Human Development Report 2007/8: Fighting Climate Change: Human Solidarity in a Divided World
click image for the report
These quotes from the Report summarize the key moral dimensions of the climate change challenge:
"Climate change demands urgent action now to address a threat to two constituencies with little or no political voice: the world's poor and future generations. it raises profoundly important questions about social justice, equity, and human rights across countries and generations"
"In reality, the world is a heterogeneous place: people have unequal incomes and wealth and climate change will affect regions very differently. This is, for us, the most compelling reason to act rapidly. Climate change is already starting to affect some of the poorest and most vulnerable communities around the world. A worldwide average 3° centigrade increase (compared to preindustrial temperatures) over the coming decades would result in a range of localized increases that could reach twice as high in some locations. The effect that increased droughts, extreme weather events, tropical storms and sea level rises will have on large parts of Africa, on many small island states and coastal zones will be inflicted in our lifetimes. In terms of aggregate world GDP, these short term effects may not be large. But for some of the world’s poorest people, the consequences could be apocalyptic." Forward to the Summary, p. 3.
"The most difficult policy challenges will relate to distribution. While there is potential catastrophic risk for everyone, the short and medium-term distribution of the costs and benefits will be far from uniform. The distributional challenge is made particularly difficult because those who have largely caused the problem— the rich countries—are not going to be those who suffer the most in the short term. It is the poorest who did not and still are not contributing significantly to green house gas emissions that are the most vulnerable." Forward to the Summary, p. 5.
There is perhaps no more eloquent, richly detailed articulation of the differential climate disruptions across the globe and the vast differences in human vulnerability to climate skocks than the the Report's Summary, available for download (31 pages).
"Climate change demands urgent action now to address a threat to two constituencies with little or no political voice: the world's poor and future generations. it raises profoundly important questions about social justice, equity, and human rights across countries and generations"
"In reality, the world is a heterogeneous place: people have unequal incomes and wealth and climate change will affect regions very differently. This is, for us, the most compelling reason to act rapidly. Climate change is already starting to affect some of the poorest and most vulnerable communities around the world. A worldwide average 3° centigrade increase (compared to preindustrial temperatures) over the coming decades would result in a range of localized increases that could reach twice as high in some locations. The effect that increased droughts, extreme weather events, tropical storms and sea level rises will have on large parts of Africa, on many small island states and coastal zones will be inflicted in our lifetimes. In terms of aggregate world GDP, these short term effects may not be large. But for some of the world’s poorest people, the consequences could be apocalyptic." Forward to the Summary, p. 3.
"The most difficult policy challenges will relate to distribution. While there is potential catastrophic risk for everyone, the short and medium-term distribution of the costs and benefits will be far from uniform. The distributional challenge is made particularly difficult because those who have largely caused the problem— the rich countries—are not going to be those who suffer the most in the short term. It is the poorest who did not and still are not contributing significantly to green house gas emissions that are the most vulnerable." Forward to the Summary, p. 5.
There is perhaps no more eloquent, richly detailed articulation of the differential climate disruptions across the globe and the vast differences in human vulnerability to climate skocks than the the Report's Summary, available for download (31 pages).
Differential Regional Impacts
The IPCC predicts that increases in global mean temperature of less than 1.8 to 6.4 degrees Fahrenheit (1 to 3 degrees Celsius) above 1990 levels will produce beneficial impacts in some regions and harmful ones in others. Here are some examples:
The most important overall conclusion, however, regarding the differential distribution of adverse effects is that " the effects of climate change are expected to be greatest in developing countries in terms of loss of life and relative effects on investment and economy."
Source: IPCC 2007, Summary for Policymakers, in Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, p. 11.
- Europe: Increased risk of inland flash floods; more frequent coastal flooding and increased erosion from storms and sea level rise; glacial retreat in mountainous areas; reduced snow cover and winter tourism; extensive species losses; reductions of crop productivity in southern Europe.
- North America: Decreasing snowpack in the western mountains; 5-20 percent increase in yields of rain-fed agriculture in some regions; increased frequency, intensity and duration of heat waves in cities that currently experience them.
- Latin America: Gradual replacement of tropical forest by savannah in eastern Amazonia; risk of significant biodiversity loss through species extinction in many tropical areas; significant changes in water availability for human consumption, agriculture and energy generation.
- Africa: By 2020, between 75 and 250 million people are projected to be exposed to increased water stress; yields from rain-fed agriculture could be reduced by up to 50 percent in some regions by 2020; agricultural production, including access to food, may be severely compromised.
- Asia: Freshwater availability projected to decrease in Central, South, East and Southeast Asia by the 2050s; coastal areas will be at risk due to increased flooding; death rate from disease associated with floods and droughts expected to rise in some regions.
The most important overall conclusion, however, regarding the differential distribution of adverse effects is that " the effects of climate change are expected to be greatest in developing countries in terms of loss of life and relative effects on investment and economy."
Source: IPCC 2007, Summary for Policymakers, in Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, p. 11.
More Evidence of Differential Climate Change Impact
Click image for larger view
One important fact of life for global justice is that, contrary to much rhetoric designed to motivate individual behavioral change, is that, as Robert Mendelsohn, an economist at Yale University, said, research leading up to and beyond the 2007 IPCC Assessment is showing that "we are not all "in this together." Indeed, some of the countries most likely to be hardest hit and hit first by the adverse consequences of climate change . As the preface of the Oxfam New Zealand webpage on its position on the place of global warming in relation to poverty alleviation aims notes, "Climate change is already having a devastating impact on people's lives, and poor communities in developing countries are being hit first and worst."
