The climate crisis has begun to disrupt human societies by severely affecting the very foundations of human livelihood and social organisation. Climate impacts are not equally distributed across the world: on average, low- and middle-income countries suffer greater impacts than their richer counterparts. At the same time, the climate crisis is also marked by signifi- cant inequalities within countries. Recent research reveals a high concentration of global greenhouse gas emissions among a relatively small fraction of the population, living in emerging and rich countries. In addition, vulnerability to numerous climate impacts is strongly linked to income and wealth, not just between countries but also within them.
The aim of this report is twofold. It endeavours first to shed light on these various dimensions of climate inequality in a systematic and detailed analysis, focusing on low and middle income countries in particular. It then builds on these insights, together with additional empirical work and interviews with experts, to suggest pathways to development cooperation, and tax and social policies that tackle climate inequalities at their core.
Key Findings
All individuals contribute to emissions, but not in the same way. The top 10% of global carbon emitters generate almost half of all greenhouse gas emissions. Thus, in addition to an obvious equity concern, there appears to be an efficiency question at stake. The marginal effort required to achieve the same emission reductions might be significantly lower for high emitting groups, thereby creating a strong incentive for policies targeted at this group. The comparison of the global bottom 50%, middle 40% and top 10% in terms of losses, emissions and capacity to finance global climate action provides a striking snapshot of climate inequalities and a reasonable guide to identify the key contributors to the funding of climate inequality reduction policies.
Better understanding how groups may win and lose from the energy transition is key to accelerating it. It is also necessary to draw policy conclusions from the fact that the top emitters are likely to be relatively well protected from the adverse consequences of climate change. Hence, their incentives to reduce emissions are not necessarily aligned with the damage those emissions cause. This holds at the international level, as well as within countries. Quantifying inequalities in carbon emissions and exposure to damages allows to be more explicit about these issues and can help facilitate effective climate policies, as well as public debate on these important matters.
Carbon inequalities within countries now appear to be greater than carbon inequalities between countries. The consumption and investment patterns of a relatively small group of the population directly or indirectly contribute disproportionately to greenhouse gases. While crosscountry emission inequalities remain sizeable, overall inequality in global emissions is now mostly explained by within country inequalities by some indicators.
Ending global poverty need not overshoot global carbon budgets. Recent research contradicts the idea that ending global poverty would eat up most of the remaining global carbon budget to meet the Paris targets. Lifting large numbers of people out of poverty need not have a large negative effect on climate change mitigation. The carbon budgets required to eradicate poverty remain relatively limited compared with global top emitters’ footprints. With well designed redistribution and climate policies, the impacts of poverty alleviation on overall emissions can be further reduced.
Climate change contributes to economic and material deprivation in myriad ways, now well documented. It aggravates low agricultural productivity in poorer countries, as well as water scarcity and security. Heat waves have significant impacts on mortality, particularly in vulnerable urban centres. Tropical cyclones and floods will continue to displace millions of people, mostly in low-income countries, and rising sea levels will make large swaths of coastal land inhabitable. While such events will affect regions as a whole, studies point to a strong socioeconomic relationship between exposure (and especially vulnerability) and current living conditions, whereby the worst off are more affected than the rest. The wide set of already visible climate change impacts reveal that, when it comes to mitigation, every fraction of a degree matters. It follows that every tonne of carbon matters as much as every dollar of adaptation funding.
As a direct consequence, all governments need to reconsider their mitigation targets and especially the historical emitters, the list of which should include large emerging economies, as emissions continue to rise.
The climate crisis has begun to disrupt human societies by severely affecting the very foundations of human livelihood and social organisation. Climate impacts are not equally distributed across the world: on average, low- and middle-income countries suffer greater impacts than their richer counterparts. At the same time, the climate crisis is also marked by signifi- cant inequalities within countries. Recent research reveals a high concentration of global greenhouse gas emissions among a relatively small fraction of the population, living in emerging and rich countries. In addition, vulnerability to numerous climate impacts is strongly linked to income and wealth, not just between countries but also within them.
The aim of this report is twofold. It endeavours first to shed light on these various dimensions of climate inequality in a systematic and detailed analysis, focusing on low and middle income countries in particular. It then builds on these insights, together with additional empirical work and interviews with experts, to suggest pathways to development cooperation, and tax and social policies that tackle climate inequalities at their core.
Key Findings
All individuals contribute to emissions, but not in the same way. The top 10% of global carbon emitters generate almost half of all greenhouse gas emissions. Thus, in addition to an obvious equity concern, there appears to be an efficiency question at stake. The marginal effort required to achieve the same emission reductions might be significantly lower for high emitting groups, thereby creating a strong incentive for policies targeted at this group. The comparison of the global bottom 50%, middle 40% and top 10% in terms of losses, emissions and capacity to finance global climate action provides a striking snapshot of climate inequalities and a reasonable guide to identify the key contributors to the funding of climate inequality reduction policies.
Better understanding how groups may win and lose from the energy transition is key to accelerating it. It is also necessary to draw policy conclusions from the fact that the top emitters are likely to be relatively well protected from the adverse consequences of climate change. Hence, their incentives to reduce emissions are not necessarily aligned with the damage those emissions cause. This holds at the international level, as well as within countries. Quantifying inequalities in carbon emissions and exposure to damages allows to be more explicit about these issues and can help facilitate effective climate policies, as well as public debate on these important matters.
Carbon inequalities within countries now appear to be greater than carbon inequalities between countries. The consumption and investment patterns of a relatively small group of the population directly or indirectly contribute disproportionately to greenhouse gases. While crosscountry emission inequalities remain sizeable, overall inequality in global emissions is now mostly explained by within country inequalities by some indicators.
Ending global poverty need not overshoot global carbon budgets. Recent research contradicts the idea that ending global poverty would eat up most of the remaining global carbon budget to meet the Paris targets. Lifting large numbers of people out of poverty need not have a large negative effect on climate change mitigation. The carbon budgets required to eradicate poverty remain relatively limited compared with global top emitters’ footprints. With well designed redistribution and climate policies, the impacts of poverty alleviation on overall emissions can be further reduced.
Climate change contributes to economic and material deprivation in myriad ways, now well documented. It aggravates low agricultural productivity in poorer countries, as well as water scarcity and security. Heat waves have significant impacts on mortality, particularly in vulnerable urban centres. Tropical cyclones and floods will continue to displace millions of people, mostly in low-income countries, and rising sea levels will make large swaths of coastal land inhabitable. While such events will affect regions as a whole, studies point to a strong socioeconomic relationship between exposure (and especially vulnerability) and current living conditions, whereby the worst off are more affected than the rest. The wide set of already visible climate change impacts reveal that, when it comes to mitigation, every fraction of a degree matters. It follows that every tonne of carbon matters as much as every dollar of adaptation funding.
As a direct consequence, all governments need to reconsider their mitigation targets and especially the historical emitters, the list of which should include large emerging economies, as emissions continue to rise.
.webp)