By Eyitayo A. Oyelowo
Robert Pindyck, a professor of economics and finance at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, says that attempts to make decisions about climate change based on a cost-benefit analysis are doomed to fail because both costs and benefits are uncertain.
“All we can do is speculate. We don’t really know the costs and we don’t really know the benefits, however, the chance of a catastrophic outcome should be enough to motivate investment to avert climate change even in the face of uncertainty, just as people buy health insurance without knowing if it will pay off.”
Developing countries are facing a tough time in dealing with the defining challenge of our time- Climate change. Millions of lives in Africa, especially those of countries in the Horn including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea and Djibouti have been subjected to severe environmental issues arising from climate change such as extreme drought and famine. In response to the situation, Ethiopia has particularly taken various steps towards managing the situation through various climate initiatives.
Basically, climate change, also called global warming, refers to the rise in average surface temperatures on Earth through the release of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the air.
The gases trap heat within the atmosphere, which can have a range of effects on ecosystems, including rising sea levels, severe weather events, and droughts that render landscapes more susceptible to wildfires.
Climate financing entails the utilization of funds from local, national or transnational sources which may be drawn from public, private and other alternative sources of finance. It is geared towards reducing carbon emissions, the main contributor to climate change.
But here’s a less asked and probably more important question: How much are we actually willing to pay to do something about it? When economists and policymakers want to assess the benefits of an environmental policy, they often turn to the concept of “willingness to pay.”
Major reports are concluding that stabilizing greenhouse-gas emissions to avoid catastrophic climate change is possible and can be done at a relatively low cost. But the details of the reports make it clear that when you factor in real-world issues—such as delays in developing and implementing technology and policy—the cost of solving climate change gets much higher. Switching from fossil fuels to low-carbon sources of energy will cost about $44 trillion between now and 2050, according to a report released by the International Energy Agency.
That sounds like a lot of money, but the report also concludes that the switch to low-carbon technologies such as solar power—together with anticipated improvements in efficiency—will bring huge savings from reduced fossil-fuel consumption.
Recently, there has been a delay in funds from the Climate Vulnerability Forum (CVF) which met in Paris in 2015. Also, the United State, a major contributor to Climate financing has announced its decision to withdraw from the Paris climate accord as well as stop contributing to the Green Climate Fund- a unique global initiative to respond to climate change by investing into low-emission and climate-resilient development.
Green Climate Fund was established by 194 governments to limit or reduce greenhouse gas emissions in developing countries, and to help adapt vulnerable societies to the unavoidable impacts of climate change. Given the urgency and seriousness of the challenge, the Fund is mandated to make an ambitious contribution to the united global response to climate change.
However, the withdrawal of the United State from contributing to GCF will be more challenging to Countries prone to massive flooding, long drought and extreme weather that scientists have linked to a changing climate. Although several reasons were attributed to the decision, nonetheless, it is highly imperative to sustain climate financing as this will go a long way in ensuring a peaceful resolution of problems associated with climate change.
These environmental hazards are not peculiar to human beings alone but to animals both on land and in water as well as plants. Natural habitats are destroyed. I could remember as a child growing up in Nigeria, I saw Ducks walk the streets, in fact they were such a beauty to behold especially the ducklings. But in the last ten years, these beautiful birds are only seen in few places.
Possibly they have gone into extinction and the present generation only gets to see them in text books. Am afraid these birds are going into extinction as a result of a change in their natural habitats. Drought is taking over and ducks are referred to as Waterfowl as they thrive in a pond or body of water large enough for them to swim in or at least submerge their head and shake water over their bodies.
Climate change is not peculiar to a certain region or country it’s a global issue which requires collective effort to combat. In an ancient Indian proverb “we did not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrowed it from our children”. So combating climate change requires all hands on deck.
Financing climate change is the major challenge of Africa. Majority of the countries affected by climate change often address the problem with funds from private investors, international donors or support from developed countries. The climate fund from the Paris agreement in 2015 is yet to be remitted to affected countries. This situation calls for a critical appraisal of dangers inherent in lack of climate financing to threat prone areas.
The numerous conditions attached to climate funds make them difficult to access, while countries in the continent are crying for funding, the developed countries are claiming that they are supporting the continent financially to tackle the challenge. We need this environmental fund so much to meet the challenges of climate change.
In actual sense, a failure to invest in taking care of our climate will inadvertently lead to food insecurity and the uninhabitable environment. As that occurs, there will also be a large increase in the movement of refugees.
For instance, a large number of women and children in Ethiopia find it difficult to cope with Climate changes in their daily life, they are forced to be separated from their husbands with their children. Little wonder, statistics offered by the United Nations in 2015 shows that 10% of refugees from the horn of Africa today are basically climate refugees.
Also, in certain parts of Ethiopia, the condition of Climate is worsened by the consumption of fossil fuels and emission from the greenhouse gases and according to an Oxfam’s report in 2016, 85% of the country’s population is dependent on Agriculture.
Ethiopia ranks 10th in the list of countries most at risk from climate change in 2014, according to the Climate Change Vulnerability Index, prepared by Maplecroft. The low-level of development and dependence on agriculture are the main reasons for this vulnerability. Consequently, Ethiopian wildlife and farmlands are also affected by environmental degradation and harsh climate.
Besides, unsanitary approach to waste disposal creates global crises because it does not just affects the population of the country involved but our own very dear ecological system.
To combat climate change, countries around the world would have to acknowledge climate financing as very essential. Although actual costs can’t be predicted with precision, cost estimates like the ones from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and International Energy Agency do have an important role: they can tell policymakers what to focus on. Climate negotiators have known for some time that acting quickly is important, and reports make this even clear by showing just how much delays can add to costs.
To achieve sustainable results from climate financing, there is need to take cognizance of mitigation and adaptation for affected areas. Efforts should be made to mitigate the overall effects of climate change and people should also be assisted in building the needed resilience to adapt to changing climatic conditions as the case may be.
Government establishments should also increase their level of commitment to climate financing and protection so as to cover for the adaptation gaps that have affected the capacity of individuals to cope with climate change over the years. This could be done by funding detailed research projects on climate change so as to better enlighten on effective environmental governance.
There should be a consistent drive to transcend from current state to a level of low-carbon economy and clean energy. In addition, non-governmental organizations and interest groups should also intensify the advocacy for climate financing towards a clean energy revolution.
Eyitayo A. Oyelowo is a Journalist and a Climate Justice Advocate in Nigeria.
oyelowoeyitayoa@yahoo.com
