Font size:
Print
End of Global Climate Policy
Context:
The 2024 Climate Conference in Baku marked a watershed moment in global climate governance.
More on News
- The conference challenged the long-standing division between “donor” and “recipient” nations, a legacy of the post-colonial era, and called for an alternative global sustainability forum.
- This paradigm shift signalled a move toward empowering developing countries to shape their own sustainable futures.
The Evolution of Climate Treaties
- The 1992 climate treaty aimed to unite nations against a shared challenge—climate change.
- While the treaty acknowledged the historical responsibility of industrialised nations, it required developing countries to address a crisis they did not create.
- In exchange, promises of technology transfer and financial aid were made.
- However, the imbalance in research capacity between the Global North and South allowed the G7 to dominate the climate agenda, subtly shifting the burden to developing nations.
- This imbalance persists. The G7 has dictated global concerns, set agendas, and implemented rules in ways that address symptoms rather than causes, perpetuating their advantages.
- Issues like incentivising private finance and managing trade restrictions, absent in the original climate agreements, now strain developing countries.
- With limited accountability, the G7 has absolved itself of responsibility for climate change, offering what India has termed the “optical illusion” of financial support.
Diverging Worldviews on Climate Action
- Since its formation in 1973, the G7 has maintained a worldview centred on reducing carbon dioxide emissions—a necessity for countries that have overused their share of atmospheric resources.
- In contrast, the Global South prioritises sustainable development, emphasising modified pathways, lifestyle changes, and equitable energy transitions.
- The Global South, representing four-fifths of the world’s population and half its GDP, has begun asserting its priorities, most notably in climate justice.
- Seventy-two countries now include the principle of a “just transition” in their climate plans, acknowledging the social dimensions of climate action.
- This approach challenges the inequities embedded in the global climate framework, which exacerbates income gaps and widens inequalities through mechanisms like carbon pricing and trade restrictions.
- The contrasting visions reflect deeper societal and developmental divides.
- Urbanisation, a key driver of emissions and resource use, has transformed the global landscape.
- Unlike the G7’s resource-intensive urban model, the Global South is forging distinct paths to development.
- By 2050, Asia will account for 55% of global emissions—aligned with its population share—while the G7 will contribute 25% of emissions with only 10% of the global population.
- Urbanisation, a key driver of emissions and resource use, has transformed the global landscape.
Toward a New Framework for Sustainability
- The Baku conference underscored the need for a new sustainability paradigm centered on justice.
- This approach would address historical inequities and establish equitable pathways for development.
- India, as a key player, must strategise to counterbalance the G7’s dominance and champion a framework for shared prosperity within ecological limits.
Proposals for Global Cooperation
To realign global governance, three key initiatives are proposed:
- Alternative Sustainability Forum: BRICS and partner nations should create a forum dedicated to urban energy transitions and sustainability research.
- This initiative would support member countries in addressing shared challenges without positioning itself as an anti-G7 coalition.
- Refocusing UN Climate Negotiations: Discussions should prioritise reviewing G7 emissions reductions and providing $300 billion in grants to the most vulnerable nations, such as Small Island States and Least Developed Countries.
- Reimagining International Fora: Global platforms should function as annual stocktaking mechanisms, enabling nations to assess progress and make necessary course corrections.
-
- Dysfunctional institutions, such as the World Trade Organisation’s dispute settlement body, could be phased out.
A Role for BRICS in Global Leadership
- As the Global South rises, BRICS has the potential to bridge divides in multilateralism, shaping a more equitable world order.
- By asserting leadership, BRICS nations can claim their rightful place in global governance, including permanent seats in the UN Security Council.
The 2024 Baku Conference has laid the groundwork for a transformative shift in climate governance. With the Global South taking charge, a new era of sustainability rooted in justice and equity may finally emerge.
