Wednesday, June 10, 2009

Deep injustice at the heart of climate change

James Ensor, Policy Director at Oxfam Australia, in ABC News (Australia): The UN climate talks in Bonn, due to wind up tomorrow after an exhausting two weeks, are one important milestone along the way to this deal, which will only be achieved if world leaders are prepared to acknowledge the real inconvenient truth - the deep injustice at the heart of climate change.

Poor people in developing countries who are least responsible for climate change are already bearing the brunt of the consequences of more than a century of rampant carbon emissions, largely from the industrialised world. They include Pacific Islanders losing their homes to rising sea levels, the poor of Bangladesh coping with more frequent floods and rural African communities dealing with devastating drought.

…People in poor countries are already adapting to their changing climate, in whatever way they can. In Bangladesh, people are raising the ground and their homes above flood level to protect them, and planting grasses and trees around their raised houses to prevent erosion. They are growing fruit and vegetables on their roofs so they can still eat during and after flooding. In some low-lying Pacific nations, families are growing food in metal buckets to avoid salt water inundation.

So far, developed countries have only committed $1.2 billion to help developing countries adapt to climate change. Compare this to the trillions spent bailing out financial services.

…The financial crisis is no excuse for inaction. The massive sums spent on bailing out banks shows that finding money when it's needed is not the problem - finding the political will to do so is the obstacle.

A tree in a flooded field in Bangladesh, shot by Ziaul Hoque from Dhaka, Bangladesh, Wikimedia Commons via Flickr, under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 License

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

"So far, developed countries have only committed $1.2 billion to help developing countries adapt to climate change. Compare this to the trillions spent bailing out financial services."
I don't see what this comparison accomplishes. You are comparing two independent events. You could have just as easily said "Compare this to the n billions spent on cancer research" which has roughly the same argumentative value, but without the banal appeal to sympathy.

Perhaps the reason that "developed countries have only committed $1.2 billion to help developing countries adapt to [anthropogenic?] climate change" is that the developing countries lack the means to properly channel the funds to the people who are affected. Committing more money may be a feel-good action, but may do very little for the people at the end of the chain.