As discussed in the Climate Diagnosis and Bad News post, climate impacts are already occurring. Strong climate adaptation measures are needed to minimize harm from locked-in climate change and the impacts of increasing emissions (IPCC, 2022, p. 13). In addition, reducing or mitigating greenhouse gas emissions as quickly as possible is imperative to avoid worsening impacts and extreme events. Climate adaptation and mitigation cannot be looked at in isolation from nature and biodiversity (IPCC, 2022, p.14 & 32). Climate change amplifies the demise of nature, but nature also offers solutions for reducing emissions and protecting against climate change impacts (IPBES, 2019, p. 16). That being said, rapid reduction in greenhouse gas emissions is incredibly complex, and it will be challenging to untangle from our reliance on fossil fuels and consumptive lifestyle. Climate science provides information that can help guide our decisions through climate models.
Climate modellers produce simulations of different emissions pathways based on socio-economic storylines (Chen et al., 2021, p.228). A vision of the low emissions pathway is the only scenario that leads to a world that avoids climate catastrophe and is what we must focus on. The very low emissions scenario used by the climate modellers to inform the latest Climate Assessment Report is called Sustainability or Taking the Green Road (O’Neill et al., 2016, p. 172). Although the scenarios are not meant to be prescriptive, looking at the one that leads to the best possible outcomes can be a way to envision what actions need to be taken and what the results or benefits of those actions will be. Taking the Green Road offers a new vision that relies on human societies adopting well-being, equity, and justice goals and working on getting there through collaboration and cooperation.
Managing the global commons is achieved by actors working to achieve the UN Sustainable Development Goals and civil societies valuing a healthy environment for well-being. Reduction in resource use comes from improved efficiencies, renewable energy technology, innovation and focus on green growth and avoidance of wasteful consumption. There is also an imperative to re-establish humans’ relationship with nature to steward nature back from biodiversity collapse and to rely on the services nature provides for human development (Khor et al., 2022, p. 141). There is no health or well-being without nature. Changing the high consumption, high growth mindset will mean communicating and discussing the benefits and urgency of working towards this vision with friends, family, colleagues and communities.
In that regard, one of the fundamental learnings I took away from MACAL CALS502 Climate Communications was the importance of talking about the benefits of our actions and acknowledging the values that people hold (Bennett et al., 2021). For Canadians, fairness is important, as are opportunities for young people, community safety, protection of the environment and cost-effectiveness. When considering fairness, Canadians have committed to reconciliation with the Indigenous People and have adopted the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People (UNDRIP).
Interestingly, according to University of British Columbia led, research It has been found that Indigenous-managed land has retained greater species richness compared to government protected areas (Schuster et al. 2019. p. 4). The researchers recommend Indigenous led land-management to conserve biodiversity, support Indigenous land rights and, ultimately, human wellbeing. Along the same lines, the National Collaborating Centre for Indigenous Health points out that “Indigenous knowledges and worldviews provide powerful teachings on environmental stewardship [which can] reduce the severity of climate change” (Public Health Agency of Canada, 2022, p.48). Here is a powerful action with many benefits.
Concerning health, Canada’s Chief Public Health Officer points out that climate action “is good for our health” (Public Health Agency of Canada, 2022, p. 4). Also, that a “One-Health approach calls on public health to think beyond human health” and consider the interconnections of humans and the natural world in a changing climate and the need for “equity and justice for human, plant and animal systems” ( Public Health Agency of Canada, 2022, p. 38). These actions are called for as they lead to better health outcomes for Canadians and reduce the economic burden on health care.
When considering the economic burden, it is often posited that the reason for fossil fuel development is to protect the economy. However, the high GHG emissions from fossil fuel development and combustion have costs due to the contribution to global warming, air pollution and environmental degradation. From climate change alone, the Canadian Climate Institutes Damage Control Report claims that Canada will lose $25 billion annually in costs associated with climate damage by 2025 (Sawyer et al., 2022, p. 6). Those costs will escalate to $101 billion annually in 25 short years if we remain on a high emissions pathway. The Damage Control report shows that investment in adaptation and mitigation can reduce those costs by 75% (Sawyer et al., 2022, p. 14).
If through climate action, we can save billions of dollars, improve human well-being, return land title to Indigenous communities, reduce biosphere loss and mass extinction, we will have done significant service for ourselves and future generations.
