Climate scientists are sounding the alarm about global warming, but the world is not responding.
In October, the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warned of catastrophic risks to health, livelihoods, water supplies and human security if global warming is not limited to 1.5°C relative to the pre-industrial level, a target set by the 2015 Paris climate agreement.
However, at the moment, we are on track for a 3°C increase.
Then, in November, the Fourth National Climate Assessment in the US predicted that without swift action to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, the US economy would suffer “substantial damages.”
However, US President Donald Trump’s administration appears utterly unconcerned.
How is it possible that the slow-motion threat of climate devastation has not yet been halted?
Insights from the social sciences can help answer this question. In a recent report and companion book, the International Panel on Social Progress (IPSP), where we serve as committee members, analyzed social justice and equality across a number of sectors. One conclusion stands out: The only way to tackle the threat posed by climate change is by simultaneously addressing social and political challenges.
When ignored, social issues can trigger political turmoil, which can undermine the political will to fight climate change.
For example, despite the implementation deal that was reached on Dec. 15 in Poland, the Paris agreement remains in jeopardy, owing to political upheaval in many countries. In the US and Brazil, voters angry over socioeconomic issues elected leaders who are hostile to climate action. In France, protesters have taken to the streets to oppose a fuel-tax hike, not because they are against climate action per se, but because they are anxious about the high cost of living and frustrated with the elite’s perceived indifference.
France’s experience echoes the difficulties that many developing countries have when trying to eliminate fossil-fuel subsidies.
These developments confirm what social scientists have long suspected: An environmentally centered, technocratic push for climate action is destined to fail.
However, the IPSP’s recent work offers insights into how to achieve social progress and environmental sustainability concurrently.
On the socioeconomic front, inequalities can be curbed with policies that go beyond standard interventions, like wealth redistribution. It has been shown that people can be empowered with skills training and better healthcare, as well as with bargaining rights and appropriate regulation of labor contracts.
Although there is no compelling evidence that automation will lead to widespread unemployment, job reshuffling will be disruptive.
Ambitious “flexicurity” policies to ensure workers’ long-term security would help. With a combination of wage compression (closing the wage gap between jobs and industries), asset redistribution and universal welfare, it is possible to accelerate innovation, empower workers, and promote growth and social mobility.
Moreover, reforming the mission and the governance of corporations to better take account of all stakeholders would promote social justice and strengthen environmental stewardship.
Through such policies, governments would make economic democracy and empowerment a top priority. They could also promote economic efficiency with tax reforms that account for negative environmental and social externalities as well as monopoly profits and capital gains from real estate.
Healthcare, education, and urban policy reforms can improve economic opportunities and yield important moral, civic, social and ecological benefits.
Restoring trust in institutions also requires addressing democratic shortcomings in political systems and global governance.
Corporate power and the influence of wealth in politics must be reined in; aligning antitrust legislation with 21st-century technologies is one place to start.
Social media, once touted as a boon to democratization, might corrode the transparency and accountability on which democracy depends.
The architecture of global governance mechanisms is still dominated by the richest countries. International organizations and their policies will not find their place and voice unless and until this power imbalance is ameliorated.
Around the world, experiments in democratic participation and deliberation hold out the promise of more inclusive decisionmaking. This makes it possible to envision societies with less inequality and stronger environmental safeguards. With the right regulations and incentives, markets, corporate behavior, and new technologies can serve social progress and ecological goals. We are convinced that a better society is possible.
The authors of the IPSP’s report are not naive; we recognize that many of our contemporary institutions have been designed to address the problems of another era and must be reinvented. It is not easy to identify actors or organizations that are up to the task.
However, in the absence of a cohesive movement effecting change, loose coalitions of actors, political and environmental movements, business leaders, workers, philanthropists, minorities and activists are capable of pursuing environmental and social causes in a decentralized fashion.
Taking action against climate change cannot be separated from social issues. In fact, simultaneously fighting climate change and promoting social justice makes it harder to ignore either one.
Marc Fleurbaey is a professor at Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. Helga Nowotny is a former president of the European Research Council and Professor Emerita of Science and Technology Studies at ETH Zurich.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Congressman Mike Gallagher (R-WI) and Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL) led a bipartisan delegation to Taiwan in late February. During their various meetings with Taiwan’s leaders, this delegation never missed an opportunity to emphasize the strength of their cross-party consensus on issues relating to Taiwan and China. Gallagher and Krishnamoorthi are leaders of the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party. Their instruction upon taking the reins of the committee was to preserve China issues as a last bastion of bipartisanship in an otherwise deeply divided Washington. They have largely upheld their pledge. But in doing so, they have performed the
It is well known that Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) ambition is to rejuvenate the Chinese nation by unification of Taiwan, either peacefully or by force. The peaceful option has virtually gone out of the window with the last presidential elections in Taiwan. Taiwanese, especially the youth, are resolved not to be part of China. With time, this resolve has grown politically stronger. It leaves China with reunification by force as the default option. Everyone tells me how and when mighty China would invade and overpower tiny Taiwan. However, I have rarely been told that Taiwan could be defended to
It should have been Maestro’s night. It is hard to envision a film more Oscar-friendly than Bradley Cooper’s exploration of the life and loves of famed conductor and composer Leonard Bernstein. It was a prestige biopic, a longtime route to acting trophies and more (see Darkest Hour, Lincoln, and Milk). The film was a music biopic, a subgenre with an even richer history of award-winning films such as Ray, Walk the Line and Bohemian Rhapsody. What is more, it was the passion project of cowriter, producer, director and actor Bradley Cooper. That is the kind of multitasking -for-his-art overachievement that Oscar
Chinese villages are being built in the disputed zone between Bhutan and China. Last month, Chinese settlers, holding photographs of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), moved into their new homes on land that was not Xi’s to give. These residents are part of the Chinese government’s resettlement program, relocating Tibetan families into the territory China claims. China shares land borders with 15 countries and sea borders with eight, and is involved in many disputes. Land disputes include the ones with Bhutan (Doklam plateau), India (Arunachal Pradesh, Aksai Chin) and Nepal (near Dolakha and Solukhumbu districts). Maritime disputes in the South China