City climate action for the 99%
The richest 1% is responsible for an outsized proportion of global emissions. Unlike national governments, cities are not waiting to act on climate to benefit the 99%.
Every year in January the World Economic Forum (WEF) hosts their Annual Meeting in Davos. The event focuses on the challenges and opportunities of the year ahead. This year’s theme, “rebuilding trust” (apparently a reboot of their 2003 event “building trust”), suggests that it may be the traditions that accompany the Annual Meeting that make it news-worthy, not its agenda.
One such tradition is the widespread (and to date inconsequential) disapproval of the flocks of private jets ferrying political leaders and business executives to the Swiss Alps. Another is Oxfam International’s annual update of their Inequality Report. Both the private jets and the update on global inequality result in a general sense of unease to the general public, but at least the Oxfam report offers food for thought and inspiration for action.
The main message of the report doesn’t change much from year to year, mostly because of the persistent and pervasive nature of inequality. Each year, the headline of the report reads: the world’s wealthiest 1% control an outsized share of global wealth—this year, the focus is on billionaires and corporate power. In November, Oxfam also published a version of the report focusing on GHG emissions inequality, highlighting how—through their consumption and investments—the world’s wealthiest 1% are responsible for 16% of global emissions. Despite it being widely reported, not enough is being done to tackle emissions of the top 1%. (We discussed this in a previous issue of this newsletter, too.)
The “remaining” emissions
Cities may not have the ability on their own to completely eliminate the 16% of emissions from the top 1%, but—unlike national governments—they are not waiting to act (see, for example, Paris’ upcoming referendum on increasing parking charges for SUVs). Cities are well placed to address the “remaining” 84% of emissions, i.e., the share that is attributable to the “bottom” 99% according to Oxfam’s calculations. This “remaining” 84% of emission is estimated based on what people consume, but it is only in small part within people’s direct control. Indeed, it largely depends on emissions linked to how buildings are built, heated, and cooled, how people move around, and if the goods they consume have been produced sustainably. Given a more sustainable urban fabric, most people’s default choices would be more sustainable too. But urban planning can only do so much, how could cities take impactful climate action and with what powers?
For starters, cities are major asset owners and procurers of goods and services. The decisions that city leaders make about the management of their assets (municipal buildings, vehicle fleets) and powers (planning policies, building regulations) can reduce their own emissions and—most importantly—catalyse change across other sectors of the economy, encouraging innovation and supporting green jobs.
Even when they don’t have formal powers, cities can have a big impact through their convening, collaborating and persuading powers, exercising their indirect authority and political and social influence to encourage the private sector to act.
Of course, a similar set of powers could be ascribed to national and regional governments: they also could empower residents to reduce their emissions while improving their standards of living. Whether they will is the crucial point, as most national governments are doing too little, too late.
To deliver a just transition, the wealthiest individuals, corporations, and countries must take responsibility for the climate crisis and bear their fair share of the costs of climate action. But we cannot wait for the 1% or for national governments to be persuaded, and indeed we don’t need to: we know that climate action benefits the 99% today, via cheaper renewable energy, better jobs, and increased security and wellbeing.
In a race against time, agility and speed are on cities’ side. City governments are less burdened by bureaucracy and less divided by partisan politics. With 2024 set to become the biggest election year ever (and likely the biggest political campaigning year ever), it is to city leaders that we should look up to if we are to meet our climate targets sooner and improve the prosperity of the 99%. Though, in the meantime, it may be worth doing something about the private jets, too.
👥 Register for the 1st Annual CAFÉ Climate & Health Conference
The joint Boston University - Harvard School of Public Health CAFÉ Research Coordinating Center is hosting the Climate Change and Health Annual Meeting virtually on February 5th-7th, 2024.
Join the C40 Centre for City Climate Policy and Economy's 1-hour “research marketplace” (exact time to be announced on Jan 22nd) as we convene a broad audience of academics, policymakers, and practitioners. Participants will actively identify evidence and research needs from a policy perspective.
Register here to receive the full agenda when it is released, on January 22nd.