The heart of what then may be called the "First and Worst Problem" is that the brunt of the adverse impact falls upon the countries that are the poorest, least developed, driest, most dependent on subsistance agriculture, and least capable of undertaking strategies for adaptation or sacrificing energy-intensive technologies currently the only feasible means for poverty reduction.
Sampson et al echoed the findings of the 4th IPCC Assessment, noting that those who are likely to be the most vulnerable to climate change are the people living in low-latitude, hot regions of the world, places like central South America, the Arabian Peninsula and much of Africa. By contrast, human populations in the high-latitude more temperate zones of the world, where the temperature change is expected to be greater, will experience less adverse impact, in part because the current pattern of population spread in the temperate areas is better suited to adapt to the new range of temperatures that they can expect.
While those who have benefited most historically may not ultimately be the most causally responsible for the effects of global warming, projections suggest that those who are already among the planet's least advantaged are poised to suffer the most harm while having derived the least benefits from the very processes of development that caused the harm. While the talk of climate change "winners" may be overstated, there is much more to be explored with respect to what justice demands toward the climate change 'losers." See the journal abstract for the original paper by Samson et al, and a brief discussion of its findings.
The heart of what then may be called the "First and Worst Problem" is that the brunt of the adverse impact falls upon the countries that are the poorest, least developed, driest, most dependent on subsistance agriculture, and least capable of undertaking strategies for adaptation or sacrificing energy-intensive technologies currently the only feasible means for poverty reduction.
Sampson et al echoed the findings of the 4th IPCC Assessment, noting that those who are likely to be the most vulnerable to climate change are the people living in low-latitude, hot regions of the world, places like central South America, the Arabian Peninsula and much of Africa. By contrast, human populations in the high-latitude more temperate zones of the world, where the temperature change is expected to be greater, will experience less adverse impact, in part because the current pattern of population spread in the temperate areas is better suited to adapt to the new range of temperatures that they can expect.
While those who have benefited most historically may not ultimately be the most causally responsible for the effects of global warming, projections suggest that those who are already among the planet's least advantaged are poised to suffer the most harm while having derived the least benefits from the very processes of development that caused the harm. While the talk of climate change "winners" may be overstated, there is much more to be explored with respect to what justice demands toward the climate change 'losers." See the journal abstract for the original paper by Samson et al, and a brief discussion of its findings.
Estimates of Human Impact vs. Estimates of Impact on Other Species, Ecosystems, and Biodiversity
Click image for larger view
It is important to note that the global map (above) showing the vulnerability of human populations looks very different from a NASA map of global warming's likely effects on other species and ecosystems in general. A December, 2011 study published in the journal Climate Change conclusion summarized on the NASA website is as follows:
"By 2100, global climate change will modify plant communities covering almost half of Earth's land surface and will drive the conversion of nearly 40 percent of land-based ecosystems from one major ecological community type [biomes] — such as forest, grassland or tundra — toward another, according to a new NASA and university computer modeling study... Ecologically sensitive "hotspots"—areas projected to undergo the greatest degree of species turnover—that were identified by the study include regions in the Himalayas and the Tibetan Plateau, eastern equatorial Africa, Madagascar, the Mediterranean region, southern South America, and North America's Great Lakes and Great Plains areas.
Greater climate sensitivity, however, does not automatically translate into greater adverse overall impact. Not all impact on ecosystems is strictly negative inasmuch as both animal and plant species often must "migrate" over multiple generations inn order to survive, compete and reproduce within the range of climates to which they are evolutionarily and physiologically adapted. However, the study goes on to say that the accelerated rate of change can "disrupt the ecological balance between interdependent and often endangered plant and animal species, reduce biodiversity and adversely affect Earth's water, energy, carbon and other element cycles."
Nonetheless, even with greater adverse overall impact on ecosystems, it does not necessarily guarantee a greater adverse impact on human beings. As the study notes, some colder climates such as Canada will likely become warmer and better suited to agricultural activities for which the climate currently will not permit. There may be both net economic benefit and net benefit in food security and the ability of people in the regions to adapt to decreased food supplies from regions of the world adversely affected by loss of arable land due to increased water-stress and desertification.
"By 2100, global climate change will modify plant communities covering almost half of Earth's land surface and will drive the conversion of nearly 40 percent of land-based ecosystems from one major ecological community type [biomes] — such as forest, grassland or tundra — toward another, according to a new NASA and university computer modeling study... Ecologically sensitive "hotspots"—areas projected to undergo the greatest degree of species turnover—that were identified by the study include regions in the Himalayas and the Tibetan Plateau, eastern equatorial Africa, Madagascar, the Mediterranean region, southern South America, and North America's Great Lakes and Great Plains areas.
Greater climate sensitivity, however, does not automatically translate into greater adverse overall impact. Not all impact on ecosystems is strictly negative inasmuch as both animal and plant species often must "migrate" over multiple generations inn order to survive, compete and reproduce within the range of climates to which they are evolutionarily and physiologically adapted. However, the study goes on to say that the accelerated rate of change can "disrupt the ecological balance between interdependent and often endangered plant and animal species, reduce biodiversity and adversely affect Earth's water, energy, carbon and other element cycles."
