The global discourses on climatic change are largely shaped by narratives set by the Global North over the years. On the other hand, the Global South countries are facing the heat of climate change largely due to the lopsided economic and industrial developments and its climatic impact, as studies suggest. However, the status-quo nature of the ideational discourses on climate change is changing now, and the Global South countries are asserting themselves. Despite the assertive move on the part of the Global South, it faces a critical challenge in negotiating climate-related issues at global forums.
Though the Global South countries are in the majority, most of the decisions are skewed to favour the Global North countries. This jeopardises the common fight against the adversarial effect of climate change. It also perpetuates a sense of climate injustice for the Global South countries. Thus, there is a need to examine the areas where the Global South is facing the heat in climate negotiation and to ensure a comprehensive energy equity framework in the international forums. At the same time, there is a need to outline India’s position on climate justice. It is a fact that over the years, India has provided the necessary leadership to the Global South countries on climate negotiation to ensure fair climatic justice.
It is in this context that there is a need to underline the major areas of divergence between the Global North and Global South on climate issues and their repercussions on the global negotiation process.
Issues of “Differentiated Responsibilities”
Scholarly studies suggest that one major factor which creates a different perspective on the Global North and Global South is that the Global North is not taking its onus for climate change. At the same time, Global South emphasises the moot point of “differentiated responsibilities” regarding taking responsibility for climate change. While looking at the position of both Global North and Global South, studies suggest three important inferences one can draw relevant to the global negotiation process.
It is a known fact that the Global North is a “historical polluter” which affects the climatic condition. In this context, it is appropriate to understand the dynamics of the Global North and its role in accentuating climate change over the years. An article published by Jason Hickel, titled “Quantifying national responsibility for climate breakdown: an equality-based attribution approach for carbon dioxide emissions over the planetary boundary”, in Lancet Public Health published in 2020, highlights some glaring facts about the role of Global North in accentuating the climatic crisis. Quoting the United Nations Framework for Climate Change (UNFCC), this article highlights that Global North accentuates the climatic crisis since 1850.
The data from 1850-2015, as the above Lancet study suggests, the “US was responsible for 26 per cent of CO2 emissions, EU countries 28 per cent of CO2 emissions, China 12 per cent of CO2 emissions and Russia 8 per cent of CO2 emissions,” etc. From the above data of UNFCC, as quoted in the above Lancet study, it can be underlined that the Global North countries are responsible for the present climate crisis due to CO2 emission.
Another recent article published in the prestigious Journal Nature titled “National contributions to climate change due to historical emissions of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide since 1850” by Matthew W. Jones et al. in 2023 highlights that apart from CO2, methane and Nitrous Sodium are the contributory elements for global climate change. This article further highlights the Global North’s role in the emission of these poisonous gases responsible for the present climate crisis. As the article states, “Anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) are key components responsible for climate change since the pre-industrial period”.
From the above statistical data, it can be underlined here that historically, the Global North is responsible for the present climate crisis; they should be accountable for the aggravation of the crisis. In this context, the West cannot absolve its responsibility for climate change. In fact, this is the position of the Global South in the negotiation process. The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development in 1992 acknowledges the importance of development and, at the same time, protecting the environment as clause 3 underlines that, “The right to development must be fulfilled to meet developmental equitably and environmental needs of present and future generations”. Similarly, under clause 7, the Rio Declaration specifically mentioned that, “In view of the different contributions to global environmental degradation, States have common but differentiated responsibilities”.
Similarly, clause 6 of the Rio Declaration also mentions that, “The special situation and needs of developing countries, particularly the least developed and those most environmentally vulnerable, shall be given special priority”. Thus, three key points that one can infer from the above discussion are considered to be necessary for the present study. These are: a) Global North is responsible for the present climate and can be considered as the “historical polluter”; b) interests of the Global South need to be protected; c) In this context, a "Differentiated Responsibility” approach needs to be adopted in all the future climate negotiation process.
At the same time, the UNFC Convention on Climate Change in 1992 further put the onus of climate change on the developed countries by stating that, "The developed country Parties and other developed Parties included in Annex II shall provide new and additional financial resources to meet the agreed full costs incurred by developing country Parties in complying with their obligations under Article 12, paragraph 1 They shall also provide such financial resources, including for the transfer of technology, needed by the developing country Parties to meet the agreed full incremental costs of implementing measures."
