It now has to be recognised that man’s capacity for self-destruction could soon outstrip what he is capable of in the practice of war. Ironically, as a result of peace and development, mankind stands accused of rampant consumerism and environmental degradation. Moreover, with the recent release of the report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) earlier this month, we are faced with the most conclusive evidence to date that mankind bears the main responsibility for accelerating global warming.
Since the end of the Second World War, the upward path taken by the world economy, whilst heart warming to economists and politicians generally, has also been a source of concern for many. Somewhat encouraging is the fact that more people are recognizing the links between growth, environmental degradation and global warming.
In the past fifty years, the world economy has increased five-fold. Generating a volume of billions of dollars a year, international trade has become a massive driver of economic, social and ecological change. But globalization is not a phenomenon confined to trade. Ecological change anywhere is ecological change everywhere. And natural disasters and epidemics, like financial meltdowns, know no borders.
Economic growth, along with the accompanying expansion and advances in modes of production, has transformed the way people around the world live, work and play. It has also exacerbated the differences between rich and poor.
The picture is even more unbalanced when global consumption is taken into consideration. Just ten of the most developed countries account for 72 percent of global GDP. About fifty middle-income countries account for 23.3 percent. On the other hand, 150 poor, developing or underdeveloped countries contribute a mere 4.7 percent of global GDP.
This asymmetry prevents the poorest and weakest countries from achieving sustainable patterns of development. This in turn gives rise to the paradox that, if they do not grow they will not survive. And if they do grow they will do so only by placing greater strains on their natural resources and the environment. They will in effect be mortgaging their future.
It is now generally accepted that poverty is a cause of environmental degradation. It is estimated that some 1.2 billion people live on less than US$1 a day. In Latin America and the Caribbean, one in four persons lives on less than US$2 a day and deforestation, land degradation, desertification are all very real and ongoing phenomena in our part of the world. When climate change is factored into the account, a net worsening of environmental degradation is anticipated.
The IPCC has declared that the world faces an average temperature rise of around 30C during the 21st century, if greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise at their current pace. That would start the melting of the Greenland ice sheet and begin to kill off rainforests. And if the rainforests begin to die, then they will release more carbon into the atmosphere and the temperature rise could reach 6.40C. It is obviously a vicious circle, which if allowed to develop unhindered, could have catastrophic results for our planet.
The IPCC report is acknowledged by all the governments involved, including the USA, to be the latest and best scientific assessment of climate change. Significantly, the message seems to have finally got home at the highest levels of the most powerful country in the world.
Now the new UN Secretary General is considering a summit of world leaders to discuss how to confront the threats of global warming and climate change. The ultimate and admittedly ambitious objective would be to reach agreement on a successor to the Kyoto Protocol, which could be implemented with the participation of the USA.
The Stern Report released late last year was not science fiction. Taken in conjunction with recent images from NASA of the melting of the Antarctic ice shield, exposing for the first time ice that had been sealed for literally tens of thousands of years, and predictions that the ice covering Greenland and most of the Arctic could vanish in a matter of decades, if that long, the future is frightening.
The problem affects us all. In particular, the richest countries have achieved their advanced levels of development by compromising irrevocably and, in some cases, unconscionably, their respective environments, with dire consequences for all. Their progress has thus far been an example of the impossibility of reconciling economic development and respect for the environment.
It is therefore imperative that we find a solution for the imbalances between rich and poor and between nature and humanity. The more developed countries must take the lead on this. But the developing world must also play its part in advocating and pursuing a more responsible approach to the stewardship of our planet. Pressure has to be maintained on those most responsible for the current state of the world and those who can afford it, to devote adequate resources to meeting the challenges of global survival.