Nonetheless, even with greater adverse overall impact on ecosystems, it does not necessarily guarantee a greater adverse impact on human beings. As the study notes, some colder climates such as Canada will likely become warmer and better suited to agricultural activities for which the climate currently will not permit. There may be both net economic benefit and net benefit in food security and the ability of people in the regions to adapt to decreased food supplies from regions of the world adversely affected by loss of arable land due to increased water-stress and desertification.
Very Bad for Some People, but Some Benefits for Others
Working Group II that prepared the estimates of effects for the IPCC 4th Assessment reached similar conclusions. They predicted that crop productivity will increase slightly at mid to high latitudes for local mean temperature increases of up to 1 to 3 degrees C depending on the crop, and then decrease beyond that in some regions. But at lower latitudes that are seasonally dry or tropical regions, crop productivity will decrease for even small local temperature increases. In short, how much heightened sensitivity of ecosystems to climate change translates into adverse effects on human well-being depends heavily two different kinds of considerations.
First, even small temperature changes in some regions can have more negative impact on human activities such as agriculture than the larger temperature changes in other, more environmentally sensitive regions. Second, global warming can have more negative impact on human communities depending on their ability to adapt to the ecosystem change. Thus, measured in purely economic terms, and assessed in purely anthropocentric terms (the benefits to the human species) it is highly likely that some regions will experience a moderate net benefit with global temperature changes in the lower range of estimates.
Much of the relevant findings of Working Group II for developing nations are summarized and explained in the UNFCCC's report, Climate Change: Impacts, Vulnerabilities, and Adaptation in Developing Countries.
First, even small temperature changes in some regions can have more negative impact on human activities such as agriculture than the larger temperature changes in other, more environmentally sensitive regions. Second, global warming can have more negative impact on human communities depending on their ability to adapt to the ecosystem change. Thus, measured in purely economic terms, and assessed in purely anthropocentric terms (the benefits to the human species) it is highly likely that some regions will experience a moderate net benefit with global temperature changes in the lower range of estimates.
Much of the relevant findings of Working Group II for developing nations are summarized and explained in the UNFCCC's report, Climate Change: Impacts, Vulnerabilities, and Adaptation in Developing Countries.
Climate Change Will Disproportionately Affect Regions that Depend on Rainwater for Agriculture
Source: Vital Water Graphics. UNEP
Click image for larger view
The consensus is that there will be more or less the same aggregate available water resources in 2050 as there was in 2007, but there will be far more people on the planet. As the maps projecting through 2025 indicate, the reduced availability of freshwater for all uses will not be distributed equally across the globe.
The main areas to face greater losses are the Equatorial regions, which are already among the most water stressed areas. These areas tend to be the parts of the world most dependent on rainfall rather than irrigation as the basis for agriculture. Rain dependent agricultural areas are at much greater risk of crop failure. They are among the least productive farmlands in the world. According to the FAO, irrigation increases yields of most crops by 100 to 400 percent, and irrigated agriculture currently contributes to 40 percent of the world's food production. The hottest, driest regions of the world, then, are already at a significant disadvantage in the efforts to meet their own food needs, but even as early as 2020, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts yields from rain-dependent agriculture could be down by 50 percent. (Source: Unwater.org).
The main areas to face greater losses are the Equatorial regions, which are already among the most water stressed areas. These areas tend to be the parts of the world most dependent on rainfall rather than irrigation as the basis for agriculture. Rain dependent agricultural areas are at much greater risk of crop failure. They are among the least productive farmlands in the world. According to the FAO, irrigation increases yields of most crops by 100 to 400 percent, and irrigated agriculture currently contributes to 40 percent of the world's food production. The hottest, driest regions of the world, then, are already at a significant disadvantage in the efforts to meet their own food needs, but even as early as 2020, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts yields from rain-dependent agriculture could be down by 50 percent. (Source: Unwater.org).
The Distribution of the Global Burden of Disease Attributable to Climate Change
click image for larger view
The World Health Organization (WHO) has undertaken the task of estimating the excess burden of disease for various years, for example, comparing the results for the year 2000 with the 1990 baseline, together with predictions of climate-attributable disease for 2010, 2020, and 2030. Estimates were made using scenarios in which carbon stocks are at 450, 550, and 750 ppm.
The study looked at food and water-borne disease, vector borne disease such as malaria, increase in malnutrition, and disease associated with natural disasters such as coastal flooding and interior severe weather events. The outcome measures used for the estimates are the widely-used Disability-Adjusted Life Year (DALY) A DALY is the sum of: (1) years of life lost due to premature death (YLL); and (2) years of life lived with disability (YLD). In all, the World Health Organisation estimates that,climate change caused a loss of 5.5m disability-adjusted life years (a measure of harm to human health) in 2000, most of it in Africa and Asia.
One example of the main climate-related causes of excess morbidity and premature mortality is likely to be from the increase of various vector-borne infectious diseases, particularly malaria, primarily found in tropical regions of Africa, Asia, and South America. The primary increase is expected in regions bordering current endemic zones. The locus of much of the high prevalence of the disease currently is within the tropical regions. Warmer weather allows the disease carrying insects such as mosquitos to migrate into previously unaffected altitudes, spreading the disease that is already the biggest killer in Africa. By 2030 climate change may expose 90 million more people to malaria in Africa alone. In effect, the endemic zones are expected to expand, while smaller changes would occur in currently endemic areas. Notably, the expectation is that most temperate regions will remain unsuitable for greater disease transmission.
The study looked at food and water-borne disease, vector borne disease such as malaria, increase in malnutrition, and disease associated with natural disasters such as coastal flooding and interior severe weather events. The outcome measures used for the estimates are the widely-used Disability-Adjusted Life Year (DALY) A DALY is the sum of: (1) years of life lost due to premature death (YLL); and (2) years of life lived with disability (YLD). In all, the World Health Organisation estimates that,climate change caused a loss of 5.5m disability-adjusted life years (a measure of harm to human health) in 2000, most of it in Africa and Asia.
One example of the main climate-related causes of excess morbidity and premature mortality is likely to be from the increase of various vector-borne infectious diseases, particularly malaria, primarily found in tropical regions of Africa, Asia, and South America. The primary increase is expected in regions bordering current endemic zones. The locus of much of the high prevalence of the disease currently is within the tropical regions. Warmer weather allows the disease carrying insects such as mosquitos to migrate into previously unaffected altitudes, spreading the disease that is already the biggest killer in Africa. By 2030 climate change may expose 90 million more people to malaria in Africa alone. In effect, the endemic zones are expected to expand, while smaller changes would occur in currently endemic areas. Notably, the expectation is that most temperate regions will remain unsuitable for greater disease transmission.
- The full WHO report can be found on the WHO climate project website.
More Estimates of Climate-Related Increases of Disease Burden Among the Global Poor
The WHO study did not attempt to map the full range of likely health impacts. Some additional benchmarks can be found in a study produced by the Global Humanitarian Forum, a Swiss think-tank. Their study published in the journal Comparative Quantification of Health Risks, put the number of additional deaths attributable to climate change every year at 150,000 due to its impact on water supplies and crop yields, as well as disease vectors. For example, climate change is responsible for increased drought in some of the already most water-stressed regions of the world. Two-thirds of Africa is desert or arid, and another study produced by the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) predicts that by 2080 as much as a fifth of Africa's farmland will be severely stressed, and apart for what that means for the agricultural sector of the economy and food security, the additional disease implications are staggering because meningitis outbreaks in Africa are strongly correlated with drought.
Differential Cost Impacts and Differential Contributions to the Problem
The Stern Report calculated that a 2°C rise in global temperature cost about 1% of world GDP. Economists debate how significant that cost may turn out over many years of compounding effect , especially in view of the global economic downturn since 2008, but we have reason to think that the economic impact on some of the countries that are home to many of the world's poorest people will be far greater. World Bank, in its World Development Report for 2010, now says the cost to Africa will be more like 4% of GDP and to India, 5%. Their estimate is that developing countries that account for 80% of world population will bear considerably more than 80% of the economic burden because they will be more adversely affected and because they lack the capital resources and existing infrastructure to adapt.
The World Bank report tracks 187 countries and territories in the U.N.’s human development index, which is based on composite measurements of health, education and income (for more on the Index, see GDP and Well-Being), and has tracked global living standards since 1990. When the effects of global warming in the 2°C range on weather, food production and pollution are factored in, the future of many developing nations is grim. The index’s average score drops 8 percent worldwide from what would otherwise be predicted, but it drops by 12 percent in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. When the assumptions shift to a “disaster” scenario — which includes vast deforestation, dramatic biodiversity declines and increasing extreme weather — the global index falls by 15 percent, with the deepest losses felt in poor regions. There is little debate that the poorest nations will get hit first and worst, and even earlier and harder if the temperature increases are in the higher range of estimates.
To keep global warming down to an increase of 2°C, the World Bank calculates, would cost $140 billion to $675 billion a year in developing countries, plus another $75 billion annual cost of adapting to global warming. For some more detailed estimates developed in line with differing sets of assumptions, see the World Bank's report, The Cost to Developing Countries of Adapting to Climate Change.
Adaptation cost estimates are somewhat speculative, but they are sobering even when modest assumptions regarding impacts are made. Lord Stern's estimates from a couple of years out from the release of the Stern Report in late 2006 suggests that the adaptation costs are rising rapidly due to delay in mitigation efforts. Under a scenario in which carbon accumulation is stabilized at 550 ppm by 2050 (well higher than the estimated 2 degrees C. that would come from a 450 ppm accumulation) projected a cost of at least 5% and perhaps more than 20% of global GDP being needed for adaptation.
Issues of global justice, however, are clouded somewhat by the fact that the profile of the main contributors to cumulative atmospheric carbon stocks is dynamic. While lesser developed nations have complained bitterly of a coming burden for which the developed nations have been the primary contributors to the problem - and the primary beneficiaries - the picture is changing rapidly. Poor and middle-income countries already account for just over half of total carbon emissions (see World Bank chart on the right). One example is Brazil, which now produces more annual CO2 per capita than Germany.
The World Bank report tracks 187 countries and territories in the U.N.’s human development index, which is based on composite measurements of health, education and income (for more on the Index, see GDP and Well-Being), and has tracked global living standards since 1990. When the effects of global warming in the 2°C range on weather, food production and pollution are factored in, the future of many developing nations is grim. The index’s average score drops 8 percent worldwide from what would otherwise be predicted, but it drops by 12 percent in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. When the assumptions shift to a “disaster” scenario — which includes vast deforestation, dramatic biodiversity declines and increasing extreme weather — the global index falls by 15 percent, with the deepest losses felt in poor regions. There is little debate that the poorest nations will get hit first and worst, and even earlier and harder if the temperature increases are in the higher range of estimates.