Note on Citations
The information in the IPCC reports is very dense. To aid in finding the reference for myself, instructors and readers that might want to follow up I have included page numbers.
References
Bennett, A., Hatch, C.,& Pike, C. (2021). Climate Messaging that Works, Climate Narrative Initiative, Climate Access. https://climateaccess.org/sites/default/files/Climate%20Messaging%20that%20Works%20-%20Talking%20Energy%20Transition%20and%20Climate%20Change%20in%20Canada.pdf
Chen, D., M. Rojas, B.H. Samset, K. Cobb, A. Diongue Niang, P. Edwards, S. Emori, S.H. Faria, E. Hawkins, P. Hope, P. Huybrechts, M. Meinshausen, S.K. Mustafa, G.-K. Plattner, and A.-M. Tréguier. (2021). Framing, Context, and Methods. In Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S.L., Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M.I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R., Matthews, T.K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu, and B. Zhou (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 147–286, doi:10.1017/9781009157896.003.
IPBES. (2019). Summary for policymakers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. S. Díaz, J. Settele, E. S. Brondízio, H. T. Ngo, M. Guèze, J. Agard, A. Arneth, P. Balvanera, K. A. Brauman, S. H. M. Butchart, K. M. A. Chan, L. A. Garibaldi, K. Ichii, J. Liu, S. M. Subramanian, G. F. Midgley, P. Miloslavich, Z. Molnár, D. Obura, A. Pfaff, S. Polasky, A. Purvis, J. Razzaque, B. Reyers, R. Roy Chowdhury, Y. J. Shin, I. J. Visseren-Hamakers, K. J. Willis, and C. N. Zayas (eds.). IPBES secretariat, Bonn, Germany. 56 pages. https://zenodo.org/record/3553579#.Y30Gl0nMI7c
IPCC. (2021). Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S.L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M.I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T.K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu, and B. Zhou (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 3−32, https://doi:10.1017/9781009157896.001
IPCC. (2022). Summary for Policymakers [H.-O. Pörtner, D.C. Roberts, E.S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, M. Tignor, A. Alegría, M. Craig, S. Langsdorf, S. Löschke, V. Möller, A. Okem (eds.)]. In: Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [H.-O. Pörtner, D.C. Roberts, M. Tignor, E.S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, M. Craig, S. Langsdorf, S. Löschke, V. Möller, A. Okem, B. Rama (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, pp. 3-33, doi:10.1017/9781009325844.001
Khor, N., Arimah, B., Otieno Otieno, R., van Oostrum, M., Mutinda, M., Oginga Martins, J., Godwin, A., Castan Broto, V., Chatwin, M., Dijkstra, L., Joss, S., Sharifi, A., Sverdlik, A., Simon, D., Florio, P., Freire, S., Kemper, T., Melchiorri, M., Schiavina, M., . . . Unnikrishnan, H. (2022). World Cities Report 2022 Envisaging the Future of Cities. United Nations Human Settlements Programme. https://unhabitat.org/wcr/
Meadows, D. H. (2008). Thinking in Systems: A primer (D. Wright, Ed.). Chelsea Green Publishing. https://www.chelseagreen.com/product/thinking-in-systems/
O’Neill, B. C., Tebaldi, C., van Vuuren, D. P., Eyring, V., Friedlingstein, P., Hurtt, G., Knutti, R., Kriegler, E., Lamarque, J.-F., Lowe, J., Meehl, G. A., Moss, R., Riahi, K., & Sanderson, B. M. (2016). The Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) for CMIP6. Geoscientific Model Development, 9(9), 3461–3482. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3461-2016
Public Health Agency of Canada. (2022). Chief Public Health Officer of Canada’s Report on the State of Public Health in Canada 2022: Mobilizing Public Health Action On Climate Change in Canada. https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/corporate/publications/chief-public-health-officer-reports-state-public-health-canada/state-public-health-canada-2022/report.html
Sawyer, Dave, Ryan Ness, Caroline Lee, and Sarah Miller. (2022). Damage Control: Reducing the costs of climate impacts in Canada. Canadian Climate Institute. https://climateinstitute.ca/reports/damage-control/
Schuster, R., Germain, R. R., Bennett, J. R., Reo, N. J., & Arcese, P. (2019). Vertebrate biodiversity on indigenous-managed lands in Australia, Brazil, and Canada equals that in protected areas. Environmental Science & Policy, 101, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2019.07.002