Earlier this year, Tropical Cyclone Idai tore through southern Africa, killing hundreds, injuring thousands, and displacing even more. In Mozambique, as much as half of all annual crops and critical infrastructure were destroyed.
In total, more than 3 million people in the region were affected. It was a stark reminder of Africa’s vulnerability to the intensifying consequences of climate change.
Cyclones are nothing new, but as climate change progresses, they are becoming increasingly common: The Indian Ocean has an average of three cyclones per cyclone season, yet in this season alone, there were seven.
The same goes for other kinds of weather events. In Zimbabwe, more than 2 million people are now facing an acute water shortage as a result of climate change-induced drought.
However, even as Africa faces new challenges from climate change, it also has major opportunities to expand its economy and reduce still-pervasive poverty
The combined GDP of African countries vulnerable to climate change is on track to rise from US$2.45 trillion this year to US$3.46 trillion in 2024.
Can Africa secure this economic progress without contributing further to climate change?
The solution lies in a kind of Green New Deal – a comprehensive strategy for achieving sustainable growth, much like the one being championed by some Democratic politicians in the US.
A pillar of such a plan would involve making large-scale investments in renewable-energy deployment.
Whereas a US Green New Deal would focus on shifting away from fossil fuels, the infrastructure for which is already in place, an African strategy would be delivering energy (and energy infrastructure) from scratch.
About 60 percent of the people worldwide who lack access to electricity live in Africa.
Yet last year, Africa received less than 15 percent of global energy investment, and much of those limited funds are still going toward yesterday’s technologies.
Between 2014 and 2016, nearly 60 percent of Africa’s public investment in energy went to fossil fuels — US$11.7 billion, on average, each year.
This approach is not only environmentally irresponsible; it also makes little economic sense. Renewables are already outcompeting fossil fuels globally, and bold action on climate now promises to bring major economic benefits — to the tune of US$26 trillion globally through 2030.
Given this, the European Investment Bank — a longstanding source of energy investment in Africa — should approve an existing proposal to halt all lending for fossil fuel-reliant energy projects by the end of next year.
As for Africans, they are already promoting sustainable development. The African Union’s Agenda 2063, created in 2013, set an ambitious blueprint for attaining sustainable and inclusive growth over the subsequent half-century.
The African Renewable Energy Initiative (AREI), founded in 2015, focuses on drastically increasing the use of renewables, while expanding overall energy access.
On the ground, solar mini-grids are delivering cheap renewable energy to communities across Africa, increasingly at competitive prices (relative to comparably sized diesel-powered grids).
Solar home systems and clean-cooking solutions (which use cleaner, more modern equipment and fuels) are also providing cost-competitive clean energy access.
In East Africa, households equipped with solar systems saved an estimated US$750 each on kerosene and eliminated 1.8 tonnes of carbon dioxide over the first four years of use.
What a Green New Deal must do is bring such innovations to scale, through coordinated public and private investment in wind and solar-power generation — both on and off-grid — and support for the deployment of clean-cooking solutions. This should be integrated with broader efforts to foster green industrialization and entrepreneurship.
Substantial funding is already on offer. Earlier this year, the World Bank announced plans to provide US$22.5 billion for climate adaptation and mitigation in Africa for 2021 to 2025.
The African Development Bank, for its part, recently invested US$25 million in a renewable-energy equity fund that plans to add 533 megawatts (MW) of installed energy-generation capacity in sub-Saharan Africa.
This initial public investment is expected to mobilize an additional US$60 million to US$75 million from private investors.
However, if a country hopes to be a recipient of that private investment, it must have strong energy planning and an effective regulatory regime, which is crucial to functioning clean-energy markets and the emergence of project pipelines. That is why African countries must integrate climate action into all their economic and development planning.
To this end, a coalition of African countries, supported by the UN Economic Commission for Africa and the New Climate Economy, is working to facilitate meaningful, coordinated action that puts the entire continent on a more inclusive and sustainable growth path.
Partnerships with national finance and planning ministers, relevant development-finance institutions, and the private sector will support this process.
Overcoming the formidable challenge that climate change poses to Africa will depend on moments of collective focus and clarity.
The UN secretary-general’s climate summit this month should be just such a moment, with countries committing to step up their emissions-reduction targets under the 2015 Paris climate agreement, so as to reach net-zero emissions by mid-century.
Given their heightened vulnerability, African countries have every incentive to set the bar high, thereby putting pressure on others to ramp up their own contributions.
Only with concerted global action will we have any hope of averting climate catastrophe.
Carlos Lopes, a member of the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate, is high representative of the African Union for partnerships with Europe post-2020.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
A Chinese diplomat’s violent threat against Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi following her remarks on defending Taiwan marks a dangerous escalation in East Asian tensions, revealing Beijing’s growing intolerance for dissent and the fragility of regional diplomacy. Chinese Consul General in Osaka Xue Jian (薛劍) on Saturday posted a chilling message on X: “the dirty neck that sticks itself in must be cut off,” in reference to Takaichi’s remark to Japanese lawmakers that an attack on Taiwan could threaten Japan’s survival. The post, which was later deleted, was not an isolated outburst. Xue has also amplified other incendiary messages, including one suggesting
Chinese Consul General in Osaka Xue Jian (薛劍) on Saturday last week shared a news article on social media about Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s remarks on Taiwan, adding that “the dirty neck that sticks itself in must be cut off.” The previous day in the Japanese House of Representatives, Takaichi said that a Chinese attack on Taiwan could constitute “a situation threatening Japan’s survival,” a reference to a legal legal term introduced in 2015 that allows the prime minister to deploy the Japan Self-Defense Forces. The violent nature of Xue’s comments is notable in that it came from a diplomat,
Before 1945, the most widely spoken language in Taiwan was Tai-gi (also known as Taiwanese, Taiwanese Hokkien or Hoklo). However, due to almost a century of language repression policies, many Taiwanese believe that Tai-gi is at risk of disappearing. To understand this crisis, I interviewed academics and activists about Taiwan’s history of language repression, the major challenges of revitalizing Tai-gi and their policy recommendations. Although Taiwanese were pressured to speak Japanese when Taiwan became a Japanese colony in 1895, most managed to keep their heritage languages alive in their homes. However, starting in 1949, when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) enacted martial law
China’s third aircraft carrier, the Fujian, entered service this week after a commissioning ceremony in China’s Hainan Province on Wednesday last week. Chinese state media reported that the Fujian would be deployed to the Taiwan Strait, the South China Sea and the western Pacific. It seemed that the Taiwan Strait being one of its priorities meant greater military pressure on Taiwan, but it would actually put the Fujian at greater risk of being compromised. If the carrier were to leave its home port of Sanya and sail to the East China Sea or the Yellow Sea, it would have to transit the
RSS