Climate change and justice - No global deal in sight

Climate change must not take place at the expense of the developing nations. It is simply not fair to impose drastic emission targets on poorer countries or divert funds that would otherwise go towards mitigating poverty in these regions.

The “Climate change and justice” project tries to find solutions to the problem using an approach based on a combination of scientific research and social ethics. Climate change impacts threaten the livelihoods of many and cause poverty to increase. Although drinking water supplies are expected to rise globally, the main beneficiaries will be regions that already have enough water, whilst precipitation levels will fall significantly in arid regions. The situation will be further aggravated by the fact that water shortages and higher average temperatures have been taking their toll on agriculture and food security.

The objective of the “Climate change and justice” project, launched in 2007 by the Catholic charity MISEREOR, the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), the Institute for Social and Development Studies (IGP) and the Munich Re Foundation, is to formulate global climate and energy-policy options designed to support rather than undermine efforts to reduce poverty.

Research shows that climate change can be curbed at moderate cost provided the available technological means are deployed and the global players involved in protecting the climate at the earliest possible juncture. A major opportunity to broker a global deal was missed at the December 2009 climate summit in Copenhagen. Unless we act quickly, we will be risking many people’s right to a dignified existence and jeopardising the prospects of future generations.

Interview with Prof. Sayer, Director General of MISEREOR

What does the climate-change and justice project mean to MISEREOR?
The most striking feature of this project is that it involves cooperation between north and south, combining the skills and expertise of different partners in Germany with those of Misereor’s partners in Africa, Asia and Latin America, while emphasising the aspect of justice. In other words, it’s not just about the facts and figures of climate change and its causes, but also about seeing that the injustice suffered by people in the southern hemisphere, who are already feeling the effects of climate change even though they have done little or nothing to cause it, is remedied. The poor were already suffering, and now they also have to endure the consequences of climatic changes brought about for the most part by the industrialised nations. This project sets in motion a north-south learning process that is in fact designed to foster a proactive approach to climate change – the issue crucial to the fate of mankind.

You have organised dialogue forums in developing countries. Has the climate-change message got through everywhere?
The extent to which people are affected by climate change varies considerably depending on the region. We conducted dialogue forums that were intended to serve as models in the worst-hit areas: in Central America, in Bolivia for the Andes region, and in Brazil’s Amazon basin. Misereor is receiving more and more requests for help with adaptation projects from its project partners in those regions. This is also true of countries in the Sahel region, where we held a dialogue forum with partners from Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger, and of South Africa, with its emerging economy. In Asia, we organised a dialogue forum for India, Bangladesh and Nepal, on the one hand, as well as forums in Indonesia and the Philippines.

What is the main conclusion you draw from the forums?
The main conclusion from my perspective is that the poor, as those principally affected, are not simply waiting for the industrialised world to grant them adaptation aid via the Kyoto II process. They aren’t just holding out their hands expectantly. I was surprised see how hard our MISEREOR partners are striving to adapt to climate change despite having relatively modest resources. In the Sahel region, for example, our partners have in recent years developed agricultural models for coping with periods of drought. They are offering the experience acquired from these models to neighbouring countries and other parts of the world in a similar situation. It also came as a revelation to learn that they are not only actively pursuing adaptation but also aware of their role in helping to prevent carbon emissions by, for instance, planting from 80 to 250 trees per hectare on land they intend to cultivate. They also want people to appreciate this carbon-capture effort. They expect of course – and this is another important conclusion – a fair transfer of sustainable technologies because they don’t want to follow the same pattern of development as the industrialised nations but to move directly to sustainable development in their regions. They also expect to be informed of global climate-change findings relevant to their regions so that they can prepare themselves accordingly. If catastrophes occur due to climate change, it would be entirely unjust if the people there were left to deal with them on their own, particularly as some sort of preventive measures should be taken.

Do you think the global community will succeed in curbing climate change?
I certainly hope so as there is no viable alternative. Whilst I was in Copenhagen, I felt to an extent optimistic because of the many representatives of NGOs and churches from all corners of the globe – young people, young families and old people. They demonstrated and gave their full support to the steps needed to halt climate change and were willing to accept much hardship and sacrifice to that end. On the other hand, I was also in part extremely frustrated by the slow progress in negotiations and the attitudes and actions of the industrialised and emerging countries. A great deal of 2009 was wasted, and the negotiations lacked the earnestness and transparency that would have been appropriate in dealing with an issue so crucial to mankind’s future. The hands of the clock are pointing to five past twelve. The United States is waiting for China to make a move and China is waiting for the USA to make a move, whilst Europe looks on. That’s no way to foster trust among the developing countries and those most seriously affected. To avoid an impending, irreversible catastrophe, it is essential that we all work together now. Only by accepting our shared responsibility and pooling the capacities of north and south, of all the industrialised, emerging and developing nations, will we manage to hold global warming under 2°C and keep the deleterious effects within somewhat manageable proportions. For instance, if climate change compels 100 million people in Bangladesh to migrate , as I was told by Bishop Gomez of Dhaka, that alone will pose a major threat to peace, quite apart from migrations in other regions, disputes over water and land, or the Pacific islands that are gradually being submerged. We Christians and the Churches have the important task of putting pressure on the political and economic decision-makers to finally take the necessary steps and, above all, create the political institutions needed to regulate and govern such challenging processes.

MISEREOR, the Munich Re Foundation, PIK and IGP are very diverse bedfellows. How do you view this alliance or partnership?
The appeal and strength of our project lie in the differences between us. Scientific expertise, ethical reflection and insurance know-how coupled with the involvement of numerous MISEREOR partners from Africa, Asia, Oceania and Latin America make for a potent mix within the alliance and a fruitful partnership. In our view, what counts is not simply carrying out a study, but actually putting the results and experience gained into practice. These factors need to be applied to the situation in Germany and beyond in order to find a sustainable mode of production and lifestyle. Relations with our partners in the southern hemisphere can help reinforce lobbying and advocacy efforts in both north and south. Thus, we nurture the hope that the human dignity of the poor will also be acknowledged and, above all, that future generations will inherit a world in which they can lead lives worth living and will not one day turn to us and ask: “You had knowledge, the facts and the figures – why didn’t you do something?”