To keep global warming down to an increase of 2°C, the World Bank calculates, would cost $140 billion to $675 billion a year in developing countries, plus another $75 billion annual cost of adapting to global warming. For some more detailed estimates developed in line with differing sets of assumptions, see the World Bank's report, The Cost to Developing Countries of Adapting to Climate Change.
Adaptation cost estimates are somewhat speculative, but they are sobering even when modest assumptions regarding impacts are made. Lord Stern's estimates from a couple of years out from the release of the Stern Report in late 2006 suggests that the adaptation costs are rising rapidly due to delay in mitigation efforts. Under a scenario in which carbon accumulation is stabilized at 550 ppm by 2050 (well higher than the estimated 2 degrees C. that would come from a 450 ppm accumulation) projected a cost of at least 5% and perhaps more than 20% of global GDP being needed for adaptation.
Issues of global justice, however, are clouded somewhat by the fact that the profile of the main contributors to cumulative atmospheric carbon stocks is dynamic. While lesser developed nations have complained bitterly of a coming burden for which the developed nations have been the primary contributors to the problem - and the primary beneficiaries - the picture is changing rapidly. Poor and middle-income countries already account for just over half of total carbon emissions (see World Bank chart on the right). One example is Brazil, which now produces more annual CO2 per capita than Germany.
Economic Impact of 1.92 Degrees C.
click image for larger view and data source
The chart on the left shows recent estimates of economic impact a temperature increase of 1.92°C compared to pre-industrial levels in 2050. Northern Europe is expected to slightly benefit (+0.18%), while Southern and Eastern Europe are expected to suffer from the climate change scenario under analysis (-0.15% and -0.21% respectively). Most vulnerable countries are the less developed regions, such as South Asia, South-East Asia, North Africa and Sub-Saharan Africa.
Water as the Big Factor in the Global South
With global temperature increases between 2 and 4 °C over the next century, the main impacts will occur through a change in the hydrological cycle. Rainfall is likely to increase in some regions, most notably in the tropics, while average precipitation is likely to decrease in the sub-tropics. While such changes will have an impact on all countries, developing countries are much more vulnerable to climate change than the developing world because it aggravates the effects of population growth, poverty, and rapid urbanization.
A scientific and policy report, Climate Change Impacts on Developing Countries - EU Accountability, authored by the Co-operative Programme on Water and Climate (CPWC) and the Wageningen University and Research Centre, for the European Parliament's Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety discusses many of the implications of climate change in regions of the world already unable to adapt to the burdens of underdevelopment and thus far less able on their own to adapt to the additional social and economic burdens of climate change.
One study has estimated that the climate-induced cost of adaptation for the water sector worldwide could total $12 billion per year, with the bulk of this amount – up to 90% – needed in developing countries. This figure is in addition to an estimated $73 Billion needed for addressing overall water resource demands worldwide.
Another report focused on Africa, Africa - Up in Smoke: The second report from the Working Group on Climate Change and Development (See entry below on this page) claims that two thirds of the rural population and one third of the urban population are already effected by a lack of access to safe drinking water. As rainfall declines in the region due to climate change, the quality of water further deteriorates. Sewage and industrial effluents become more concentrated, thereby exacerbating water-borne diseases and reducing the quality and quantity of fresh water available for domestic use. In the Nile region for example, most scenarios estimate a decrease in river flow of up to 75 per cent by 2100, displacing up to 90 million people by 2015.
A scientific and policy report, Climate Change Impacts on Developing Countries - EU Accountability, authored by the Co-operative Programme on Water and Climate (CPWC) and the Wageningen University and Research Centre, for the European Parliament's Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety discusses many of the implications of climate change in regions of the world already unable to adapt to the burdens of underdevelopment and thus far less able on their own to adapt to the additional social and economic burdens of climate change.
One study has estimated that the climate-induced cost of adaptation for the water sector worldwide could total $12 billion per year, with the bulk of this amount – up to 90% – needed in developing countries. This figure is in addition to an estimated $73 Billion needed for addressing overall water resource demands worldwide.
Another report focused on Africa, Africa - Up in Smoke: The second report from the Working Group on Climate Change and Development (See entry below on this page) claims that two thirds of the rural population and one third of the urban population are already effected by a lack of access to safe drinking water. As rainfall declines in the region due to climate change, the quality of water further deteriorates. Sewage and industrial effluents become more concentrated, thereby exacerbating water-borne diseases and reducing the quality and quantity of fresh water available for domestic use. In the Nile region for example, most scenarios estimate a decrease in river flow of up to 75 per cent by 2100, displacing up to 90 million people by 2015.
The Agricultural Impact of Climate Change
A report of the International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD) offers the following insight in its executive summary:
"Country-speciic studies on the climate change impacts expected for the agricultural sector in most low income countries are scarce, in part due to a lack of data availability. Where country-specific studies do exist, they typically analyse a limited number of crops and cereals feature most prominently. Although such crops are important in terms of global agricultural trade lows, reductions in agricultural output and productivity because of climate change will af ect more than just cereals. Some of the economies most dependent on agriculture face an estimated loss of more than 50 percent of their total agricultural output by 2080, even when including carbon fertilisation effects (where an increased concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere acts as a stimulus to crop productivity). Countries such as Malawi may need to adapt to a 20 percent reduction in agricultural export earnings because of reduced agricultural output as a result of climate change."
