Image: National Geographic
Researchers at McGill University have published a new study mapping human vulnerability to climate change. In what is perhaps the cruelest of ironies, researchers found that the major negative impacts of climate change will be experienced by those populations least responsible for increasing carbon dioxide concentrations and also least capable of dealing with the impacts of climate change. This begs the question, how will those responsible for increasing emissions take responsibility for their actions if they are going to be the least effected? And further, should nations with higher emissions have some kind of differentiated responsibility in dealing with the effects of climate change? What kind of role do different ethical belief systems play? Here is a brief summary of the research.
*Addition: Here is the map of vulnerability.
Nice illustration of an issue that is of little surprise to us. Though I am curious why there are very few, if any, vulnerability points outlined in the northern hemisphere and Arctic, where the lifestyles of both indigenous and more advanced societies are in danger. Perhaps their populations are too small to show up on the map?
Those countries that have produced the highest emissions should be responsible for helping countries that did not contribute much to the problem. I am not sure how they would go about differentiating their responsibility, but I do not know if even giving a significant amount of money would even be enough to combat the effects, especially because fresh water supplies and other resources may end up being a huge problem for everyone. I guess responsibility depends a lot on the overall temperature increase that we end up with as that will determine the conditions of those who are most vulnerable.
While i do think that the countries most responsible for increased greenhouse emissions should be held accountable. I do not think that it is going to happen anytime soon. It will also cost a substantial amount of money to do this, so i think that we chould establish something like a pigouvian tax. This would tax something like emissions or energy input and would subsidize good things such as paying damages and technology research.