2020年 面对碳排放不平等

OXFAM MEDIA BRIEFING 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 www.oxfam.org CONFRONTING CARBON INEQUALITY Putting climate justice at the heart of the COVID-19 recovery Despite sharp falls in carbon emissions in 2020 linked to the COVID-19 pandemic, the climate crisis – which is driven by the accumulation of emissions in the atmosphere over time – continued to grow. This briefing describes new research that shows how extreme carbon inequality in recent decades has brought the world to the climate brink. It sets out how governments must use this historic juncture to build fairer economies within the limits our planet can bear. ‘As Oxfams new report shows, our current economic model has been an enabler of catastrophic climate change and equally catastrophic inequality. The COVID-19 pandemic provides an incontestable imperative to rebuild better and place the global economy on a more sustainable, resilient and fairer footing. Addressing the disproportionate carbon emissions from the wealthiest in society must be a key priority as part of this collective commitment.’ Ban Ki-moon, Deputy Chair of The Elders, former Secretary-General of the United Nations ‘Oxfam’s timely report shows once again that to tackle climate change we must fight for social and economic justice for everyone. My indigenous peoples have long borne the brunt of environmental destruction, and now is the time to listen, to integrate our knowledge, and to prioritize saving nature to save ourselves.’ Hindou Oumarou Ibrahim, environmental activist, member of Chad’s pastoralist Mbororo community, and President of the Association for Indigenous Women and Peoples of Chad AFPAT. ‘The manifest refusal of leaders to deal with massive inequality stands in the way of urgently needed climate ambition. We need a Just Transition, for workers, their families and communities at all levels, from the work floor, in economic sectors, at the national level and at the global climate negotiations. We need climate justice and a voice at the table for those most affected by the climate emergency.’ Sharan Burrow, General Secretary of the International Trade Union Congress 2 SUMMARY Amidst the global health and economic crises, the climate crisis continues to grow. Extreme weather disasters have not stalled during the COVID-19 pandemic – from cyclone Amphan in India and Bangladesh to the wildfires raging in the USA – serving as a potent reminder that the world stands perilously close to exceeding the 1.5C goal of the Paris Agreement. New research by Oxfam and the Stockholm Environment Institute SEI reveals the extreme carbon inequality in recent decades that has driven the world to the climate brink. From 1990 to 2015, a critical period in which annual emissions grew 60 and cumulative emissions doubled, we estimate that The richest 10 of the world’s population c.630 million people were responsible for 52 of the cumulative carbon emissions – depleting the global carbon budget by nearly a third 31 in those 25 years alone see Figure 1; The poorest 50 c.3.1 billion people were responsible for just 7 of cumulative emissions, and used just 4 of the available carbon budget see Figure 1; The richest 1 c.63 million people alone were responsible for 15 of cumulative emissions, and 9 of the carbon budget – twice as much as the poorest half of the world’s population see Figure 1; The richest 5 c.315 million people were responsible for over a third 37 of the total growth in emissions see Figure 2, while the total growth in emissions of the richest 1 was three times that of the poorest 50 see Figure 6. Restrictions related to the pandemic saw global emissions fall this year. But unless emissions continue to decline rapidly, the 1.5C global carbon budget will be fully depleted by 2030. The inequality is such that the richest 10 alone would fully deplete it by just a few years later, even if everyone elses emissions dropped to zero tomorrow. Over the past 20-30 years, the climate crisis has been fuelled and our limited global carbon budget squandered in the service of increasing the consumption of the already affluent, rather than lifting people out of poverty. The two groups that suffer most from this injustice are those least responsible for the climate crisis poorer and marginalized people already struggling with climate impacts today, and future generations who will inherit a depleted carbon budget and a world accelerating towards climate breakdown. Governments must put tackling the twin climate and inequality crises at the heart of the COVID-19 recovery. A failure to confront extreme carbon inequality at this historic juncture – prioritizing yet more grossly unequal, carbon intensive economic growth to the benefit of the rich minority – will mean jumping from the frying pan of the current pandemic to the fire of an uncontrolled and irreversible climate crisis. Yet while the pandemic triggered a chaotic and often