Showing posts with label inequality. Show all posts
Showing posts with label inequality. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 20, 2014

Why the Climate Movement Must Stand with Ferguson

Scene from post Katrina New Orleans

Why the Climate Movement Must Stand with Ferguson
By Deirdre Smith, Strategic Partnership Coordinator, 350.org

It was not hard for me to make the connection between the tragedy in Ferguson, Missouri, and the catalyst for my work to stop the climate crisis.

It’s all over the news: images of police in military gear pointing war zone weapons at unarmed black people with their hands in the air. These scenes made my heart race in an all-to-familiar way. I was devastated for Mike Brown, his family and the people of Ferguson. Almost immediately, I closed my eyes and remembered the same fear for my own family that pangs many times over a given year.

In the wake of the climate disaster that was Hurricane Katrina almost ten years ago, I saw the same images of police, pointing war-zone weapons at unarmed black people with their hands in the air. In the name of “restoring order,” my family and their community were demonized as “looters” and “dangerous.” When crisis hits, the underlying racism in our society comes to the surface in very clear ways. Climate change is bringing nothing if not clarity to the persistent and overlapping crises of our time.


Scene from Ferguson, MO

I was outraged by Mike Brown’s murder, and at the same time wondered why people were so surprised; this is sadly a common experience of black life in America. In 2012, an unarmed black man was killed by authorities every 28 hours (when divided evenly across the year), and it has increased since then. I think about my brother, my nephew, and my brothers and sisters who will continue to have to fight for respect and empathy, and may lose their homes or even their lives at the hands of injustice.



Can you tell whether this is from New Orleans or Ferguson?



To me, the connection between militarized state violence, racism, and climate change was common-sense and intuitive.

Quickly understanding interdependence and connectedness here, and often elsewhere is, in part, the result of my experience of growing up black in America, and growing up in New Mexico, a place ravaged by climate impacts. New Mexico is, as Oscar Olivera noted, showing the early signs of what sparked theCochabamba Water Wars, yet another example of how oppression and extreme weather combine to “incite” militarized violence.

The problems of Cochabamba and Katrina are not just about the hurricane or the drought – it’s what happened after. It is the institutional neglect of vulnerable communities in crisis, the criminalization of our people met with state violence, the ongoing displacement of New Orleans’ black residents through the demolition of affordable housing for high-rise condos — that all adds up to corporations exploiting our tragedy using the tools of racism, division, and dehumanization. (Naomi Klein calls it the Shock Doctrine.) And it’s also about what happened before too: how black and brown communities have coal refineries, tar sands, and gas wells in their back yards to extract fossil fuels in the first place.

These divisions imposed on us prevent us from building the movement we need to create a new future for ourselves, a future where we have clean energy that doesn’t kill us, and creates jobs that provide dignity and a living. In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, black and brown people were seen as “disposable,” and the powers-that-be sought to divide us by once again painting the victims and heroes as villains.



How would you be portayed if unarmed and killed by police?

The hashtag #iftheygunnedmedown trended during the past week in reaction to the media’s portrayal of Mike Brown and countless other victims. Black folks asked: if I was killed by police, how would I be portrayed? It illustrated how a racist and victim-blaming cultural narrative is central to how the media responds to the victimization of a vulnerable community in crisis.

A discourse that dehumanizes and blames the victims makes black and brown communities even more vulnerable than they already are in the wake of climate disasters. If extreme weather is about droughts, floods, hurricanes, and wildfires, the way people get treated in the wake of disaster is about power.

Demonization and the illusion of the “other” allows mainstream US to feel unaffected and disconnected to the employment of unacceptable and institutionally supported militarized violence. If we hope to build anything together and employ our combined power we must deny that anyone is an “other” – denying this pervasive cultural norm isn’t easy but it’s a central challenge we face.

We’re all impacted by climate change, but we’re not all impacted equally.

Communities of color and poor communities are hit hardest by fossil fuel extraction, as well as neglected by the state in the wake of crisis. People of color also disproportionately live in climate-vulnerable areas. Similarly, state violence should concern us all, but the experience of young black men in particular in this country is unique. Those of us who are not young black men must step up to the challenge of understanding that we will likely never experience that level of demonization. That kind of solidarity is what it takes to build real people power — the kind of power that stands up unflinchingly to injustice, and helps us all win our battles by standing together.

This is difficult work. Some of it requires listening and working with racial justice organizations, and some of it requires introspection, questioning what we have been taught, and healing from internal oppression. Part of that work involves climate organizers acknowledging and understanding that our fight is not simply with the carbon in the sky, but with the powers on the ground.

Many people have pointed out that the climate movement needs to understand our internal disparity of power too: between mainstream and grassroots organizations, between people of color and white folks, between the global north and the global south. We need to account for these things if we truly want to build the diverse movement leadership that we will need to win.

The events in Ferguson offer an important moment if you’re a climate organizer, looking around the room, wondering where the “people of color” are. It’s a time to to dig deep and ask yourself if you really care why – and if you are committed to the deep work, solidarity, and learning that it will take to bring more “diversity” to our movement. Personally, I think the climate movement is up to this necessary challenge.

It isn’t incidental, it’s institutional, and it’s rooted in history.

I can’t stress enough how important it is for me, as a black climate justice advocate, as well as for my people, to see the climate movement show solidarity right now with the people of Ferguson and with black communities around the country striving for justice. Other movements are stepping up to the plate: labor, GLBTQ, and immigrant rights groups have all taken a firm stand that they have the backs of the black community. Threats to civil dissent are a threat to us all. We’ve seen this kind of militarized police violence in the environmental movement before: in the repression of the Global Justice Movement, pioneered by police with tanks on the streets of Miami during the Free Trade Area of the Americas protests in 2003, to name just one example.



Scene from the militarized police repression of environmental and global justice activists in Miami 2003. Since pioneering this model, local police forces across the country have been given military-grade weapons with little to no training.

It has happened to our movements before, and it will happen again. As James Baldwin expressed, “if they come for you in the morning, they will come for us at night.” But solidarity and allyship is important in and of itself. The fossil fuel industry would love to see us siloed into believing that wecan each win by ourselves on “single issues.” Now it’s time for the climate movement to show up– to show that we will not stand for the “otherizing” of the black community here in America, or anyone else.

We have a lot of learning to do about how to come together, but we are in process of learning how our fights are bound together at their roots. If we knew everything we needed to know about navigating the climate and ecological crises, we would have done it already. Now is a time to stand with and listen to the wisdom of our allies in movements that are co-creating the world we all want to live in.

As crisis escalates, as climate change gets worse, we better get ready to see a whole lot more state violence and repression, unless we organize to change it now.

The first step to understanding is listening. The second step is digging.

I could tell you all day about the brilliant and strategic analysis and leaders that exist in historically oppressed communities. I could tell you…but your path to understanding why solidarity is important is your own. Don’t miss this opportunity to dig in and show up. Don’t miss this opportunity to leverage our power together. If we mitigate and adapt to the climate crisis it, will be because we understood our enemies and leveraged our collective power to take them down and let our vision spring up. Take a moment today to read the demands of the Dream Defenders, Freedomside, and Organizing Black Struggle. Read about solidarity and white allyship, and identify anti-blackness showing up in your spaces. Take a moment today to really think about how we really should confront the climate crisis and ask yourself if you’re willing to dive into the long haul and complex work it will take.

I believe in us.

I am grateful that amidst all my anger, frustration, sadness, determination, and exhaustion that I am left with one resounding thought: I believe in us.

Doing climate work takes a lot of courage, and I am endlessly inspired by my comrades’ and colleagues’ abilities hold the contradictions, complexity, and overwhelming reality it is to take on this challenge. I am excited by the deepening and aligning I’ve been seeing happening in cross-sector movement spaces over the past year especially. The more complex (and less comfortable) we allow ourselves to be, the more simple things actually become: we are in this together and our fights are connected. We don’t know everything by ourselves, but together we know enough.

Sunday, July 6, 2014

Sunday, June 15, 2014

'Fossil fuel industry should pay for climate damage'


'Fossil fuel industry should pay for climate damage'
6/12/14 dw.de

Big fossil fuel companies should compensate poor countries for loss and damage caused by climate change, according to the NGO Climate Justice. Julie-Anne Richards says 90 entities account for 63 percent of emissions.

DW: During the ongoing UN climate talks in Bonn (04.-15.06.2014), you put forward a controversal proposal - as laid out in your report " Carbon majors funding loss and damage'".What exactly do you mean by that?

Julie-Anne Richards: Since the Industrial Revolution began, the products of big, largely fossil fuel entities - such as Chevron, Exxon Mobil, BP, Shell - have been responsible for 63 percent of the world's emissions. So more than half of the emissions in the atmosphere right now are there because of these 90 carbon majors.

These emissions have led to the climate change we are feeling, which is affecting the poorest and most vulnerable people most, through loss and damage. We are talking about extreme impacts like Typhoon Haiyan last year, which killed more than 6,000 people in the Philippines, left four million people without houses, caused $2 billion (1.48 billion euros) worth of damage. We propose that these carbon majors - the corporations that have been making profits selling fossil fuels - should pay a levy into the new UN mechanism for Loss and Damage, so that those poor and vulnerable people facing the worst impacts of climate change have funds to deal with those impacts.

What is going to motivate those companies to agree to that?

Our proposal is for an international agreement at government level. There are precedents and examples of this happening in other fields. Take the oil spill regime, for example. Or the scheme to deal with nuclear accidents. We need to apply the best elements of examples happening around the world to climate change and ensure that governments, who already monitor how much coal or gas is extracted so they can charge royalties to these companies, would apply an additional levy that they then pay in to the UN Loss and Damage mechanism.

Is there anything stipulated in international law which would back this up?

Yes, there are a couple of principles in international law we are applying here: the "no harm" and "polluter pays" principle. If you emit pollution that causes harm somewhere else, you should be the one [having] to pay for that.

[But] it doesn't happen in this case. We have the big fossil fuel companies making trillions of dollars in profits, while the harm from their product - climate change - is essentially being paid for by the poorest and most vulnerable. Within international law there are some recommendations as to how to deal with that, which have been applied in these other fields: oil spills, nuclear accidents.



NGOs in Bonn are in favor of renewable energy sources and made sure their voices were heard

How have the carbon majors been responding?

We've only just made the idea public. It is a discussion paper, so we are looking forward to lots of people engaging with it. We think it's very important for the idea to be part of the overall climate agreement to be reached in Paris in 2015, so we have a year and a half to work out how it will be embedded in that. We are looking forward to the carbon majors and the fossil fuel corporations engaging with it, but as of yet we haven't had a lot of response from them.

Who supports the move so far?

A range of parties, including a lot of the vulnerable countries. In fact one reason we have the Loss and Damage Agreement that was agreed in Warsaw last year is because [chief negotiator] Yeb Sano from the Philippines made such an impassioned plea about the impacts Typhoon Haiyan had on his country.

Richards has presented Climate Justice's working paper at the ongoing UN climate talks in Bonn

So the Philippines are championing the idea. We hope to talk to other countries, which will probably have a range of views about whether the idea is good or bad. We want their ideas on how it might work. We don't have answers to all the questions, we are also talking to NGOs that work in the area.

You are based in Australia, a country feeling impacts from climate change, but that has a government that does not take climate change seriously. How does that affect your message?

The proposal is very relevant to the Australian situation. Our present government is trying to repeal good climate legislation because it is too close to the fossil fuel industry. We want to make it very clear that the fossil fuel industry is the reason we are suffering from climate change, and that poor people are facing the worst impacts.

They have a legal and a moral responsibility to pay for the damages their product is causing. Our proposal is a way to make that work. And by identifying them very clearly as the people who are causing climate change, we hope to drive a wedge between the over-influence the fossil fuel industry has on governments around the world, including the Australian government.

Tuesday, April 29, 2014

Indigenous Peoples & Climate Change Perspective


Indigenous Peoples & Climate Change Perspective
Published on Feb 25, 2014
The University of Missouri School of Law presents the 2014 Journal of Environmental & Sustainability Law Symposium - Environmental Law 4.0: Adaptive and Resilient.

Indigenous Peoples & Climate Change Perspective Presented by:
Elizabeth Kronk Warner, Associate Professor of Law;
Director, Tribal Law & Government Center; Affiliated
Professor, Indigenous Studies, University of Kansas School of Law

11:20 am, February 14, 2014, John K. Hulston Hall, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri.

"Food and Climate" by Dr. Michael Fratantuono




"Food and Climate" by Dr. Michael Fratantuono
USArmyWarCollege
 Published on Feb 11, 2014
Dr. Michael Fratantuono is a professor at Dickinson College in Carlisle, PA. He discussed how a changing climate threatens havoc on already insecure and vulnerable populations. Can the U.S. lead the way to climate reform.

Friday, April 25, 2014

A Nonviolent Insurgency for Climate Protection



A Nonviolent Insurgency for Climate Protection

Where the old institutions have failed, insurgent global citizens must now defend the climate directly and preserve the public trust for generations to come.

Jeremy Brecher, December 10, 2013

When 30 climate activists from 18 countries protested drilling at an oil platform operated by Gazprom in the Russian Arctic, they represented the people of the world taking a symbolic stand against climate destruction, the corporate climate destroyers, and the governments that back them. But the action of the Arctic 30 may be prophetic of something more: The emergence of a global insurgency that challenges the very legitimacy of those who are destroying our planet.

The 2013 Fifth Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change confirmed that humans are destroying the earth’s climate. But it also revealed something even more alarming: Twenty-five years of human effort to protect the climate have failed even to slow the forces that are destroying it. On the contrary, the rate of increase in carbon emissions from burning fossil fuels tripled between the release of the first IPCC report in 1988 and today.

Scientists and climate protection advocates once expected that rational leaders and institutions would respond appropriately to the common threat of climate change. As Bill McKibben said of Jim Hansen and himself, “I think he thought, as did I, if we get this set of facts out in front of everybody, they’re so powerful — overwhelming — that people will do what needs to be done.”

It didn’t work. Those who are fighting to save the climate need a new strategy. One such strategy to consider is a global nonviolent law-enforcing insurgency, where citizens take it upon themselves to defend the climate directly and preserve the public trust for generations to come.

Read the report (PDF).

Friday, April 18, 2014

The Cost of Carbon: Personal Stories Showing the Human Impact of Climate Change Around the World



The Cost of Carbon: Personal Stories Showing the Human Impact of Climate Change Around the World
Published on Oct 22, 2013
Hosted by Al Gore and The Climate Reality Project, "24 Hours of Reality: The Cost of Carbon" shows the personal costs of carbon pollution to communities across North America, South America, Europe, Africa, Asia and Australia.

Food shortages could be most critical world issue by mid-century


Food shortages could be most critical world issue by mid-century
April 17, 2014 phys.org

The world is less than 40 years away from a food shortage that will have serious implications for people and governments, according to a top scientist at the U.S. Agency for International Development.

"For the first time in human history, food production will be limited on a global scale by the availability of land, water and energy," said Dr. Fred Davies, senior science advisor for the agency's bureau of food security. "Food issues could become as politically destabilizing by 2050 as energy issues are today."

Davies, who also is a Texas A&M AgriLife Regents Professor of Horticultural Sciences, addressed the North American Agricultural Journalists meeting in Washington, D.C. on the "monumental challenge of feeding the world."

He said the world population will increase 30 percent to 9 billion people by mid-century. That would call for a 70 percent increase in food to meet demand.

"But resource limitations will constrain global food systems," Davies added. "The increases currently projected for crop production from biotechnology, genetics, agronomics and horticulture will not be sufficient to meet food demand." Davies said the ability to discover ways to keep pace with food demand have been curtailed by cutbacks in spending on research.

"The U.S. agricultural productivity has averaged less than 1.2 percent per year between 1990 and 2007," he said. "More efficient technologies and crops will need to be developed—and equally important, better ways for applying these technologies locally for farmers—to address this challenge." Davies said when new technologies are developed, they often do not reach the small-scale farmer worldwide.

"A greater emphasis is needed in high-value horticultural crops," he said. "Those create jobs and economic opportunities for rural communities and enable more profitable, intense farming." Horticultural crops, Davies noted, are 50 percent of the farm-gate value of all crops produced in the U.S.

He also made the connection between the consumption of fruits and vegetables and chronic disease prevention and pointed to research centers in the U.S. that are making links between farmers, biologists and chemists, grocers, health care practitioners and consumers. That connection, he suggested, also will be vital in the push to grow enough food to feed people in coming years.

"Agricultural productivity, food security, food safety, the environment, health, nutrition and obesity—they are all interconnected," Davies said. One in eight people worldwide, he added, already suffers from chronic undernourishment, and 75 percent of the world's chronically poor are in the mid-income nations such as China, India, Brazil and the Philippines.

"The perfect storm for horticulture and agriculture is also an opportunity," Davies said. "Consumer trends such as views on quality, nutrition, production origin and safety impact what foods we consume. Also, urban agriculture favors horticulture." For example, he said, the fastest growing segment of new farmers in California, are female, non-Anglos who are "intensively growing horticultural crops on small acreages," he said.

This Oakland Project Is Connecting the Dots Between Climate, Food, and Health


(Photo: Ashel Eldridge)

This Oakland Project Is Connecting the Dots Between Climate, Food, and Health
S.o.S. Juice, a grassroots nonprofit started in 2012, creates solutions to the community's biggest problems.

Ashel Eldridge, April 17, 2014 takepart.com

In 2012 I started S.o.S Juice, which stands for System out of our System, an Oakland-based nonprofit that sells organic raw vegan juice, smoothies, tonics, and elixirs and popped up in areas that lacked healthy options for locals. In the early days, I’d set up a juice bar outside a fast-food restaurant and encourage people to make a healthier choice. Instead of opting for a processed product that was both bad for their health and bad for the planet, I got them to try fresh juice and gave them information about wellness.

Soon, S.o.S. expanded from pop-up juice bars to farmers markets, and my team now hosts monthly food justice, health equity, and spiritual liberation events at a local community center, United Roots Oakland. We bring in a variety of speakers, from activists to hip-hop artists, to educate the community on the benefits of a healthy lifestyle. Over the past two years we’ve reached thousands of people.

It’s hard to feel like it’s ever enough. Nearly 50 million Americans are food-insecure, and many of them are low-income individuals and people of color. Yet, a full 40 percent of food in the U.S. is wasted—97 percent ends up in landfills, producing methane and contributing to climate change. It’s clear that we have an infrastructure problem, and our communities need a way to ensure environmental, economic, and health resiliency.

For me, I loved educating young people about climate for the five years that I worked at the Alliance for Climate Education, a national organization whose mission is to educate and inspire young people to break through the challenge of climate change. However, one day last year after I left a low-income, majority-minority high school, I felt like I wasn’t doing enough to get at the root issues of climate change: racism, classism, homophobia, and the many other preventable sicknesses that plague our society.

As I drove away from the school, I reflected on how my grandmother died from diabetes and my grandfather, who was a powerful preacher, died from cancer. I also recalled the way my aunt, a Black Panther, denounced oppressing another animal on so-called Thanksgiving. These issues and the fight to solve them feel like they're in my blood.

That’s why I want to scale up my efforts to make a larger, more holistic impact. I want to promote health for low-income communities, support sustainable agriculture, and create green career paths. I’ve come to the realization that my community needs something bigger than juice—we need an urban pharmacy.

I’m in the process of launching Urban Fx—Urban Farmacy Oakland—to solve issues of food waste, food security, community health, climate, and employment. The project will be supplied by its own net-zero co-op commercial kitchen and distribution facility that creates community resiliency through a regional food hub, selling locally sourced foods and healing products.

I envision Urban Fx working as a membership-based net-zero facility that processes, stores, and inventories foraged, donated, and locally grown quality organic seeds, starts, food from urban gardens, small farms, and food businesses within a 180-mile radius. We’ll map and register our local food assets. Food waste will then be turned into a compost product via vermiculture stations positioned around the perimeter of the facility.

All told, I want to create a home base for locals to heal themselves, learn about healthy lives, and build a community of entrepreneurs, food justice advocates, urban farmers, nutritionists, and spiritual leaders.

Because it’s tough to ask people to care about climate when they’re worried about food and shelter, Urban Fx needs to create green jobs for people recently released from jail and low-income, low-skilled individuals. Job training will include experiential education in nutrition, agriculture, and entrepreneurship. I even have plans to refurbish one into a food truck and mobile education platform.

