While US President George W. Bush has begun to acknowledge the risks of global climate change, his administration failed to lead on the issue for eight years. That may change after the presidential election. Democratic candidate Barack Obama and Republican rival John McCain both promise to take climate change more seriously.
Emissions of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas that accumulates in the atmosphere and is a major cause of rising temperatures, are a by-product of a wide range of normal economic activities. And because carbon dioxide emissions are what economists call a “negative externality” — emitters do not bear the full cost of the damage that they cause — there is little incentive to reduce them.
Smoking is a similar example: Non-smokers must bear part of the increased health care costs that smoking imposes. But, unlike smoking, which can be discouraged through taxes and regulations, there is no global government to regulate excessive emissions, and countries are tempted to leave remedies to others. Moreover, some countries, such as Russia, which could benefit economically from a warmer Siberia, have different incentives from countries like Bangladesh, a poor country that is likely to be flooded by rising sea levels that will accompany global warming.
Some scientists predict that climate change will cause severe disruptions, such as weather-related natural disasters, droughts and famines, which may lead to enormous loss of life. Global warming between 1.6ºC and 2.8ºC over the next three decades would raise sea levels by half a meter.
That is a conservative estimate, and if warming proceeds more rapidly because of the loss of the reflectivity of Arctic ice and the release of carbon dioxide and methane from thawing permafrost, rising sea levels could lead to the submersion of low-lying islands and hence threaten the survival of entire nations. At the same time, in Africa and Central Asia, water will become more scarce and drought will reduce food supplies.
External shocks brought about by climate change will directly affect advanced economies. If rising sea levels flood the Maldive Islands, the effects of climate change would be as devastating as a nuclear bomb. Even for the US and Europe, the damage to, say, Florida or the Netherlands could be just as costly.
But such external shocks may also have indirect effects by aggravating the disparities between developed and developing countries and creating additional incentives for mass migration to rich, less affected and more adaptable regions. In addition, climate change will put stress on weak governments in poor countries and may lead to an increase in the number of failed states and become an indirect source of international conflict. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon argued last year that the Darfur conflict “began as an ecological crisis, arising in part from climate change.”
Such direct and indirect effects from human activity, while not malevolent in intention like terrorism, argue for a broadening of our concept of security and the adoption of new policies.
There are two basic instruments to reduce carbon emissions and thus mitigate global warming. Technological innovation and increased energy efficiency have considerable potential. For example, carbon sequestration allows the capture and storage of carbon in underground geological formations and deep oceans. Thus, less carbon dioxide gets released into the atmosphere.
But technological innovation alone is unlikely to be sufficient. The other basic instruments include economic incentives and disincentives. The so-called emissions trading system aims to control carbon emissions by allocating tradable permits. A carbon tax has also been proposed as a method to reduce consumption of fossil fuels.
Not everyone will embrace such instruments. Last year, China surpassed the US as the world’s leading carbon dioxide emitter. But China points out that on a per capita basis, US emissions are five times higher. China, India and other countries argue that economic development in rich countries caused most of the existing problem and it is only fair that developing countries should not have to reduce their emissions until they reach the rich countries’ levels of emissions. But this is a formula for global disaster. The world’s climate is affected by total emissions, regardless of their origin.
China uses coal, a particularly carbon dioxide-intensive fuel, for 70 percent of its commercial energy supply, while coal accounts for a third of the US’ total energy. China is now estimated to build two new coal-fired power plants each week.
Coal is cheap and widely available in China, which is important as the country scrambles for energy resources to keep its many energy-intensive industries running. Given that the bombs, bullets and embargoes of traditional security policy are irrelevant, what can the US and other rich countries do about this security threat?
A report last year from the International Energy Agency (created after the 1973 oil crisis to provide policy advice to industrial countries) urged a cooperative approach to helping China and India become more energy efficient. In other words, to prevent dangerous climate change and promote their own security, the US and other rich countries may have to forge a partnership with China, India and others to develop creative ideas, technologies and policies.
Climate change is increasingly recognized as one of the transnational challenges with the greatest environmental, economic and security implications, and a powerful global environmental movement constantly highlights its importance. The early statements from McCain and Obama are encouraging, but finding international agreement will remain a challenge no matter who is elected.
Joseph Nye is a professor at Harvard.
COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
RSS