Hence, the demand on the part of the Global South is that there is a need for “Differentiated Responsibility” in the institutional realms of global climate negotiation. The same aspect has got much attention in the Paris Agreement which took place in December 2015.
In this regard, it is necessary to underline that the Paris Agreement explained the need for “recognising the specific needs and special circumstances of developing country Parties, especially those that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change, as provided for in the Convention.”
The United Nations’ Sustainable Agenda goal 2030, titled “Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”, has also brought out clearly the importance of “Differentiated Responsibility” by emphasising the fact that, "We resolve also to create conditions for sustainable, inclusive and sustained economic growth, shared prosperity and decent work for all, taking into account different levels of national development and capacities."
Similarly, the subsequent Glasgow Climate Summit of 2021 also discussed "reflecting common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities and in the context of sustainable development and efforts to eradicate poverty."
The Global South’s emphasis on “differential responsibilities” highlights the fact that these countries are facing complex as well as multiple challenges ranging from poverty, health crisis, malnutrition, and lack of education. It has also been noticed that the Global South countries are more susceptible to the adverse effects of climate change because of a lack of coping strategies.
Similarly, the COVID-19 and its aftermath produced a new kind of challenges for the Global South countries. The disruption of supply securitisation and access to medicines and other essential commodities accentuating a new kind of crisis situation along with a prolonged recession in the global economy are some of the factors thus aggravating the crisis situation for Global South countries. It is in this context that the climate crisis is putting an additional burden on Global South countries. Hence, the logic of “Differentiated Responsibility” is a move to ensure equity at the global level as imbibed in the Sustainable Developmental Goals(SDG) 2030 of the UN. At the same time, the Global South countries are handicapped in their fight against climate change because of lack of finance. Financial issues are one of the major contentious points of division between the Global South and Global North.
Climate Finance and North-South Divide
Along with the issue of “historical responsibility” and “ differentiated responsibility” led to another issue of divergence between the Global South and Global North in the form of finance required to fight climate distress. To put it simply, who will bear the responsibility to address the climate crisis, which has accrued over the years largely due to the lack of sensitivity on the part of Global North to address the issue in a more responsible manner. As the Global South does not have adequate resources at its disposal, it is an uphill task on its part to address the climate issues in a sustainable manner.
It is a fact that almost all the Climate Conventions, starting with the UNFCC Convention to the 2022 Summit in Cairo, dwell at length on the questions relating to Climate Finance. For instance, the Paris Agreement emphasised the importance of climate finance for “adaption”, “ mitigation”, and “financial assistance”. Some of these principled obligations of the Paris Agreement have yet to be implemented by t the Global North countries. The OECD Report titled “Climate Finance Provided and Mobilised by Developed Countries in 2013‑2021” suggests that 100 billion dollar fund (set up in 2009) to fight climate adversity and to be contributed by the Global North countries are yet to be realised.
The total fund collected so far, as per the above report of the OECD, is 89.6 billion US Dollars till 2021. So, to address the climate crisis, the Global North countries need to be more sensitive to the requirements of the Global South countries. The issue of climate finance also got adequate attention from the recently concluded New Delhi G 20 Summit, which envisaged a revised target for climate finance of 5.8 to 5.9 trillion US Dollars by 2030. Even the New Delhi G 20 Summit called for “responding to loss and damage for assisting developing countries that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change, including establishing a fund.”
So, what is required is a tangible commitment on the part of the Global North to address the issue which can benefit the Global South. It has been observed that the Global North consistently tries to take advantage of the rules of the UNFCC to its advantage. For instance, the Paris Agreement in Article 9 Clause 2 mentions that “Other Parties are encouraged to provide or continue to provide such support voluntarily”. Taking advantage of this clause, the Global North is also trying to impose a new form of burden on the Global South. This is one contentious area where divergent policy prescriptions exist between the Global South and the Global North.
The Green Climate Fund (GCF), which came into operation in the post-2010 UNFCC, has played a critical role in addressing the concerns of the Global South countries. The core goal of the Green Climate Fund is to adopt a multi-dimensional as well as sustainable approach to “mitigation, adaptation and sustainable development”, as envisaged on its website.
The GCF, in recent years, played a critical role in the transformation of the Global South countries in terms of financial assistance capacity building, including civil society in combatting climate crisis. However, more has to be done to address the concerns of the Global South. The lack of timely financial assistance to the Global South countries impairs its fight against climate adversity.
