Climate change has emerged fast as an extremely serious problem, and while it is very important for everyone, all countries and all people, to respond in adequate and proper ways to contribute to climate change mitigation as well as adaptation, at the same time it should be emphasized that this should happen within a framework of justice and protection of livelihoods. Unfortunately the entire climate response has got so distorted under the impact of imperialism, including the richest countries and their multinational companies, that on the one hand it is moving away from solving the real problems and on the other hand it is becoming an instrument of promoting big business interests at the cost of farmers and workers as well as the overall interests of the majority world or global south. Such a distorted agenda imposed by imperialism will not achieve climate change mitigation and may worsen adaptation in some serious ways. This distorted agenda can even take the form of a new kind of neo-colonialism by imposing policies that are harmful for farmers and workers in the garb of (false) solutions for climate change. All this should be firmly rejected and never accepted. At the same time, it is very important to evolve and implement an agenda of climate change based on justice which further enhances sustainable and satisfactory livelihoods of people everywhere, and particularly in the majority world.
In the earlier stages of the climate change debate, a consensus was sought to be created on the precept of common but differential responsibility, implying that as the rich countries, historically as well as in terms of their life-styles which are a bigger burden on environment, have a greater responsibility for causing climate change, they must bear a much higher share of the responsibility for reducing GHG emissions and in addition must contribute substantially with economic and technical assistance to the majority world for their climate change mitigation and adaptation efforts as well as for facing climate change impacts in the form of various disasters and adverse weather situations. However in reality the richest countries have contributed very little and now several of them even try to avoid the precept of differential responsibility.
While governments and multinational companies of the richest countries try to impose an imperialist agenda, farmers, workers and ordinary people there will also gradually realize the folly of this and they too will find much greater hope in a very different agenda of climate change for which the majority world must take the lead.
Climate change responsibility is often seen as a very burdensome task and so discussion is more about who will share the more burden. Actually this can be highly creative work, very involving work which becomes even more exciting with the cooperation and sharing of several people working together.
The important thing to remember is that climate response should not be taken up in such ways as to disrupt the livelihoods of people. For this reductionist approach should be avoided—you cannot say arbitrarily stop this as this causes GHG emission. You have to look at the wider reality of several aspects, also at systems which when taken as a whole present an ecologically protective alternative.
It is possible to take up this responsibility of adequate climate response in such a way that sustainable and satisfactory livelihoods are enhanced while at the same time a lot of destruction and waste seen in the present day world can be avoided.
Several people see this task mainly in terms of reducing fossil fuels as much as possible and replacing these with renewable energy. Of course this is a very important part of the task ahead, and a lot can be done to take this forward without disrupting any economy or livelihoods. However there are a lot of other very important things that can contribute to climate change remedial actions and to a lot of other kinds of welfare as well. This is what we ought to be looking for—achieving climate change objectives together with enhancing human welfare in other ways as well. Here is a list of some possibilities.
Reduce inequalities significantly, help the poorest peasants and workers much more and curb high luxury consumption of the richest in a big way. This will help to reduce overall burden on environment while at the same time increasing the resilience of the poorest, their ability for better adaptation in difficult times as well as their ability to contribute to checking climate change in very creative ways.
There should be a huge, continuing, convincing campaign to check all those forms of consumption which are harmful for health. While tobacco and alcohol in their various forms are the most ready targets for such a campaign, reduction of consumption and use of many other harmful goods will help both health and environment—improving health and also reducing GHG emissions (as well as other types of ecological ruin).
There should be consistent efforts for promoting value systems which discourage high luxury and ecologically destructive consumption/accumulation, while at the same time encouraging voluntary simplicity.
There should be firm commitment to a no-wars future, curbing the arms race and eliminating all weapons of mass destruction. Wars, war preparations and weapons race constitute one of the biggest sources of GHG emissions and other environmental ruin, while at the same time causing massive death, destruction and distress in direct and indirect ways.
About 90% of the army, air force, navy and other military forces of the entire world should be diverted, with their salary and benefits protected, to the tasks of restoration of devastated ecosystems, disaster protection and rescue effort.
The concept of citizenship of world, one world and peace for all world should be promoted at all levels, with people being encouraged and helped all the time in terms of accepting the responsibility , high relevance and great virtue of being protective towards all life on earth and towards life-nurturing systems as the highest calling on earth.
Food and cultivable raw materials like cotton should be produced entirely on the basis of sustainable livelihoods of small farmers and family farmers, using organic, natural and self-reliant ways, using mixed farming and crop rotations which protect soil and save water, increase the organic content of soil. GM crops should be entirely banned, farming should be on the basis of traditional biodiversity best adapted to local conditions. There is much less room for chemical fertilizers or for heavier forms of machinery and the fossil fuels they gulp, hardly any room for chemical pesticides and herbicides, and much more for the creativity of small farmers. All small farmers should be encouraged to have a few indigenous species trees on their small mixed farms. All this will help sustainable livelihoods and at the same time reduce GHG emissions in a big way.
There should be a sustained campaign for healthier ad ecologically protective food habits, so that we have more of organic, local whole grains and legumes, fruits and vegetables, and less of meat and high fat, highly processed, high salt and sugar foods.
There should be increased emphasis on using/consuming food and other essential needs from local or nearer sources, while international and far away trade should be limited more to where it is really needed in terms of meeting important requirements. The promotion of largely self-reliant rural communities should be encouraged in various ways.
Greater emphasis on retaining a rural base of human civilization should be encouraged, as rural areas are more conducive to environment protection, while the tendency of equating urbanization with human progress should be given up.
The most neglected section of rural landless people can be drawn into a very important program of afforestation of wastelands with mixed indigenous trees, resembling a local natural forest, which provides them satisfactory sustainable livelihoods. While this program can be very big at national level, it consists of small units of land in the hands of small landholders, working in highly decentralized ways according to local conditions, and hence this is an entirely different concept from industrial monoculture plantations.
At the same time all remaining natural forests should be protected as much as possible, and weaker sections of society should be involved in a very big in the protection of these forests.
The creativity of peasants, workers and other ordinary people to contribute to climate change mitigation and adaptation in hundreds of important ways in daily life should be encouraged.
Educational systems should provide adequate space for the young to think with independent creativity for resolving climate change and related issues, and to contribute to this.
Waste management should be improved, based on segregation at source level and decentralization. Waste should be minimized in various ways.
Water conservation and proper water management practices, with emphasis on decentralized solutions and avoiding large dams and inter-basin transfers, should be prioritized. This will be very helpful for climate change adaptation, and also for mitigation.
Disaster management, disaster response and climate change adaptation work, including flood protection in particular, should improve, learning lessons from past mistakes.
Policy reform should focus on making room for brave new thinking, which would allow much wider and bigger changes, instead of remaining addicted to very narrow frameworks. If present problems are so big and unprecedented, accordingly we should be able to think of very new and out-of-box solutions.
The role of people’s movements and youth movements in resolving climate crisis should get much more attention.
The program outlined above has the additional advantage of resolving many other big problems at the same time, or at least preparing the way for this.
Bharat Dogra is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include Planet in Peril, A Day in 2071, Protecting Earth for Children, Earth without Borders and Man over Machine.