"Country-speciic studies on the climate change impacts expected for the agricultural sector in most low income countries are scarce, in part due to a lack of data availability. Where country-specific studies do exist, they typically analyse a limited number of crops and cereals feature most prominently. Although such crops are important in terms of global agricultural trade lows, reductions in agricultural output and productivity because of climate change will af ect more than just cereals. Some of the economies most dependent on agriculture face an estimated loss of more than 50 percent of their total agricultural output by 2080, even when including carbon fertilisation effects (where an increased concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere acts as a stimulus to crop productivity). Countries such as Malawi may need to adapt to a 20 percent reduction in agricultural export earnings because of reduced agricultural output as a result of climate change."
- The final report is available in its entirety: Climate Change and Developing Country Agriculture.
- Some recent country-specific case studies of adaptation costs and challenges have been undertaken by the World Bank.
The Significance of Economic Dependency on Agriculture for Adaptation to Global Warming
The International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) has observed that in 2005, nearly half of the economically active population in developing countries—2.5 billion people—relied on agriculture for its livelihood. Currently, 75 percent of the world’s poor live in rural areas. Their 2009 Food Policy Report presents research results that quantify the climate-change impacts mentioned above, assesses the consequences for food security, and estimates the investments that would offset the negative consequences for human well-being. In addition to yield declines disproportionately affecting the rural, global poor, the Report noted the following likely impacts:
- additional price increases for the most important agricultural crops–rice, wheat, maize, and soybeans. Higher feed prices will result in higher meat prices. As a result, climate change will reduce the growth in meat consumption slightly and cause a more substantial fall in cereals consumption.
- Calorie availability in 2050 will not only be lower than in the no–climate-change scenario—it will actually decline relative to 2000 levels throughout the developing world.
- By 2050, the decline in calorie availability will increase child malnutrition by 20 percent relative to a world with no climate change.
The Added Burdens of Climate Change in Africa
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in its 4th Assessment describes Africa, the world’s poorest region, as “the continent most vulnerable to the impacts of projected change because widespread poverty limits adaptation capabilities.” A number of features of Africa's economy and geography make it especially vulnerable. The comprehensive report, Africa - Up in Smoke: The second report from the Working Group on Climate Change and Development, notes that small-scale farming provides most of the food produced in Africa and employment for 70 per cent of working people. Because much of Africa will experience some of the worst reductions in rainfall, it will be hit especially hard as farming there, unlike farming in many other parts of the world, is overwhelmingly dependent on direct rainfall. Africa is thus exceptionally vulnerable to the uncertainties and weather extremes of global warming in ways that impact not only food security but the very basis of its economic subsistence.
Climate-induced agricultural effects and the resulting economic fallout will be exacerbated by other factors identified in the report, These include such things as widespread poverty, recurrent droughts and floods, an immediate daily dependence on natural resources and biodiversity, a heavy disease burden, and the numerous conflicts that have engulfed the continent, and the burden of unpayable debt. While the report was produced using information available from the 3rd IPCC Assessment, the document remains important for its comprehensive examination of how many of the expected climate change impacts (very similar to much of what the 4th Assessment articulated, differing largely in its greater detail and increased confidence) interact with economic, political, and geographic factors to produce densely woven patterns of systematic disadvantage.
Climate-induced agricultural effects and the resulting economic fallout will be exacerbated by other factors identified in the report, These include such things as widespread poverty, recurrent droughts and floods, an immediate daily dependence on natural resources and biodiversity, a heavy disease burden, and the numerous conflicts that have engulfed the continent, and the burden of unpayable debt. While the report was produced using information available from the 3rd IPCC Assessment, the document remains important for its comprehensive examination of how many of the expected climate change impacts (very similar to much of what the 4th Assessment articulated, differing largely in its greater detail and increased confidence) interact with economic, political, and geographic factors to produce densely woven patterns of systematic disadvantage.
Horizon 2025: Report by the Overseas Development Institute
click image for link
A more recent 2012 projection of the lagest pockets of "stubborn poverty" claims that by 2025 the world will be closer than ever to ending global poverty and two thirds of the remaining 600m or fewer poor people will live in fragile and conflict affected states in Africa. The states indentified in Horizon 2025, a new report from the Overseas Development Institute track closely the list of most climate vulnerable states shown on the map produced by the University of Texas study described in the entry below.
More ways to Understand the Nature of the African Vulnerability to Climate Change
Click image for a larger view
Another recent report confirms what earlier assessments have claimed. A recent study from the University fo Texas notes that "Africa is particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change due to its reliance on rain-fed agriculture and the inability of many of its governments to help communities in times of need."
The study used somewhat different variables to reach the same general conclusion regarding impediments to adaptation. They looked at four different sources of vulnerability: 1) the degree of physical exposure to climate hazards, 2) population size, 3) household or community resilience, and 4) the quality of governance or presence of political violence. The composite vulnerability based on these four variables can be seen in the figure on your left and more information, along with other informative maps, is available can be found here.
