National Responsilibity and European Green Deal Flashcards
Part a) Critically discuss which countries might have a national responsibility for climate breakdown. (20 Marks) Part b) Explain to what extent the European Green Deal has taken into account issues of climate justice. (13.4 Marks) Total 33.4 Marks
Define National Responsibility
National responsibility’ in the context of climate change can be defined as the obligation of countries to address their contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions and to participate in mitigation and adaptation efforts. This responsibility may be informed by several factors: historical emissions, per capita emissions, economic capacity to respond).
Historical Context: HIC Global north USA’s historical emissions per capita
Historical emissions per capita data indicate that high-income countries, predominantly from the Global North, have contributed disproportionately to cumulative greenhouse gas emissions. This disproportionate contribution has significant implications for climate justice. High-income countries such as the USA, with historical emissions per capita of 19.1 tCO2, have substantially exceeded their allocated budget of global carbon emissions, which, as per Hickel (2020), should be distributed according to population shares from 1850 to 2015.
Advocates for this perspective (historical emissions) argue that since climate change is a cumulative problem, those who have contributed most to the stock of emissions in the atmosphere should bear the most responsibility.
Against Historical Contributions: Opponents may argue that focusing on historical emissions ignores current and future emissions trends, where some developing countries are rapidly increasing their emissions.
For Current Emissions: This view holds that current high-emitters should take immediate action to reduce emissions, as they are now contributing the most to the problem.
Against Current Emissions: Critics suggest that this approach does not consider historical responsibility and the capacity to respond, which may be lower in emerging economies despite high current emissions.
Production vs. Consumption-Based Accounting:
Paris Agreement - holds producers and China exporting - holds consumers
Production vs. Consumption-Based Accounting:
The debate between production (territorial) and consumption-based accounting underscores the complexity of attributing national responsibility. While the Paris Agreement relies on production-based accounting, which holds producers responsible for emissions within their territory, consumption-based accounting shifts responsibility to consumers, accounting for imports and excluding exports. For instance, China’s role as a major exporter implicates the consumers in other countries who purchase Chinese goods.
National Fair Shares and Climate Debt
National Fair Shares and Climate Debt:
The concept of ‘national fair shares’ provides a framework to evaluate each country’s proportionate responsibility in climate breakdown. Overshooters, or ‘climate debtors’, are countries that have surpassed their fair share of the planetary boundary for CO2 emissions. The United States, for example, is responsible for 40% of the total national overshoot emissions. In contrast, undershooters or ‘climate creditors’, such as India and China, have emitted less than their fair share, positioning them in a climate credit.
Climate Justice and Equity
Climate justice calls for recognizing the unequal impacts of climate change and the disparate capabilities of countries to address it. The concept demands that those most responsible for historical emissions, largely countries in the Global North, take the lead in mitigation efforts and support adaptation and compensation for loss and damage in the Global South. Moreover, ‘intergenerational climate justice’ highlights the moral imperative to consider the burdens on younger generations who inherit the consequences of previous generations’ emissions.
Critical Perspective
It is also essential to consider the roles that trade, economic systems, and consumption patterns play in the global distribution of emissions. Acknowledging these complexities can lead to more equitable climate policies.
International Agreements and Allocation of Responsibilities
International frameworks such as the Paris Agreement embody principles to guide the allocation of responsibilities. The principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities” (CBDR-RC) acknowledges that while all countries are responsible for addressing climate change, developed countries are expected to take the lead due to their historical emissions and greater capacity to respond. The Paris Agreement also encourages countries to determine their own nationally determined contributions (NDCs), which reflect their ambition in combating climate change relative to their national circumstances and capabilities.
Introduce The European Green Deal (EGD)
The European Green Deal (EGD) represents the European Union’s ambitious plan for a sustainable green transition, aiming to achieve climate neutrality by 2050. It encapsulates various policies to address climate change and environmental degradation.
EGD - The Just Transition Mechanism (JTM)
the Just Transition Mechanism, is designed to support regions most affected by the transition towards a green economy. With a targeted support package that aims to mobilise around €55 billion, the JTM attempts to alleviate the socio-economic impact of transitioning from high-carbon industries to sustainable practices. This mechanism acknowledges that the costs and benefits of the green transition are not evenly distributed, and it attempts to address this disparity, which is in line with principles of climate justice.
EGD Taken into account; Inequities
The EGD’s JTM recognizes the potential for economic and social inequities that could arise from aggressive climate policies. By targeting specific regions and sectors that are likely to suffer from the transition (GS vs GN, Highly vulnerable), the mechanism embodies a principle of climate justice that seeks to prevent disproportionate burdens on certain communities.
EGD Taken into account; Regions and sectors but too narrow focus
However, the critique arises that the JTM’s definition of ‘just transition’ is too narrow. It primarily focuses on regions and sectors rather than individuals and communities that may be most marginalized by climate impacts. This could include racialized communities or low-income groups who historically bear the brunt of environmental degradation and climate change.
EGD needs to work on colonial legacies and Global Impacts:
The EGD fails to address the wider historical context of colonial extraction, which has contributed significantly to the climate crisis. It does not explicitly address the ‘green harm’ that can result from the extraction of resources for renewable energy technologies, often in the Global South. The EGD’s policies lack a comprehensive plan to mitigate these global injustices.
EGD needs to take into account Omission of Loss and Damage
The EGD also does not thoroughly address the concept of ‘loss and damage’, a key issue in climate justice, which refers to the impacts of climate change that cannot be mitigated or adapted to. These impacts are particularly relevant to vulnerable countries in the Global South, which face existential threats from climate impacts that they did little to cause.
In conclusion, the European Green Deal
In conclusion, the European Green Deal has taken initial steps towards integrating climate justice into its policies through the Just Transition Mechanism. However, its approach is somewhat narrow, prioritizing regional and sectoral adjustments without fully addressing the broader, global dimensions of climate justice, including historical responsibilities, global inequities, and the full spectrum of ‘loss and damage’. For the EGD to be truly just, it must broaden its scope to consider these wider implications and implement policies that address not only the ecological transition within Europe but also the EU’s role in a global context.
