Sunita Narain: Climate is the true globaliser

DOWN TO EARTH

Last fortnight I wrote about making space for emissions. Let's discuss how this can be done. Let's discuss this when the British government-commissioned study has concluded that evidence shows climate change will be disastrous, particularly for poor countries. It also says that it would cost the world much less if it invested today in mitigating emissions than it would need to spend in the future when climate catastrophe is on our head.

The UK report authored by economist Nicholas Stern is important for this reason. It is an economist's warning in a world run by them. I say this because for far too long these smart people have argued that climate change is too uncertain and therefore, there is no reason to take high-cost action today. The assumption is that technological transition and the market will happily provide answers. But most of all, this breed has lulled us into complacency by believing that the climate change is a win-win solution. There will be no costs to this transition to a low-carbon economy.

It is time we stopped fooling ourselves. The fact is that warming of the global atmosphere is possibly the biggest and the most difficult economic and political issue the world has ever needed to confront. I say this because firstly, emissions of carbon dioxide are directly linked to economic growth. Therefore, growth as we know it is on the line here. We will have to reinvent what we do and how we do it. There will be costs, but as Nicholas Stern says, the cost will be a fraction of what we will need to spend in the future.

Second, the issue is about sharing that growth between nations and between people. The question now is how the world will share its right to emit (or pollute) or will it freeze inequities.

Third, climate change is about international co-operation. The fact is that climate change teaches us more than anything else that the world is one; if the rich world pumped in excessive quantities of carbon dioxide yesterday, the emerging rich world will do it today. The only way to build controls is to ensure that there is fairness and equity in the agreement.

What then must be done? Firstly, there is also a much better understanding that the route ahead is made up of technologies that we have in hand currently. Therefore, answers will lie in increasing the efficiencies of the generation of energy and in the use of energy. It will also lie with the change in how we do things "" from transportation policies in our cities to everything else. The fact is that we know how to change.

It is also clear that the emerging rich world "" China, India and others "" are already proving to be more efficient per unit of output within their limited means than the industrial world was. The fact is that they would want to make this transition, if they are compensated for their efficiency. The question then is why can we not move ahead? The answer lies in the way we have decided on the question itself. It has been lost in the obdurateness of the US government, which has never accepted the need to build a fair and co-operative agreement to combat climate change.

This must change. Ultimately, climate change is the true globaliser. It forces our world to come together not just to make short term profit for some, but long term economic and ecological benefits for all. Let us continue to discuss how this can be done...