Chandrashekhar Dasgupta: Dealing with climate change

Business Standard

Saturday, Nov 21, 2009

Advanced Search
Feedback | RSS

Content Guide
Follow us on

|

Markets & Investing

|

Companies & Industry

|

Banking & Finance

|

Economy & Policy

|

|

|

|

|

BS Headlines | News Now | BS Weekend | The strategist | The Smart Investor | Lunch with BS | Columnists | BS 1000

Hindi | E-Paper | Motoring | Live Markets | Smart Portfolios II

| Blogs | Portfolios

>

Search:

Chandrashekhar Dasgupta: Dealing with climate change

Chandrashekhar Dasgupta / New Delhi April 22, 2007

Only rapid development can make India less vulnerable.

Two recent reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) paint a vivid and stark picture of the expected extent of global warming in the coming decades and its impacts on life on our planet. The latest scientific “best estimates” indicate that on an average, temperatures will rise within a range of 1.8 to 4.0 degrees Centigrade by the end of this century. Among the expected impacts of global warming on this scale are a reduction in the thickness and extent of glaciers, sea-level rise, inundation of low-lying islands and coastal areas and variations in rainfall patterns, among other impacts.

In south Asia, increased glacier melt in the Himalayas will initially cause floods but in the long run, as the glaciers shrink, water flows in the northern Indian rivers will suffer reduction. Together with changes in rainfall patterns, this will have major implications for our agricultural sector. Low-lying areas in the heavily populated Ganges-Brahmaputra delta will be prone to inundation on account of sea-level rise, leading to the loss of cultivable land and posing a threat to villages and towns.

Climate change is caused by excessively high levels of the emission of “greenhouse gases”, among which carbon dioxide is the most important. Mankind has been consuming ever-increasing quantities of hydrocarbon fuels (coal, oil and natural gas) since the onset of the Industrial Revolution in the 18th century, causing a progressive increase in carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere. The industrialised, or developed, countries are thus responsible for causing human-induced climate change. If all countries had the low per capita emission levels as India, the climate change problem would not have arisen. The emissions would have been well within the carrying capacity of the atmosphere.

A global response to climate change must encompass two approaches — reducing greenhouse gas emissions in order to mitigate or restrict global warming; and adapting to or coping with climate change.

UN agreements on climate change — the Framework Convention and its Kyoto Protocol — recognise the need to differentiate between the respective responsibilities of the developed and developing countries, as well as their differing financial and technological capabilities. The developed countries are required to reduce their emissions and to provide the finance and technology needed to implement climate change projects in developing countries. The climate change convention rightly recognises that the “first and overriding priority of the developing countries is economic and social development and poverty eradication”. Developing countries are only required to moderate increasing emissions where these do not entail additional costs — unless, of course, the additional costs are met by the developed countries.

Nature is unfair. Even though the wealthy, industrialised countries are responsible for causing climate change, the main victims will be the world’s poor. Developing countries are more vulnerable because they lack the financial and technological resources needed to cope with and adapt successfully to climate change. Traditional farmers, in particular, are highly vulnerable to variations in temperature and rainfall patterns. Adaptation will require a wide range of responses, including a shift to drought resistant plant varieties, economical use of water resources, water conservation measures, watershed management, protection of coastlines and disaster management. Low-income countries will be unable to implement these measures on an adequate scale. In the final analysis, an effective climate change strategy for a country like India can only be based on rapid, sustained development and poverty eradication. This is essential for reducing our vulnerability to climate change.

We should, of course, also moderate greenhouse gas emissions wherever this is possible without diverting resources from development. There are many areas where such possibilities exist. Cost-effective energy saving and energy efficiency programmes serve our development goals and also result in lowering emissions. Policies designed primarily to reduce local environmental pollution (such as the substitution of diesel by cleaner fuel in some of our major cities) can also lead to reduced greenhouse gas emissions. The promotion of nuclear, wind and solar power not only serves our energy security interests but also results in lower greenhouse gas emissions. In all these cases, measures designed primarily to promote our developmental objectives also yield important co-benefits for climate change mitigation. Moreover, we can implement mitigation projects involving additional costs, provided we are fully compensated for the additional expenditure under the provisions of the climate change convention or the Kyoto Protocol.

However, this is no longer an approach favoured by most industrialised countries. Ignoring the provisions of the framework convention, these countries are bringing strong pressure to bear on us to accept new commitments involving huge costs. This is an attempt to shift to our shoulders a part of the burden rightly assigned to them under the convention. Their argument is that India is one of the “big emitters” of greenhouse gases since its total emissions are large, even though its per capita emissions may be very small. Moreover, these emissions are rising because of India’s rapid growth. Hence, India should limit its rising emissions even if this entails the diversion of funds from development priorities.

