✖

The scientific consensus

• "[Global] emissions of CO2 would need to fall by about 45 percent from 2010 levels by 2030, reaching 'net zero' around 2050." [1]
• Falls in developed countries would need to be greater in line with the Paris Agreement.
• "limiting global warming to 1.5°C would require rapid and far-reaching transitions in energy, land, urban and infrastructure (including transport and buildings), and industrial systems" [2]
• "These systems transitions are unprecedented in terms of scale, but not necessarily in terms of speed, and imply deep emissions reductions in all sectors" [2]

Decision making based on facts and fairness

Children develop a sense of fairness at an early age. Adults generally develop this inate sense of fairness into opinions and actions that aim to protect weaker members of society. To some extent, protecting weaker members of society is in everyone's personal interest since everyone can fall on misfortune. In democracies, those in positions of power are expected to behave according to specified standards, so that they do not abuse their power. These standards are set out in national codes of conduct and in international agreements such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights [3]

What should have happened?

• Climate scientists should have explained the key points of the scientific consensus:
• action is urgent and a very high priority because the harm is enormous, irreversible and cumulative
• the aim is to set a limit to global warming - to 1.5°C
• via limitation of the CO2 budget and equity in division between countries
• which means steady emission cuts to stay within this budget
• Government scientists should have echoed this explanation.
• Governments should have
• listened carefully
• recognised that climate change is an over-riding priority
• implemented effective policies
• The media should have conveyed the situation accurately to the general population.
• Businesses and other organisations should have implemented change.
• Quality control measures should have worked - so errors in decision making should have been corrected due to scrutiny by
• media
• commentators
• advocacy groups, campaigners and protesters.

The end result

The end result should have been a good response by all sections of society, so that

• a limit to global warming was set
• a CO2 budget was calculated
• the budget was divided in a fair manner between countries
• in each country, a timescale of emission cuts was agreed that woud stay within the CO2 budget for that country
• accounting procedures were carried out with integrity
• plans were made that would lead to the emission cuts agreed
• the plans were adhered to.

References

[1]	IPCC (Oct 2018) SR15 Summary for policymakers https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/2/2018/07/SR15_SPM_version_stand_alone_LR.pdf

[2]	IPCC (Oct 2018) SR15 report headline statements https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/2/2019/06/SR15_Headline-statements.pdf

[3]	The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) Proclamation by the General Assembly of the United Nations http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/index.html

First published: 20 Dec 2021
Last updated: 22 Sep 2023