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
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry