Degrowth? Climate justice cannot come at sole cost of rich nations

The Global South’s demand for climate justice is justified but so is the developed world’s need for growth and security
COP28 must prioritise the crafting of a win-win situation for all, including wealthy countries, which will need to lead the transition to net zero emissions

Rizwan Basir

Published: 3:00am, 10 Aug 2023

Why you can trust SCMP

I write from Pakistan, a country plunged into multiple crises by last year’s floods, which ruthlessly claimed lives, displaced millions, destabilised our political landscape, and brought us dangerously close to economic default. Despite Pakistan’s minimal contributions to global emissions, the country remains unfairly susceptible to the impact of climate change. Climate justice is an alien concept to us.

I harbour no desire to see the developed world continue to grow at the expense of countries like mine. Carbon emissions must be drastically reduced. But frustrating as it may be, I am also acutely aware that this is unlikely to occur any time soon. Reducing emissions entails curbing growth, and history unequivocally shows that no developed country has ever compromised on its national interests, particularly concerning industrial prowess and energy security.

Degrowth has never been an option for rich economies. And in the post-Covid era amid the war in Ukraine, the developed world is extremely focused on economic and energy security. Why wouldn’t it be? The leaders of developed countries have pledged to safeguard their citizens from potential threats, and that’s precisely what they strive to achieve.

Remember, developed countries possess sufficient adaptive capacities to endure climate disasters. It is the impoverished South, countries like mine, that suffers the most. Leaders of the developed world would not say it but the South still gets the message: climate change is not our issue, it’s yours.

So, as the world approaches the COP28 UN climate change conference, it is essential for countries – especially those in climate-vulnerable South Asia and Africa – to reassess their diplomatic efforts. Should they persist in expending energy on advocating “degrowth” in the developed world to address climate change, a seemingly improbable outcome, or should they focus on feasible solutions that could genuinely curb rising global emissions?

The concept of degrowth is increasingly gaining popularity as an alternative approach to confronting the urgent ecological crisis. The idea was recently highlighted at the Beyond Growth conference by the European Parliament and has been repeatedly advocated by climate activists as a necessary prerequisite to the phasing out of fossil fuels. Rich countries must put people over profits, they believe, and justifiably so.

Advocates, spearheaded by economic anthropologist Jason Hickel, propose degrowth as a strategic reduction in energy and resource consumption to restore ecological balance and improve human well-being while addressing social inequality.

The degrowth movement contends that other approaches to the ecological crisis, like green growth and sustainable development goals, are futile due to their roots in democratic capitalism, which is fixated on economic growth. Consequently, the movement advocates a radical political project aimed at displacing capitalism and implementing degrowth in the Western world, while exempting the Global South.

While degrowth proponents raise valid concerns about the environmental consequences of continuous growth, the impact of degrowth policies remains open to question.

For instance, reducing the gross domestic product of developed countries may not have a significant impact on the world’s material footprint, given that large rapidly industrialising countries account for about 40 per cent of global carbon emissions. In addition, reducing income in developed countries might impede investment in green technology, potentially hindering progress on climate change mitigation and adaptation.

Another critical concern revolves around “dirty degrowth”. As resource and innovation pressures mount due to degrowth policies, industries may opt for cheaper yet more environmentally damaging production methods, undermining the objective of ecological restoration.

But even beyond this, the incessant bombardment of such concepts appears to be causing more harm than good. Climate activists have been vociferously demanding that advanced economies take responsibility and bear the costs of the damage caused by their emissions, and insisting that they promptly transition their production processes, even if it entails temporarily compromising growth.

As a result, rich countries are becoming increasingly agitated. Instead of constructive action, this mounting pressure has triggered finger-pointing among major carbon emitters.

01:40

‘Climate time bomb ticking’: UN chief says carbon emissions must be urgently cut

Moreover, climate change, once a universally acknowledged concern, has fallen prey to politicisation. Countries exploit it as a diplomatic tool to wield power and influence, diluting its essential global impact.

Lastly, and most regrettably, the uncertainty surrounding the issue has fuelled a reckless surge in fossil fuel consumption in at least two large rapidly industrialising nations, akin to an arms race.

Rather than solely advocating degrowth of the rich, climate activists must explore alternative strategies that foster conscious growth for all, and not oppose the principles of capitalism but, rather, leverage them to their advantage.

Climate activists must envision a future where countries in the South actively contribute to the solution, rather than being passive recipients. The underdeveloped yet resourceful markets of the South could easily be integrated into the renewable revolution by becoming part of its supply chains – uplifting their populations out of poverty and vulnerability, while maintaining profits for developed economies.

If the South’s demand for climate justice is justified, so is the developed world’s need for growth and security – both consider these elements crucial for their survival. Climate activists must remember that though the poor may contribute meaningfully to the fight against climate change, it is the developed world that must eventually take the lead.

Therefore, above all else, COP28 must prioritise the crafting of a win-win situation for all, including the rich. The transition to net zero carbon emissions cannot come at the sole expense of those financing it.

Rizwan Basir is a sociologist who works as a climate finance specialist at the Climate Resourcing Coordination Centre (CRCC), based in Islamabad, Pakistan