The study used somewhat different variables to reach the same general conclusion regarding impediments to adaptation. They looked at four different sources of vulnerability: 1) the degree of physical exposure to climate hazards, 2) population size, 3) household or community resilience, and 4) the quality of governance or presence of political violence. The composite vulnerability based on these four variables can be seen in the figure on your left and more information, along with other informative maps, is available can be found here.
Similar Threats to Other Tropical Areas: South and Southeast Asia
Africa is not unique in the inherent, water-related vulnerabilities to agricultural production produced by climate change. For example, South and Southeast Asia are home to more than one-third of the world's population and half of the world's poor and malnourished. Climate change in this region is expected to reduce agriculture productivity by as much as 50 per cent in the next 30 years. Approximately 88 per cent of Indians, for example, live in river basins with some form of water scarcity or food deficit. In Southeast Asia, despite the wider use of irrigation, approximately 75 per cent of crops are still rain-fed and remain especially vulnerable to the vagaries of the climate. Here, as in Africa, a great proportion of the local economy derives from agriculture.
Data regarding the special threats to water and agriculture posed by climate change to the tropical regions can be found in Mapping Hotspots of Climate Change and Food Insecurity in the Global Tropics, a study done by CGIAR Research Programme on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS).
Data regarding the special threats to water and agriculture posed by climate change to the tropical regions can be found in Mapping Hotspots of Climate Change and Food Insecurity in the Global Tropics, a study done by CGIAR Research Programme on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS).
Closing the Gap: The international Commission on Climate Change and Development
The international Commission on Climate Change and Development was launched in late 2007 by the Swedish government. They were given the task of evaluating programs for international development in light of climate change impacts, with a special focus on adaptation. Their report noted that the global poor are "overwhelmingly the present and future victims of climate change. Its impacts are mixed with and overlap the impacts of other syndromes such as rising food prices, the financial crisis, energy shortages, ecosystem degradation due to other human causes, and demographic changes."
Among the many notable observations in the report is the fact that "six assessments of global adaptation costs were published in the period of 2006 –2008, and that they vary widely. The range is from $3 billion to $135 billion per year. They broke down costs estimates into short-term costs that are estimated at between $6 billion and $11 billion per year and medium-term costs between $12 billion and $29 billion per year. Whatever the costs their conclusion was that the lesser developed nations lack the resources to address the problem of adaptation on their own, but that external funding was unlikely to make up the difference. Thus far, most external funding has gone for case-by-case evaluation of specific adaptation projects. However, the longer-tern requires some clearer vision of the overall priorities if for no other reason than the fact that the level of micromanagement required by such a process will become impossible.
The original report and more recent updates can be found on the Commission's Website.
Among the many notable observations in the report is the fact that "six assessments of global adaptation costs were published in the period of 2006 –2008, and that they vary widely. The range is from $3 billion to $135 billion per year. They broke down costs estimates into short-term costs that are estimated at between $6 billion and $11 billion per year and medium-term costs between $12 billion and $29 billion per year. Whatever the costs their conclusion was that the lesser developed nations lack the resources to address the problem of adaptation on their own, but that external funding was unlikely to make up the difference. Thus far, most external funding has gone for case-by-case evaluation of specific adaptation projects. However, the longer-tern requires some clearer vision of the overall priorities if for no other reason than the fact that the level of micromanagement required by such a process will become impossible.
The original report and more recent updates can be found on the Commission's Website.
The Impact on Small Island Developing States
click image for larger view
The 4th Assessment Report from the IPCC developed estimated ranges of impact of global warming under each of its warming scenarios. Even under the most modest scenario in which temperature increases might be held to 1.5 degrees Centigrade, it means the loss of substantial land mass for many small island states, as well as loss of low-lying coastal lands on most continents.
The graphic on the right is taken from a recent study completed for the United Nations Environment Programme shows projections of percentage of land mass loss for 15 island states in the Indian and Atlantic Oceans. Notice that the loss for some islands is 100%. The graph shows the percentage of susceptible area of each of the 15 islands under two scenarios. The blue line indicates susceptibility at 0-1 meters sea level rise, and the red line indicates susceptibility at 1-2 meters. What this and other studies show is that at even modest sea level rises, many nations face extinction. The details on methodology and assumptions can be obtained by following the link above to the UNEP study.
The Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) is an important umbrella group representing over fifty island and low-lying coastal nations, but Small Island Developing States (SIDS) is the primary organization articulating the position of these nations in international discussions and meeting regarding climate and other matters of sustainability, including the last UNFCC conference at Durban and the Rio+20 global summit in the summer of 2012. Their statement of position is contained in the AOSIS document "1.5 to Stay Alive"
The graphic on the right is taken from a recent study completed for the United Nations Environment Programme shows projections of percentage of land mass loss for 15 island states in the Indian and Atlantic Oceans. Notice that the loss for some islands is 100%. The graph shows the percentage of susceptible area of each of the 15 islands under two scenarios. The blue line indicates susceptibility at 0-1 meters sea level rise, and the red line indicates susceptibility at 1-2 meters. What this and other studies show is that at even modest sea level rises, many nations face extinction. The details on methodology and assumptions can be obtained by following the link above to the UNEP study.
The Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) is an important umbrella group representing over fifty island and low-lying coastal nations, but Small Island Developing States (SIDS) is the primary organization articulating the position of these nations in international discussions and meeting regarding climate and other matters of sustainability, including the last UNFCC conference at Durban and the Rio+20 global summit in the summer of 2012. Their statement of position is contained in the AOSIS document "1.5 to Stay Alive"
Migration as Yet Another Example of Differential Impact
"Migration and Climate Change” published by UNESCO in 2012 brings together the views of 26 leading experts from a range of disciplines such as demography, climatology, economics, geography, anthropology and law. They present case studies from Bangladesh, Brazil, Nepal and the islands of the Pacific. Both loss of coastal areas, often with accompanying saltwater infiltration, and desertification are the major sources of gradual climate-exacerbated causes of groundwater availability, which in turn aggravates existing tensions among populations seeking necessary resources as dwindling supplies nearby diminish.
For papers derived from the 2011 conference on understanding the relation between water stress and conflict and migration, see the 2012 report produced by the International Hydrological Programme (IHP) of UNESCO.
For papers derived from the 2011 conference on understanding the relation between water stress and conflict and migration, see the 2012 report produced by the International Hydrological Programme (IHP) of UNESCO.
Migration, Displacement, and Climate-Induced Extreme Weather Events
Climate change causes displacement of people in other ways, including migration due to the increased number and severity of weather-related disasters which destroy homes and habitats. A recent Asian Development Bank report, Addressing Climate Change and Migration in Asia and the Pacific, identifies “environmental hot spots” that are particular risk of flooding,cyclones, typhoons, and water stress.
The differential impact on parts of Asia has tremendous moral significance in much the same way as it does for Africa. The Asia Pacific region is home to over 60% of the world's people, of which according to the United Nations two-thirds of whom live in extreme poverty. According to an annual review of global insurance trends produced by Swiss Re, 90% of the world's climate related disasters occur in Asia. They estimate that the human cost has been the death of half a million people from climate related events since 1970.
The differential impact on parts of Asia has tremendous moral significance in much the same way as it does for Africa. The Asia Pacific region is home to over 60% of the world's people, of which according to the United Nations two-thirds of whom live in extreme poverty. According to an annual review of global insurance trends produced by Swiss Re, 90% of the world's climate related disasters occur in Asia. They estimate that the human cost has been the death of half a million people from climate related events since 1970.
So, What do Americans Think?
Res ipsa loquitur
U.S. consumer research conducted by EnviroMedia Social Marketing in November of 2010 showed that 43 percent of Americans disagree and 49 percent agree with the statement, “My personal energy use affects the health and living conditions of people in poor, developing countries.” However, 60 percent of 18- to 34-year-olds believe their personal energy use affects others globally.
For more general information on Americans' beliefs with regard to the science of global warming, see what The Yale Project on Climate Change has to say. It has been surveying public attitudes and beliefs regarding global warming and they have found six distinct clusters of public sentiment, which they label as the Alarmed, the Concerned, the Cautious, the Doubtful, and the Disengaged, and the Dismissive. The most recent report dated July 12, 2012 and can be downloaded from their website in pdf format.
Compare what some critics of the outcome of the Rio+20 conference in 2012 said. Muhammad Yunus, a member of the Panel and Nobel Peace Prize laureate, linked the plight of Africa due to the expected climate change impacts to another trend that may compound the ability of many African nations to marshal their own agricultural resources in ways that allow them to adapt to global warming. "In the last decade, speculators have bought up over 134 million hectares of land in Africa - an area larger than the UK, France and Germany combined, threatening the livelihoods and the futures of the poor people who often live on this land," he said.
For more general information on Americans' beliefs with regard to the science of global warming, see what The Yale Project on Climate Change has to say. It has been surveying public attitudes and beliefs regarding global warming and they have found six distinct clusters of public sentiment, which they label as the Alarmed, the Concerned, the Cautious, the Doubtful, and the Disengaged, and the Dismissive. The most recent report dated July 12, 2012 and can be downloaded from their website in pdf format.
Compare what some critics of the outcome of the Rio+20 conference in 2012 said. Muhammad Yunus, a member of the Panel and Nobel Peace Prize laureate, linked the plight of Africa due to the expected climate change impacts to another trend that may compound the ability of many African nations to marshal their own agricultural resources in ways that allow them to adapt to global warming. "In the last decade, speculators have bought up over 134 million hectares of land in Africa - an area larger than the UK, France and Germany combined, threatening the livelihoods and the futures of the poor people who often live on this land," he said.
Progress is Elusive: United Nations Environment Programme Report Card:
This comprehensive report card created by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) presents the disturbing reality of exactly how little progress has been made towards the 90 most important global environmental objectives as determined by the U.N. Significant progress has only been made towards four goals - fighting ozone depletion, eliminating lead from oil, reducing ocean pollution, and, to a lesser extent, ensuring equitable access to quality water supplies.
The remainder of the issues, which range from making "some progress" to "deteriorating," are organized under the thematic categories of Atmosphere, Land, Water, Biodiversity, and Chemicals and Waste. This is an invaluable document for anyone interested in environmental issues and the corresponding failures of national and international policymakers.
The remainder of the issues, which range from making "some progress" to "deteriorating," are organized under the thematic categories of Atmosphere, Land, Water, Biodiversity, and Chemicals and Waste. This is an invaluable document for anyone interested in environmental issues and the corresponding failures of national and international policymakers.