Along with climate finance, the other area of concern for the Global South countries is access to technology. In this regard, it is necessary to mention that there is a need to democratise greater access to technology by the Global South countries. Hence, technology is another critical area of contestation between both Global North and Global South countries.
Technological Accessibility
One main handicap on part of the Global South countries in their mission to mitigate the adversarial effect of climate change is that these countries lack access to technology. This is, in fact, one of the core areas of concern for the Global South countries. This severely affects the Global South countries’ efforts towards energy transition and adopting low-carbon technologies.
A sustainable approach to address the concerns of climate change can be possible only when adequate technology is available to the Global South countries. Highlighting the importance of technology, the Kyoto Protocol of UNFCC emphasised the need for “advanced and innovative environmentally sound technologies.” The Protocol has also underlined the need “for the transfer of technology, needed by the developing country Parties to meet the agreed full, incremental costs of advancing the implementation of existing commitments.”
The Paris Agreement of 2015 under Article 10 also highlighted the importance of technology transfer when it highlighted the need for “Parties, noting the importance of technology for the implementation of mitigation and adaptation actions under this Agreement and recognizing existing technology deployment and dissemination efforts, shall strengthen cooperative action on technology development and transfer.” The UN Sustainable Development Goal 2030 has also underlined the importance of technology transfer as one of the key areas through which climate-related vulnerabilities can be addressed at the global level.
Despite having immense potential for renewable energy, the Global South countries cannot tap the resources because of a lack of technology. As per a report by the International Energy Agency (IEA), “In 2022, an estimated 2.3 billion people lacked access to clean cooking globally, of which about 40 per cent were in Sub-Saharan Africa and 55 per cent in developing Asia.” Similarly, the IEA report further adds that the number of “people without access to electricity worldwide has increased in 2022 due to the combined impact of the energy crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic. This increase is dominated by sub-Saharan Africa, which counts for about 80 per cent of people living without electricity.”
From the above analysis of IEA, it can be underlined that access to electricity and energy is still a distant dream for the Global South. Technologies for energy storage will also definitely help the Global South countries to enhance their harnessing capacity. At the same time, supply securitisation of photovoltaic semiconductors and other critical minerals is considered necessary for harnessing the renewable energy needs of the Global South. It has also been observed that the “chip war” between the US and China, so the role of China in obstructing Taiwan’s semiconductor industry is also impacting Global South countries in terms of access to technology.
Hence, technology transfer is one key area of divergence between Global South and Global North countries. To realise the UN-mandated SDG Goals, it is necessary that there should be a greater democratisation of technology transfer. This will immensely benefit the Global South.
Despite institutional mechanisms evolved over the years to address the concerns of Global South countries some of the issues have not been addressed over the years by the Global North. It is in this context, that there is a need to look into the role of India being a major global power as well as the “voice of the Global South” in addressing the concerns of the Global South in international forums.
India’s Perspective on Global Climate Concerns
While looking at India’s approach to global climate concerns, three major factors need to be analysed. These are:
If one goes by the data of UNFCC as quoted in the above Lancet Journal from 1850-2015, India’s CO2 emission rate is only 3 per cent. This statistical data demonstrates that India’s emission rate is very low compared to the US and China.
India, at the domestic front over the years initiated a massive socio-economic development program which involves ensuring food security, health security and providing electricity at a subsidised rate. These welfare schemes closely resemble the (SDG Goals of the UN ) aimed at uplifting the poorer sections and bringing them into the mainstream while providing them with dignity of life.
India’s approach, like other Global South countries is that the “differentiated responsibility” should be applied while addressing the climate questions at the global negotiation forums.
India believes that the Global North countries should honour their commitment to contribute to the global climate fund to mitigate global climate disasters.
India emphasises the importance of technology transfer from the Global North to the Global South as the way to ensure an energy security transition which in turn can mitigate the adversarial effect of climate change. ,
It is in this context that there is a need to look at what are the policy initiatives of India to address the climatic concerns. In this regard, it may be mentioned that India is a signatory to the Paris Agreement. While addressing the Glasgow Climate Summit of 2021, Prime Minister Narendra Modi highlighted India’s approach in addressing global climate change, which is called “Panchamrit”.
