They warned it could happen: a world of surging nationalism, stalling economic development and the unraveling of decades of international cooperation on climate change and other global challenges.
Long before Donald Trump lurched away from diplomatic norms and the international rules-based order, scientists mapped out different potential futures to understand the possible implications for greenhouse gas emissions. Developed a decade ago, five of these “pathways” became crucial to the work of the UN’s IPCC climate expert panel. These are not predictions for the 21st century.
Rather, they envision what could happen with various societal changes including for trade, economic development, technological innovation and global population. The most optimistic narrative foresees sustainable growth and improved equality.
Photo: AFP
A second “middle-of-the-road” scenario is an extension of current trends.
The third is a world riven by rivalries, a fourth is blighted by increasing inequality, and the fifth assumes supercharged economic growth grounded in expanding fossil fuel use. Keywan Riahi, of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, who coordinated the development of the so-called Shared Socioeconomic pathways (SSPs), said the world has largely developed in line with the third scenario in recent years.
While it is certainly not a perfect fit, what we see now “is a much more fragmented world,” Riahi said. “Collaboration is more difficult, economic development is actually also not so optimistic.”
Photo: AFP
‘ROCKY ROAD’
Scientists’ original description of the SSP3 scenario was: “A resurgent nationalism, concerns about competitiveness and security, and regional conflicts push countries to increasingly focus on domestic or, at most, regional issues.”
This “rocky road” is arguably the worst of all the hypothetical futures. Planet-heating emissions are second only to economic expansion driven by oil, gas and coal. But the fractured SSP3 world ranks first when it comes to damages from climate change, showing the largest population boom, and the weakest economic growth.
This scenario “reflects a current strain of populist isolationist politics that is ascendant today,” climate scientist Zeke Hausfather noted in a recent newsletter post. In 2021, Hausfather got blowback for calling SSP3 “Trump World.” But “the actions in his second term around energy and trade seem to be playing out much more closely to SSP3 than other pathways,” he said.
The US has ditched the Paris climate treaty, turned its back on global cooperation on science, trade and health and eviscerated its international development budget.
Washington has lambasted UN sustainable development goals, especially related to climate change and women’s rights. Domestically, the world’s second biggest carbon polluter has undermined progress on low-carbon technology, canceled climate research and even stymied weather data collection. World leaders have expressed their disquiet.
“The global economy thrived on a foundation of openness and multilateralism underpinned by US leadership... but today it is fracturing,” said European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde in late May. Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney declared the global trade system in place for 80 years “over,” and China’s Xi Jinping (習近平) urged the preservation of “the international order based on international law, and global fairness and justice.”
NOT DESTINY
There are important ways in which today’s reality differs from the hypothetical SSP3 world. World population projections are significantly lower, for instance. And the development of climate tech has been “much more successful,” Riahi said. A dramatic drop in the cost of solar and wind power, as well as electric vehicles and batteries, has boosted the growth of low-carbon technologies.
Carbon dioxide emissions have also slowed, while predicted warming for the end of the century is lower than a decade ago — albeit still reaching catastrophic levels. Scientists are currently updating SSP projections and crafting a new set of climate narratives.
They have much to unpack. Riahi said that even if there was a “complete collapse of climate policies globally,” the previous worst-case emissions projections will likely not materialist because clean energy has become so cheap.
At the same time, he said, the world will almost certainly overshoot the Paris deal’s aspirational goal of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels in the coming years. This has forced scientists to consider a new set of questions. What is the new best-case scenario for bending emissions down to zero? If current policies persist, will emissions stay high for a longer period, causing temperatures to keep rising in the coming decades?
“What are the implications climatically of this high overshoot, which is unfortunately a more and more likely scenario if you extrapolate what we see at the moment?” said Riahi.
June 2 to June 8 Taiwan’s woodcutters believe that if they see even one speck of red in their cooked rice, no matter how small, an accident is going to happen. Peng Chin-tian (彭錦田) swears that this has proven to be true at every stop during his decades-long career in the logging industry. Along with mining, timber harvesting was once considered the most dangerous profession in Taiwan. Not only were mishaps common during all stages of processing, it was difficult to transport the injured to get medical treatment. Many died during the arduous journey. Peng recounts some of his accidents in
“Why does Taiwan identity decline?”a group of researchers lead by University of Nevada political scientist Austin Wang (王宏恩) asked in a recent paper. After all, it is not difficult to explain the rise in Taiwanese identity after the early 1990s. But no model predicted its decline during the 2016-2018 period, they say. After testing various alternative explanations, Wang et al argue that the fall-off in Taiwanese identity during that period is related to voter hedging based on the performance of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). Since the DPP is perceived as the guardian of Taiwan identity, when it performs well,
A short walk beneath the dense Amazon canopy, the forest abruptly opens up. Fallen logs are rotting, the trees grow sparser and the temperature rises in places sunlight hits the ground. This is what 24 years of severe drought looks like in the world’s largest rainforest. But this patch of degraded forest, about the size of a soccer field, is a scientific experiment. Launched in 2000 by Brazilian and British scientists, Esecaflor — short for “Forest Drought Study Project” in Portuguese — set out to simulate a future in which the changing climate could deplete the Amazon of rainfall. It is
The Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on May 18 held a rally in Taichung to mark the anniversary of President William Lai’s (賴清德) inauguration on May 20. The title of the rally could be loosely translated to “May 18 recall fraudulent goods” (518退貨ㄌㄨㄚˋ！). Unlike in English, where the terms are the same, “recall” (退貨) in this context refers to product recalls due to damaged, defective or fraudulent merchandise, not the political recalls (罷免) currently dominating the headlines. I attended the rally to determine if the impression was correct that the TPP under party Chairman Huang Kuo-Chang (黃國昌) had little of a
RSS