The world’s richest people are causing climate change. Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.
Climate change is unequal - caused by the rich, but it impacts the poor the most. Thanks to a new study in the Lancet, we know that this inequality is inhibiting global economic and social wellbeing - and health.
We have known for a long time that the majority of greenhouse gas emissions have been caused by the Global North, and increasingly by countries like China and India as they become wealthier. Changes in consumption patterns - like moving from active or public transportation to cars, and increased industrial development powered by fossil fuels like coal and gas - have led to a surge in emissions from these countries.
Today, we know that not only is it the richest countries that bear the biggest responsibility for causing climate change, but that it is the richest people in and between those countries who create the vast majority of emissions. According to the study published in the Lancet, the top 10% income classes globally consume more than 20 times the amount of energy as the bottom 20%.
Currently, richer populations consume far more energy than is required to meet basic human needs. This is well documented and also makes sense, given our own experience: as incomes rise, societies consume more. The demand for energy-intensive goods that power peoples’ lives like cars for transportation, electricity and manufactured goods increases. What is stark is just how unequal this distribution is. While richer populations in the Global North consume more than their fair share of energy, in contrast, more than 3 billion people live in energy poverty in the Global South.
Figure 1. Global distribution of carbon emissions and carbon footprints
The recent research published in The Lancet Planetary Health analysed the current global and regional inequalities in energy consumption and the necessary convergence of energy demand if we are to secure a climate safe world in which everyone can prosper. The research found that:
“...Unprecedented reductions in income and energy inequalities are likely to be necessary to simultaneously secure a climate-safe future and decent living standards for all. If global energy use is reduced enough to ensure climate safety, but the extent of energy inequality remains as it is today, more than 4 billion people will not have access to decent living energy.”
In other words, to address the climate crisis, meeting our emissions reduction targets is not sufficient. The inequalities perpetuated by our global economic system—which are reflected in the unequal consumption of energy—need to be drastically reduced.
In order to ensure all people can meet basic living standards, the Global North must drastically reduce its energy consumption while at the same time ensuring that people in the Global South are able to access ample energy to meet human needs. There are efforts being made globally to address this - for example, C40 Cities Deadline 2020 climate planning programme has increased obligations for its Global North cities to reduce emissions, particularly by 2030, and some efforts - like in the City of Los Angeles - to address the same inequalities that are occurring locally. But much more has to be done, particularly if we are to avoid the prospect of Global South countries developing their economies based around gas - a fossil fuel just as dirty as coal.
The politics of this matters - those who have contributed the most, need to lead and be seen to be leading. For example, in some Global South countries, criticism has emerged targeting Global North countries who have refused to finance gas projects abroad, while continuing to consume fossil gas for their own energy needs. From an emissions reductions perspective, stalling financing of these projects in the Global South is reasonable—the global carbon budget cannot withstand any new oil and gas exploration. However, it is certainly hypocritical to stop funding new gas development abroad but continue to fund them at home.
This also means that we have to be creative and support countries and cities to meet their energy needs, through cleaner sources. It doesn’t mean that the Global South should not have access to sufficient energy to meet the needs of people. We need to look to wider investments in renewable energy, which have lower costs over their lifetimes and aren’t subject to the same price volatility as fossil fuels, as we’ve seen with the global price of oil following the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
What does this mean for cities, which account for nearly 75% percent of global energy consumption? Cities are on the frontlines of the energy transition and they must take a leading role in its delivery. Cities have numerous energy efficiency measures that can be implemented: providing incentives for energy efficient appliances, strengthening building codes and reducing demand for high carbon modes of transport by investing in walking and cycling - and generating clean energy by expanding access to renewables in low income areas, to name a few.
Thoughtfully done, these measures can also address the structural inequality that has ensured that the richest people live high emitting lifestyles. Some of those issues depend on choice - like flying or eating a significant amount of meat - but most depend on systems, like supporting the private car over public transport (low cost for the user) and walking and cycling (virtually free). Ensuring all of these efforts are implemented equitably will help to address the global energy inequalities that exist today - and make a successful transition to a cleaner economy far more likely.
What I’m reading
I’m listening to a recent episode of our podcast, Cities 1.5 - The Dirty Truth about “Natural Gas”. Listen to the whole season here!
Until next time,