inequitable contraction in consumption around the world, it has also shown that once unthinkable changes to the lifestyles of the richest in society can be adopted in the interests of us all. Public policies – from taxing luxury carbon like SUVs, frequent business class flights and private jets, to expanding digital and public transport infrastructure – can cut emissions, reduce inequality and boost public health. But to do so before the carbon budget for 1.5C is totally depleted, they must happen now. Cumulative emissions, COVID-19 and the global carbon budget The climate crisis is driven by the accumulation of emissions added to the atmosphere over time – which is why the drop in emissions due to lockdowns in 2020 will have only a tiny impact without further, year-on-year emissions cuts. 1 The global carbon budget defines the maximum amount of cumulative emissions that can be added if the rise in average global temperature is to be kept below a certain level, such as the Paris Agreements 1.5C goal, after which net emissions must be zero. Allocating global carbon emissions to individuals Oxfam and SEIs research estimates how global carbon emissions are attributed to individuals who are the end consumers of goods and services for which the emissions were generated. See Box 2. It took about 140 years to use 750Gt of the global carbon budget, and just 25 years from 1990 to 2015 to use about the same again – over half of which linked to the consumption of just the richest 10 of people. The remainder will be entirely used up by 2030, without urgent action now. 3 1 THE ERA OF EXTREME CARBON INEQUALITY The 25 years from 1990 to 2015 saw a rapid escalation of the climate crisis, as global annual carbon emissions grew by around 60, and the total emissions added to the atmosphere since the mid-1800s approximately doubled. 2 Global GDP doubled in this period too, and while there was significant progress in reducing the proportion of humanity living in extreme poverty on less than 1.90/day, 3 income inequality grew around the world, with the share of national income captured by the richest 1 increasing in most countries. 4 It is striking that in 2015 – even after that huge expansion in global GDP – nearly half the world’s population still earned less than the more realistic 5.50/day poverty line. 5 Figure 1 shows our estimate of the carbon emissions associated with consumption by different global income groups in this period, and the corresponding depletion of the 1.5C global carbon budget. For details of the methodology, see Box 2 and the accompanying Oxfam/SEI research report. 6 We estimate that between 1990 and 2015 The richest 10 of humanity c.630 million people accounted for 52 of the cumulative emissions, depleting the global carbon budget for 1.5C by nearly a third 31; The richest 1 c.63 million people alone accounted for over 15 of the cumulative emissions, using up 9 of the carbon budget more than twice the poorest 50 c.3.1 billion people, or more than the entire cumulative emissions of citizens in the EU; 7 The 40 of humanity in the global middle class c.2.5 billion people accounted for 41 of the cumulative emissions, and 25 of the carbon budget, while the poorest 50 accounted for just 7 of cumulative emissions, and a mere 4 of the budget. If emissions re-bound as restrictions related to the coronavirus pandemic are lifted the 1.5C global carbon budget will be fully depleted by 2030, the richest 10 alone would fully deplete it by just a few years later, even if everyone elses emissions dropped to zero tomorrow. Figure 1 Share of cumulative emissions from 1990 to 2015 and use of the global carbon budget for 1.5C linked to consumption by different global income groups 4 It is striking that the shares of emissions across income groups have remained essentially unchanged across the period. While millions of people escaped extreme poverty in countries like China and India, significantly increasing their incomes and associated consumption emissions, consumption emissions also continued to grow among the richest. Figure 2 shows how consumption emissions grew between 1990 and 2015 for each ventile 5 of the population. While per capita consumption emissions increased the most among the global middle classes – from a very low starting point – the richest income groups contributed most to the absolute growth in global emissions – the shape of the curve resembling a dinosaur. We estimate that from 1990 to 2015 The richest 5 around 315 million people accounted for over a third 37 of the total growth in emissions; The richest 10 around 630 million people accounted for 46 of the total emissions growth – only marginally less than the 49 contributed by the middle 40. The poorest 50 barely increased their consumption emissions at all. Figure 2 The dinosaur graph of unequal carbon emissions growth 1990-2015 Unequal growth and climate justice Unequal economic growth slows poverty reduction rates. The World Bank recently concluded that continued unequal growth will barely make a dent in the number of people living on less than 1.90 per day by 2030; only a reduction in income inequality will help. 8 One estimate suggests it would take around 200 years at current rates to lift everyone above the 5.50 poverty line – a terribly inefficient and morally indefensible approach to poverty reduction. 