Climate Justice: Policies and Promises

Picture of Iman Afif

Iman Afif

Baking and petting street cats are Iman's top-tier dopamine boosts. Now, we fear she has gotten too powerful with her new oven and neighbour's kittens.

Climate change has been a crisis brewing ever since the Second Industrial Revolution. From carbon emissions to food insecurity and rising sea levels, climate outbursts are slowly becoming a constant occurrence with more pressing long-term concerns looming in the future. After decades of awareness campaigns and education, the public generally understands that the solution to reversing climate change involves everyone – individuals, corporations, and every governing body there is in the world – and requires faster and larger preventive measures and remediation. Braced with this knowledge, ordinary people suffer in silence as their trust in climate action by authoritative bodies and belief in community efforts dwindle.

Yet, the world had triumphed before.

We used to hear of holes in the ozone layer. In the 1980s, the depletion of the ozone layer and its consequential health risks were popularised after scientific investigations fault chlorofluorocarbon (CFCs) as the catalyst. Public dissatisfaction had pressured national leaders to mitigate the phenomenon, which gave way to the Montreal Protocol in 1987. Since then, the joint action of nations to eliminate the production and use of ozone-depleting compounds worldwide had successfully averted more holes and facilitated ozone regeneration, where the ozone layer is forecasted to achieve complete recovery by 2065.

In the energy sector, promising trends for the transition to alternative clean energy owe their credentials to science-backed policies and incentives within its enforcement as far back as the 1970s. The oil crisis coaxed the U.S. government to turn to alternative energy, investing $1 billion into research and development in solar energy sources. The solar energy race involved China and Japan passing batons in solar cell innovation while Germany and the U.S. grew the solar energy market with policy incentives such as feed-in tariffs and investment tax credits. The effect of policies stimulating renewable energy markets was tremendous, where the cost of electricity generation from solar photovoltaics decreased by 89% from 2009 to 2019 ($359 per megawatt hour to $40 per megawatt hour) and is currently cheaper than fossil fuels.

Therefore, the crucial factor in transitioning to a more sustainable world is effective policymaking and implementation. While environmental laws are enforced to penalise harmful externalities (e.g., chemical plant run-offs, excessive carbon emissions etc.), incentives such as subsidies and tax credits hold an equally positive reaction from corporations to pursue sustainable practices or even ventures. Money makes the world go round indeed, and governments wield the power to keep them both green.

So we have cracked the code, no? No.

Source: Jemal Countess

In countries with strict environmental laws, multinational corporations manage to operate with 29% lower domestic emissions on average. However, a disproportionately adverse effect occurs beyond the boundaries, where the same corporations ramp up to 43% more emissions in other nations with laxer regulations. These countries, dubbed ‘pollution havens’, are mostly developing countries that anticipate higher foreign direct investments with weaker environmental regulations, as most leaders insist that a tradeoff exists between climate response and economic growth. As a result, elevated capital movement is recorded from heavily-pollutive industries into countries that are willing to hamper climate action to boost economies. 

A recent example of this tradeoff is highlighted by the Minister of Natural Resources, Energy and Climate Change with his support for the approval of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of the controversial Penang South Islands reclamation project. The minister had stated that the economy can only grow with development projects and claimed that the project had been conditionally approved after nearly two years, alluding to the environmental commitment and rigour. However, the project received intense backlash from local fisheries and other environmental conservation groups due to its probable detriment to marine life and biodiversity.

To an extent, this raises a multitude of different questions: are developing countries actively set back by climate resistance? Why are these nations shouldered with equal magnitudes of climate responsibility as developed nations that were able to grow their economies as historically major polluters (e.g., the U.S., United Kingdom, Germany)?

Unfortunately, this decision is for the national leaders and governments to make again, whether they would propose and implement an equitable international climate response plan, or shift blame. As we traverse the climate emergency with hope and concern, the world knows that it cannot be a matter of time because hurricanes and heat waves have already begun.

 

References