Incorporating Social Justice in Climate Change Solutions. Dr. Christie Klimas

Transcription

1 Incorporating Social Justice in Climate Change Solutions Dr. Christie Klimas

2 Talk outline 1. Inequities in climate change 2. Three strategies for mitigating climate change 1. Cap & Trade 2. REDD (Reducing Emissions i from Deforestation and Degradation) 3. Environmental lperformance Bonds

3 Some nations have contributed disproportionately to climate change

4 CO 2 Emission Sources 4

5 Climate change impact will not be equally distributed worldwide

6 According to WORLD BANK & W.H.O.: All countries are vulnerable to climate change but the poorest countries and the poorest people within them are most vulnerable. In this decade over 3 billion people in developing countries could to be affected by climate related disasters People in developing countries are affected at 20 times the rate of those in developed countries Number af ffected (Milli ions) 4,000 3,000 2,000 1, s 1980s 1990s 2000s Dev'ed CIT Dev'ing LDC Source: World Bank analysis based on CREDA data.

7 Projected Changes in Agriculture in 2080 due to Climate Change Wealthier nations may be better able to adapt. Will they be able to feed the world? 7

8 Sun Come Up The Oscar nominated film Sun Come Up follows the relocation of the Carteret Islanders, a peaceful community living on a chain of tranquil islands in the South Pacific, and now, some of the world's first environmental refugees

9 Cap and Trade

10 Tradable permits Wikipedia Rights to discharge pollution can be exchanged through a permit market market To date, they have mostly been used for point sources of emissions Fix the amount that agents can collectively emit, but not the price at which they emit Do not attempt to control how emissions are allocated among individual actors

11 Setting a global target Using precautionary principle Determine: 1. maximum amount of greenhouse gases in terms of warming potential Goal: avoid significant climate change Different concentration targets for the different greenhouse gases based on warming potential 2. Date by which stabilization ation should be achieved Use least cost as a criterion to pick from multiple options

12 Precautionary principle Where the environmental consequences of regulatory inaction are 1. uncertain/ambiguous 2. non negligible, ibl regulatory inaction is not justified the precautionary principle/

13 Tradable permits Cap and trade Least cost and dependable Equity would depend on Can meet a target initial allocation between countries Ex: 450 ppm atmospheric CO 2 Issuing permits based on current emissions would perpetuate existing disparities Equal shares of per capita emissions would allow countries like India to sell permits to the U.S. Wealth transfers and trade is alive and well/

14 CO 2 sequestration

15 Impacts of Deforestation Deforestation comprises 18 20% ofworld s carbon emissions (Stern 2006*) More than world s trains, cars, airplanes and ships combined Brazil responsible for 40% Must reduce For temperature increases below 2 C *Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change, 2006

16 Trees and the carbon cycle Trees and forests remove CO 2 from the atmosphere Convert CO 2 to carbon Store carbon as wood and vegetation Soil Deforestation releases stored carbon Burning and decomposition Timber products actually store carbon Feedbacks with climate change

17 Observed rainfall anomalies product CPTEC/INPE (Marengo et al. 2008, J. of Climate). Droughtof of May September 2005 >> western Amazonia Acre

18 The Drought of Amazonia in 2005 (2008, Journal of Climate, ) José A, Marengo*, Carlos A, Nobre*, Javier Tomasella*, Marcos D, Oyama**, Gilvan Sampaio de Oliveira*, Rafael de Oliveira*, Helio Camargo*, Lincoln M, Alves*, Irving Foster Brown*** *CPTEC/INPE, São Paulo, Brazil ** CTA/IAE, São Paulo, Brazil ***WHRC/UFAC Slide by: F. Brown 18

19 Sinks as a component of global emission reductions A country would be contributing to mitigation if it enhanced sinks If marginal cost of sink enhancement was less than emissions abatement, the country would choose to enhance sinks to plant 40 million trees reforestation campaign.php

20 REDD++: Paying for Forests Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation Essence: Pay people to NOT cut trees Pay for tree planting Now would pay to conserve standing forest Requires knowledge of what would have happened How much land would have been cleared?

21 REDD++ THE IDEAL: Countries can sell credits on the amount of carbon their forests and rain forests soak up to industrialized nations that need to reduce emissions, thereby protecting their environment, stopping global warming and ensuring a sustainable future income without having to chop down the trees. This provides an alternative to current development trajectories Google images

22 REDD++ In the absence of safeguards, the carbon finance market will simply inject more money into an already corrupt system, short cutting needed reforms and exacerbating the situation, Human Rights Watch Report Indonesian palm oil plantation: google images

23 REDD and Indonesia Norway has pledged $1 billion as part of Norway has pledged $1 billion as part of Indonesia s pledge (2009) to cut GHG emissions by 26% President in Oslo also announced his commitment to halting all new concessions for the conversion of peatlands and natural forests in two years Funds released in 2010 Why Indonesia?

24 What is needed for REDD Baseline data on GHG emissions CREDIBLE market Proof that forests remain standing Enforcement Cl Calculations lti are based on carbon storage, not per hectare complicated for local communities Who owns the carbon (land tenure is tricky in many places)

25 Benefits Easier than changing transportation worldwide Establishes a financial link between those who value forests and those responsible for the forest Money can benefit communities Monthly salary (~$28/month) Hospitals, schools Future cost much higher than current cost Challenges Enforcement corruption What qualifies Planting trees yes Not cutting trees now yes Outsourcing carbon emissions to developing nations What would have happened? Benefits those who are the worst deforesters Cost $7 to $28 billion/year

26 REDD Flexibility mechanism Planting forests instead of These mechanisms can greatly reduce the cost of mitigating climate change Nordhaus & Boyer 2000 Global costs of Kyoto protocol $59 billion with flexibility mechanisms and $884 billion without (1990 US$) They can be more equitable Transfer payment Maintain a safety net (forests and resources) Maintain resources for future generations we work/jewels/redd/

27 Environmental performance bonds Links valuation to prevention!

28 Preventing ecological disasters We use valuation methods to calculate l the cost of the spill Replacement value Contingent tvaluation Lost income & tourism revenue Health impacts Travel cost How can we use this damage invoice to prevent similar occurrences? Let s say that we calculated damages at $400 million

29 Environmental performance bonds Up front payment (bond) Bond is the best estimate of monetary value of the largest potential future environmental damage Bond is returned if the polluter proves that the suspected damage has not or certainly will not occur If damage does occur, the bond will be forfeited based on the value of the damage companys oil spill scorecard

30 Environmental performance bonds Pros Create an incentive for firms to reduce environmental damage Eliminate companies declaring bankruptcy in face of large environmental disaster Cons What if damageishigher than the bond? Also need to prove causation court fight If high bonds are required, this may favor larger firms oil spill/bourne text

31 Thank you! Questions?