In his speech, Prime Minister Modi set an ambitious target for India of “net zero emissions by 2070” and meeting “50 per cent of its energy requirements from renewable energy by 2030”. The “Panchamrit spirit” also reflects India’s commitment to addressing the adversarial impact of climate mitigation. Another important aspect of India’s approach to sustainable climate change is the launching of the “LiFE” mission in June 2022. Launching the vision of LiFE, Prime Minister Modi stated, “The vision of LiFE is to live a lifestyle that is in tune with our planet and does not harm it. And those who live such a lifestyle are called ‘Pro-Planet People’. Mission LiFE borrows from the past, operates in the present and focuses on the future. Reduce, Reuse and Recycle are the concepts woven into our life. The Circular Economy has been an integral part of our culture and lifestyle”.
LiFE is a novel and comprehensive concept where sustainability is the key aspect. At the same time, it also emphasises the role of society and human behaviour in mitigating the climate crisis. At the same time, India’s Intended Nationally Determined Contributions( NDC), which was announced in August 2022, aimed at reducing Carbon emissions by 45 per cent by 2030. This is a major step as far as addressing climate concerns. India’s approach to Sustainable climate Security is well reflected in the logo of the New Delhi G 20 Summit, which highlights "Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam”, “One Earth, One Family, and we share One Future”.
The significance of LiFE in mitigating the adverse effect of climate change can be understood from the fact that the IPCC Report 2022, titled Climate Change 2022 Mitigation of Climate Change, highlights that, “With policy support, socio-cultural options and behavioural change can reduce global GHG emissions of end-use sectors by at least 5 per cent rapidly, with most of the potential in developed countries, and more until 2050."
In this context, one can assess the significance of India’s approach to climate issues through the principles of LiFE. One may recall here that India played a pivotal role in forming the International Solar Alliance. Similarly, at COP 26, Glasgow in 2021, India launched “Infrastructure for Resilient Island States”, which aims at protecting the island countries from natural disasters. So also, during the recently concluded G 20 Summit, India announced the formation of the Global Biofuel Alliances.
It is in this background one has to envisage India’s role in addressing the global climatic crisis. Prime Minister Modi, in his address to the COP-28 in Abu Dhabi, highlighted India’s position on climate issues by focusing on three issues namely, “climate justice, climate finance and green credit” in his address. At the COP 28 Summit, Prime Minister Modi also outlined India’s new initiative to address climate concerns through “Green Card Initiatives”.
Prime Minister Modi also pitched for a greater role of Global South in addressing the climate crisis by underlining that, “We don't have much time to correct the mistakes of the last century. A small section of mankind has exploited the nature indiscriminately. But the whole humanity is paying its price, especially the residents of the Global South”. The above speech of Prime Minister Modi reflects India’s concerns for the Global South countries.
From the above policy initiatives of India to address climate change, three major inferences one can draw have much relevance for the Global South countries. These are:
India provides a normative basis to address the climate concerns not only for the Global South countries but also for the global community rooted in the age-old philosophical doctrine of “Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam”.
India provides a “voice” to the Global South countries in the international forums on climate change over issues like technological transfer, climate finance, etc. These issues are areas of vital concern for the Global South countries.
The Global South countries have also benefitted immensely from some of India’s initiatives to address climate change, whether it is in the form of the International Solar Alliance, Infrastructure for Resilient Island States, Global Biofuel Alliance, etc. This moves on the part of India to provide an overarching framework for Global South to address climate change and will ensure a new form of sustainable security paradigm.
India’s climate initiatives will help ensure climate justice for the Global South countries.
The normative discourses on global climate change, as well as the challenges Global South is currently confronting to address the same, are providing a critical framework to study climate change at a greater length.
Conclusion
The three major discourses on climate issues, namely, “differentiated responsibility”, climate finance, and technology transfer, provided the base for the fruition of polemics in global geopolitics. Some of these issues can be considered as steps to ensure climate justice for the Global South countries. The historical trajectories which shape the present climatic discourses are largely skewed in favour of the Global North. This needs to be deconstructed, and Global South’s perspectives on climate change must be highlighted. At the same time, India’s role is crucial in the present global climatic discourses because of its role as an emerging Global Power and also as the “ Voice of the Global South.”
(Nalin Kumar Mohapatra is an Assistant Professor at the Centre for Russian and Central Asian Studies, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University. The views expressed are personal to the author.)
