Climate action and the politics of grievance

Winnipeg Free Press

7 hours ago

Opinion
The notion of grievance has always played a central role in our politics, for better or worse.
We all have a sense of fairness that frames our worldview and how we interpret our collective actions and the actions of others.
We all have opinions on whether the grievances of others are real, perceived, or just imagined. We do have to remember that all grievances are real to the aggrieved. It is a strong emotion and politicians have long realized its power in mobilizing support. It is not necessarily tied to a level of economic well-being.
Consider that the wealthiest nation on Earth, our neighbour to the south, has initiated a trade war with everybody based on a grievance that everyone else is taking advantage of them. Here in Canada, our wealthiest province is flirting with separation justified by a grievance that the rest of the country is holding back their prosperity and taking unfair advantage. Our current political discourse is dominated by disruptions of our expectations around affordability and continued prosperity, often framed as grievances.
Here in Canada and other wealthy countries of the Global North, climate action seems to have taken a back seat to other issues in a 'dangerous and divided world'. In order to assure our continued economic prosperity, we talk about investing in building out projects 'in the national interest.' We talk about increasing defence spending to provide security from those threatening us.
We all know that a climate crisis requiring global action is still there and only going to get worse as we dawdle and get distracted. When it comes to climate action, stepping back and thinking of grievances in a global context is essential.
Consider this. Countries of the Global South have rightly pointed out the injustice inherent in the currently unfolding climate crisis. This can be illustrated by example using some comparative numbers between Canada and Bangladesh based on 2023 data.
Cumulatively, for every tonne of CO2 historically emitted by the average Bangladeshi, the average Canadian has emitted about 80 tonnes. Even currently, for every tonne being emitted by the average Bangladeshi, 20 tonnes are being emitted by the average Canadian. There is a strong correlation between energy consumption and wealth as measured, however imperfectly, by GDP.
Adjusted for purchasing power, Canada's per capita GDP is about eight times that of Bangladesh. Furthermore, due to its geography, Bangladesh is more exposed to the ravages of a warming planet, particularly rising sea level. This will result in the loss of agricultural production and its ability to feed itself and the displacement of millions of people.
So, in the parlance of grievance it would not be unreasonable for someone from the Global South to say to us 'You made this mess and became rich in the process. This mess is going to hurt me a lot more than you especially considering my limited capacity to adapt to a warming planet compared to yours. You talk a good game but seem to have trouble with the action step especially when you realize that action might result in a small reduction in your outsized wealth. Why aren't you doing something about this?'
It's a question we should all reflect on and take to heart.
Canada, by participating in the Paris Accords, has accepted the principle of 'common but differentiated responsibility' among nations. This principle holds that wealthy countries such as Canada must lead in mitigation efforts and provide international financial support for mitigation and adaptation efforts needed elsewhere. Given that our track record on meeting our previous climate commitments is anything but stellar, it is essential that policy development towards our current commitments doesn't falter. We have committed to a 45-50 per cent GHG reduction from 2005 levels by 2035.
More policy action is needed to achieve this. We can't afford any backsliding and, in fact, have an obligation to do more.
If one doesn't see a moral imperative here, pure self-interest would suggest a motivation for addressing this injustice. As climate change impacts become more severe, grievances will become a more powerful political force driving global conflict.
A world rife with conflict between those who benefited most from the use of fossil fuels, thereby having the means to protect themselves from the consequences, and those are condemned to suffering the consequences, is not a world that any of us would want to live in.
Canada is a wealthy country. We have the means to show leadership in climate action and look after each other in the process, should we so choose. This is a time when we are re-evaluating our economic and geopolitical place in the world and seeking new partnerships. As a middle power, we have an opportunity to buck the trend of grievance-fueled polarization, step up with serious climate action, and reap the rewards of the goodwill generated.
If not us, then who?
Daniel Barchyn is an adjunct professor at the Natural Resource Institute, University of Manitoba.