The intergenerational dilemma and geographical unfairness of climate change
It is time again! By the end of 2015 governments, companies and organisations from 196 countries will participate in the COP21 in Paris to discuss climate change issues, impacts and problem solutions. This time it will be different, they say. It is not anymore about defining what to do, since all this seems crystal clear, it is about agreeing on the highest common denominator and giving the starting shot for a better future. Once again! The time for small commitments thus seems to be over, the reduction of CO2 emissions and an entire change of our environmental acting closer than ever. However, would not that implicate a damage of our economies, at least in the short-term? Hence doubts are justified, if our generation is really willing or even capable to risk recession in order to sustain a better life for future generations. On the basis of this doubt this article tries to consider and demonstrate the short- and long-term consequences for certain countries and generations.
What are the environmental short-term impacts for the majority of the industrialized countries? Ebbing of the glaciers, weather extremes and drought. Since all this is already happening and industrialized countries do not really feel economic or environmental consequences on the whole, they do not see an urgency for change. Yet, the impacts for some certain other countries around the globe are already tremendously more dramatic and constantly deteriorating. In Bangladesh, for example, the first people and villages get already displaced by the consequences of climate change, such as melting of the glaciers of the Himalaya on the one side and an increase of the sea level on the other side. Other examples are the floods in Haiti and the Philippines in the last years. Not only that those natural disasters costed a high number of lives they also devastated towns, villages and agricultural areas. Needless to say that the economic impacts for those countries are enormous and the outlook on the future horrifying. Among other things, because there is always the possible threat that these natural disasters will happen again. By comparing these short-term impacts of developed and developing countries we can see an unfair allocation of climate change consequences. Once again certain countries have to pay the bill for something that they did not caused. This time, because of a disadvantageous geographical location.
In the long-term climate change and its consequences will get progressively more global, drastic and harder to manage. The right moment to take action would be the COP21. Though is a generation, holding the power, really able to initiate a change from which itself won’t really benefit? Doubts are justified! Since time immemorial power get passed down from generation to generation, and whenever a generation has its turn, it tries to maximal benefit from the power. Sometimes with positive impacts for future generations, sometimes with negative. However, climate change is probably the hugest threat for future generations and the impacts definitely will be negative. The dilemma? Future generations would need this power today, because the foundation for a sustainable future must be laid. But, since they have no voice today, a global and auspicious commitment at the COP21 seems far away. Anyways, one day the change of environmental behaviour will be inevitable and the change will be profitable, in whatever terms. And even if we manage climate change, inequalities between countries and geographical unfairness will remain. The natural resources for non-renewable energy will be depleted, but industrialized countries will have already created a new long-term advantage! The technology and know-how of renewable energy!
In conclusion, COP21 probably won’t be that game-changing as some people expect or hope, but rather a next step along the way. A generation delivers its input. The threat and impact of climate change is increasing, but a change in the required extent perhaps still not beneficial enough for the leaders of the current generation. When the time has come, a certain future generation will have to take action, namely in form of re-action, as usual. Today three questions are remaining. Which generation pays the bill, which countries suffer the most along the way and who will finally benefit?
Christoph Kain
No hay comentarios /
30 Nov 2015
por
ckain
IMSD /
COP21
.png)
].gif)
.png){kind=logo}
].png)
].png)
].png)
].png)
.png){kind=logo}
].png)
.png){kind=logo}