This is like arguing that India should restrict its food consumption because its total calorie consumption is very large, even though the per capita intake is inadequate! India’s per capita carbon emissions are only one-eighth that of the EU and one-twentieth that of the US. The total figure is high only because India is a very large and populous country, with a population exceeding the combined total of the US, the European community, Russia and Japan.

If the demands of these developed countries are conceded, funds will be diverted from our national priority goals of development, poverty eradication and progress on local environmental issues like air and water quality. The rate of growth of the economy will be slowed down, with the result that India will remain highly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change.

India’s climate change strategy should rest on three pillars.

First, we should be prepared to meet the impacts of climate change by implementing appropriate adaptation programmes. The key to success in achieving this goal is rapid and sustained development.

Second, we should reduce greenhouse gas emissions wherever this can be achieved without diversion of resources from our development, poverty eradication and local environmental priorities.

Third, we must firmly resist attempts by affluent countries to shift their own responsibilities to our shoulders. These countries are responsible for precipitating climate change. They must, therefore, reduce their emissions sharply and bear the incremental costs of introducing low-carbon technologies in developing countries in conformity with the universally accepted Framework Convention on Climate Change.

The writer has been involved in climate change negotiations and is currently a Distinguished Fellow at TERI

Other Stories

-

Sensex makes remarkable recovery, regains 17K

-

Bharati to go by Sebi norms on Great Offshore offer

-

Galleon exits Edelweiss; sells 7% stake for Rs 255.54 cr

-

Suzlon Energy's three promoters pledge 2.8 cr shares

-

Draw export strategy of $300 bn: Assocham to govt

More

Read Business news in

Advertisements

Get financial advisory and solutions for your projects

Holidays starting at a delightful EMI of Rs 3481

Switch on and say hello to Monday morning !

Your dream home can now be a reality.

Visit Fortis for a preventive health check-up & get a 20% discount.

Follow the ups and downs of your investments. Try our new Portfolio Tracker

Kolkata Dock \ Freight contract for the British Gurkhas Nepal

Find how Midsize Businesses use ERP to gain competitive advantage

Trading in Forex is now as easy as 1-2-3

Discover an economical and cost effective way to market your products and services

Giftwithlove.com: Same day delivery of Flowers and Cakes to India

Download the E-book on the Future of Business Intelligence

Learn Best Practices for improving customer satisfaction

Know your customers better... download the free e-book on CRM


		Discussion Board / User Comments

April 22 , 2007 ,06:38 IST

At the same time, we should focus our energies to catch up on research and innovation into clean technologies, as also revive many of our traditional energy-efficient practices. Else, we will be forced to pay the price for waiting to be "spoonfed" on clean tech which have billions of Western govt. and VC money behind them. For a lead on what we can do immediately, check out: www.downtoearth.org.in/full6.asp?foldername=20060415&filename=news&sec_id=18&sid=14 For more,contact at cvikash@yahoo.com

Reply

April 22 , 2007 ,06:31 IST

The only way to get the West pay for its cumulative environment crimes is to stop aping its carbon-intensive lifestyles. The big hole in this argument is that those who can afford to, in India, are amongst the worst polluters per capita. My article in Down to Earth highlights this glaring oversight in the "much-hammered" but toothless Indian position. www.downtoearth.org.in/full6.asp?foldername=20070415&filename=croc&sec_id=10&sid=2

Reply

Most Popular

Read

-		Bharti Airtel slashes roaming rates by 60%

-		Govt may allow private sector investment in education

-		We are not trying for a monopoly: HAL chairman

-		Patni may host all IT services on 'cloud'

-		Bank stocks rise on merger talk

BS Poll

Cast Your Vote

Should rich charitable trusts be brought under the tax net?

Yes

No

Hot Searches

Amitabh Bachchan | N Chandrasekaran | Swine Flu | Mukesh Ambani | Anil Ambani | TCS | Infosys | Air India | Duronto | Pranab Mukherjee | Sonia Gandhi | Congress | Rahul Gandhi | Bigg Boss | New Pension Scheme | Service tax | Excise duty | Sebi | Tech Mahindra | Ramalinga Raju | Satyam | Reliance | RBI | GDP | Gold | Ratan Tata | ICICI | | B-School | DLF Sensex | Tax calculator | Home Loan | Bollywood | Personal Finance | inflation | oil prices | World Bank | Reliance Infratel | HDFC | Barack Obama

Write to the Editor

Advanced Search

BS print product

Portfolio Tracker

FOR HOT PRODUCTS

Home | Markets & Investing | Companies & Industry | Banking & Finance | Economy & Policy | Opinion
Life & Leisure | Management & Marketing | Tech World

About Us | Partner With Us | Code of Conduct | Careers | Advertise with us| Terms & Conditions | Disclaimer | Site Map | Contact Us | Feedback