9 But unequal growth has another cost it means that the global carbon budget is being rapidly depleted, not for the purpose of lifting all of humanity to a decent standard of living, but to a large extent to expand the consumption of a minority of the worlds very richest people. 10 This is an injustice which is felt most cruelly by two groups who have contributed least to the climate crisis the worlds poorest and most vulnerable people around the world today – already experiencing the impacts of a world that is 1C hotter – and future generations who will inherit a depleted carbon budget and an even more dangerous climate. Doubling the per capita footprint of the poorest 50 of the world’s population from 1990 to 2015 would have increased total global emissions by less than the growth in emissions associated with the richest 1 in this period. 5 Box 1 Intersectional climate injustice It is vital to recognize that the income-based carbon inequalities explored here are inter- twined with and reinforce other power structures associated with gender, race, age or caste, among others. This helps to explain why in many countries, for example, white men tend to be over-represented among the highest income groups, and women of colour among the lowest. 11 Our dataset is built on household surveys that do not allow for disaggregation by gender or any other category, although there is plenty of evidence that household members do not have equal access to resources, 12 which would very likely be reflected in varying carbon consumption footprints. For example, in poorer countries, women and girls of reproductive age were found to be more likely to live in low-income households, 13 while poverty and deprivation have been found among women in non- poor households 14 . In richer countries, studies have found that men in Sweden accounted for 75 of all driving in person-kilometres, 15 and that women in Canada account for only 31 of carbon emissions from light vehicles. 16 Women also often experience the impacts of climate change differently from men whether walking further to collect water, being last to eat during droughts, or assuming most of the household caring responsibilities in the wake of extreme weather. 17 But these inequalities can be seen in many other, often overlapping, dimensions too, as consideration of just one climate impact, extreme heat, reveals By income in hot countries, poorer households are more likely to be exposed to higher temperatures than richer ones; 18 By race in the USA, so-called redlined, predominantly black neighbourhoods that were historically denied access to investment, experience temperatures up to 7C 12F hotter than in other neighbourhoods in the same city, a result of fewer green areas; 19 By age in Canada, 8 in 10 premature deaths from heat-related causes are in victims aged 60 and over; 20 By occupation in India, outdoor workers in sectors like agriculture and construction, comprising 75 of the workforce and in the case of agriculture employing 80 of economically active women 21 , are particularly exposed in a country that could be the first to see heatwaves that cross the survivability limit for a healthy person. 22 Box 2 Methodological approach to estimating carbon inequality Oxfam and SEIs approach to estimating how global carbon emissions can be attributed to individuals based on their consumption builds on Oxfams 2015 report Extreme Carbon Inequality, 23 which gave a snapshot of the global distribution of emissions in a single year, and that of Chancel and Piketty 24 among others. It is explained in detail in the accompanying research report. 25 We start with national consumption emissions data for 117 countries from 1990 to 2015 period. This reflects both the emissions produced in a country and those embedded in imports, while excluding those embedded in exports. We allocate national consumption emissions to individuals within each country based on a functional relationship between income and emissions, drawing on new income distribution datasets. We assume, based on numerous studies at national, regional and global levels, that emissions rise in proportion to income, above a minimum emissions floor and to a maximum emissions ceiling. These estimates of the consumption emissions of individuals in each country are then sorted into a global distribution according to income. 6 2 TACKLING CARBON INEQUALITY Over the past 20 years, much of the popular and political debate about climate change has focused on the impact of the global middle class in countries li