and fairness in climate change negotiations has been anything but easy.
In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle distinguished three forms of justice, namely, distributive, commutative, and corrective. With the start of the implementation phase of the Paris Agreement, it would be useful to take stock of how the global community is addressing these three aspects of justice.
Distributive justice refers to how resources should be distributed in terms of the principles of equality, equity and merit. For climate change, the most important resource is global carbon space. It is important to note that while industrialization in developed countries is responsible for much of the accumulation of greenhouse gases that cause climate change, the population of developing countries suffers disproportionately more from its impacts. Developed countries continue to corner the lion’s share of carbon space for luxurious consumption while urging developing countries to reduce their emissions that emanate even from basic necessities. The Climate Action Tracker reports that climate action in major developed countries is incompatible with the goals of the Paris Agreement. Only a few developing countries, including India, are taking appropriate climate measures. Therefore, attention must be focused on ensuring ambitious climate action by developed countries in the short term to ensure distributive climate justice in the implementation of the Paris Agreement.
Commutative justice refers to agreements or commitments and other types of social contracts. In his speech on climate change, he was referring to the fulfillment of past commitments in good faith. The Kyoto Protocol adopted in 1997 marked a historic turning point with legally binding targets for industrialized countries to reduce global GHG emissions. However, the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol, which commits developed countries to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by at least 18% below 1990 levels by 2020, only came into force on December 2020, just one day before its expiration. These goals were not only unambitious and too inadequate to achieve the UNFCCC’s main goal, but several developed countries backtracked and refused to take on any goals during the second commitment period. The provision of financing, technology transfer and capacity-building support to developing countries in developing countries is not up to par either. They are not even close to achieving their climate finance goal of jointly mobilizing at least $ 100 billion a year by 2020 to support climate action in developing countries. Fulfilling these past commitments would be a critical precursor to any improvement in the climate ambition of developing countries.
Finally, corrective justice refers to the correction of errors. Climate justice demands that every individual born on earth has the right to development and a dignified life. That is why developed countries must pay off climate debt by taking on greater mitigation responsibilities and providing financial, technological and capacity-building support to safeguard the interests of poor and vulnerable people in developing countries.
India and other developing countries have worked hard to ensure the differentiation between developed and developing countries and to enshrine the principles of equity and CDR-RC in the Paris Agreement. Thus, while many are announcing the call for zero zero in 2050 as a positive signal to prevent climate failure, it is actually slowing down climate action in developed countries and is being used to evade historical responsibility and shift loads. in developing countries. Now is the time for developed countries to take the opportunity and ensure climate justice by leading climate action responsibly.
This article first appeared in the April 2, 2021 print edition entitled “Zero Clean and Climate Injustice.” Ravi Shankar Prasad is an IAS officer. Until recently, he was additional secretary in the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change. The views are personal.
