CLIMATE CHANGE CONVENTION - The Issues of Equity & Survival
K. Chatterjee

Aubrey Meyer, Director, Global Commons Institute, London was recently the guest speaker at a discussion in New Delhi on the Climate Change Convention.  He spoke on the theme “Equity and Survival” in the context of global climate change.

The central point Meyer made was that the climate change threatened global economy is a single system within which equity is now inextricately linked to survival.  In order to solve the problems of human-induced climate change, a ‘per capita fossil fuel derived Gross Domestic Product (fossil GDP) indicator’ needs to be established as the global economy depends essentially on fossul fuel energy to the tune of 90 percent.

Three years after the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warned of the need to reduce CO₂ emissions, these are still increasing.  However, rising per capita GDP is still taken as a valid monetary measure of economic benefit (development indicator) by the World Bank.  In a fossil GDP economy, universally rising per capita GDP is only possible by raising CO₂ emissions -- rising environmental impacts and rising risk of global climate change.  Therefore, Meyer posited that the per capita fossil GDP is and should be the principal indicator of environmental impact globally.

the pre-industrial atmospheric concentration of carbondioxide which was 280 parts per million (ppm) rose to 353 ppm by 1990 due to industrialisation.  it is the emission of the developed countries which have created and continue to add to the threats of climate change and it is primarily their responsibility to reverse the situation by setting limits on their emissions.

The need for immediate displacement of fossil fuels by renewable ones is now more compelling than is the case for refining their use through better fuel and other efficiency gains.  The efficiency arguments are relevant, but alone are incapable of solving the climate problem.

Meyer talked about a universally valid definition of indicators of progress, development, impact and change.  He elaborated on the aspect of energy efficiency--energy efficiency is expressed as a ratio and has a technology is expressed as a ration and has a technology component i.e. how efficiently does a device or a system match the energy it uses to produce the usable energy.  In economics, energy efficiency is taken as the ratio between the money or GDP generated by the energy. In the context of a global fossil economy, it is the ratio of dollars (of GDP) generated per unit of carbon (from CO₂ emissions from fossil fuels) used to generate the dollars of GDP.

In 1990, the global GDP totalled $ 20.5 trillion; fossil fuels supplied 90 percent of the energy to generate the global GDP which equals $ 18.45 trillion.  In the same year global emissions of CO₂ from industry were 6 billion tonnes of carbon.  Therefore the average energy efficiency and global carbon emissions per capita worked out to be $ 3075 per tonne of carbon and 1.15 metric tonne of carbon per person respectively taking global population at 5.2 billion in 1990.

The IPCC in 1990 showed that for stabilizing the climate, and immediate 60 per cent CO₂ emission reduction was required.  As per this requirement global per capita carbon emission should be 0.46 metric tonne of carbon per person per year.  Developing countries have already lived with less than 0.46 metric tonne of carbon per person.  For example, the per capita consumption in India is only 0.21 metric tonne of carbon.

With $ 3075 per metric tonne of carbon as average efficiency and allowing only 0.46 metric tonne per caputa, fossil GDP works out to be $ 1415 per person.  Meyer defined this as “the sustainable per capital fossil GDP threshold” for 1990.

The IPCC in 1990 showed that for stabilizing the climate, an immediate 60 per cent CO₂ emission reduction was required.  As per this requirement global per capita carbon emission should be 0.46 metric tonne of carbon per person per year.  Developing countries have already lived with less than 0.46 metric tonne of carbon per person. For example, the per capita consumption in India is only 0.21 metric tonne of carbon per person per year.  Developing countries have already lived with less than 0.46 metric tonne of carbon per person.  For example, the per capita consumption in India is only 0.21 metric tonne of carbon.
 

With $ 3075 per metric tonne of carbon as average efficiency and allowing only 0.46 metric tonne per capita, fossil GDP works out to be $ 1415 per person.  Meyer defined this as “The sustainable per capita fossil GDP threshold” for 1990.

Meyer then defined GDP “debitors” and “creditors” by allocating $ 1415 to each country by population.  These “sustainable fossil GDP” quotas are then compared with 1990 GDP values for each country.  When a country exceeds its quota, it is referred to as “fossil GDP debitor” (industrial countries) and the amount by which a country exceeds its quota, is defined as “production dumping.”  When a country falls short of its quota, it is a “fossil GDP creditor” (developing countries) is worth $3.1 trillion annually.  This energy subsidy from the South to North assists the unsustainable production dumping of $ 14.6 trillion worth of fossil fuel products.

Meyer then drew attention to the connections between economic growth and population growth and referred to chapter 5 of Agenda 21 of the UNCED on demographic dynamics and sustainability which states “unsustainable consumption pattern.....place increasingly severe stress on the life supporting capacities of our planet”.  The developing countries at the UNCED at Rio were partly successful in resisting the stereotype formulation of population as sheer numbers of people and their growth rates per country, and making the ‘rising rates of resource use per capita’ the meaningful measure.  This recognised people as units of consumption and their comparative rates of resource consumption per country over time.  He then referred to the comment made by Maurice Strong, Secretary-General of the UNCED:  “The gross imbalances that have been created by concentration of economic growth in the industrial countries and population growth in the developing countries is at the centre of the current dilemma.  Redressing these imbalance will be the key to the future security of our planet-- in environmental and economics as well as traditional security term.  This will require fundamental changes both in our economic behaviour and our international relations”.

Meyer concluded by saying that the political disadvantage of discovering that there is a deterministic link between economic growth in the wealthy economies and population growth in the poorer countries is the embarrassing answer to the embarrassing question.  The wealthy economics are vulnerable to the consequences of having initiated both runaway population growth as well as potentially runaway climate change....The chain of causation is simple.  Economic growth in the North has been achieved by impoverishing the South.  This impoverishment results in population growth....Most environmental offences that have global impacts are caused by rich minorities with hazardous production patterns, energy use and consumption styles.

Back to Contents