With S.o.S. and Urban Fx, I’m just one community activist trying to chip away at some big problems. This idea is ambitious—I have plenty of work to do—but I’m not waiting for someone to do to or for my community. What would this look like in your neighborhood?

Robert Jensen on "We Are All Apocalyptic Now: Moral Responsibilities in Crisis Times"


Robert Jensen on "We Are All Apocalyptic Now: Moral Responsibilities in Crisis Times"
Published on Mar 4, 2013
University of Texas Professor Robert Jensen speaks on "We Are All Apocalyptic Now: Moral Responsibilities in Crisis Times" in the First Unitarian Universalist Church Public Affairs Forum.http://austinuu.org/wp2011/community/...
In his talk, Jensen discusses the need for a "calm apocalypticism" that takes seriously the social and ecological crises we face. Rather than search for magical solutions in religion or technology, he argues for a realistic program that challenges the unjust and unsustainable systems of power that currently structure our world.
Location: First Unitarian Universalist Church, 4700 Grover Ave., Austin 78756
A ZGraphix/Austin Indymedia Production.
Filmed/Produced/Edited by Jeff Zavala.

Thursday, April 17, 2014

Tackling Global Injustice in a World of Climate Change: punishing the innocent?



Tackling Global Injustice in a World of Climate Change: punishing the innocent?
Download: Audio, Video

Speaker(s): Mary Robinson, Professor Lord Stern, Sharan Burrow, Caio Koch-Weser, Marvin Nala, Sheela Patel, Henry Shue, Dessima Williams
Chair: Professor Conor Gearty

Recorded on 13 March 2014 in Sheikh Zayed Theatre, New Academic Building.

LSE's Institute of Public Affairs and the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment invite you to an innovative public session which will explore who constitutes the innocent, how they are impacted by climate change and how they lack access to power. It will consider if these issues can be overcome and suggest ways in which they can.

The session will be framed by a discussion with Nicholas Stern and Mary Robinson.

This will be followed by interventions from a panel comprising representatives of the Innocent: the marginalised, the poor, youth, workers and future generations. Panellists representing the political world and the corporate voice will respond to the issues and concerns raised by the Innocent outlining both the challenges of political office and the realities of the corporate world.

The audience will have an opportunity both to make observations and to put questions to the panellists regarding what can be done to find solutions to the problems identified.

Mary Robinson is the former president of Ireland and UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and currently president of the Mary Robinson Foundation - Climate Justice.

Nicholas Stern is currently president of the British Academy and chair of the Grantham Research Institute.

Sharan Burrow is secretary general of the International Trade Union Confederation.

Caio Koch-Weser is vice chairman of Deutsche Bank Group.

Marvin Nala is a climate and energy campaigner for Greenpeace, East Asia.

Sheela Patel is the founder-director of Society for the Promotion of Area Resource Centres.

Henry Shue is a senior research fellow at Merton College and professor of politics and international relations at University of Oxford.

Dessima Williams is the former ambassador of Grenada to the United Nations.

Monday, March 31, 2014

The rich West is ruining our planet

People stand among debris and ruins of houses destroyed by Super Typhoon Haiyan 

The rich West is ruining our planet
The industrialised economies have created climate change, but the poorest are paying the
price for it. We must do more to help

Rowan Williams, 29 Mar 2014 telegraph.co.uk

The storms that have battered parts of the UK this year and left hundreds of people facing the misery
of flooded homes and ruined land have again brought questions about the impact of climate change to
the forefront of the public consciousness. And this week the whole question has been put into still
sharper focus, as the world’s leading climate scientists publish a report on the subject putting our
local problems into a deeply disturbing global context.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the world’s leading body of scientists in this
area, will be pointing out that, appalling as the experiences of recent months have been here, we have
in fact got off relatively lightly in comparison with others. It is those living in the typhoon-prone
Philippines or in drought-ravaged Malawi who are being forced not only to deal with the miseries of
flooded homes and prolonged disruption, but to make fundamental changes in their way of life.

We have heard for years the predictions that the uncontrolled burning of fossil fuels and the
consequent pouring of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere will lead to an accelerated warming of the
Earth. What is now happening strongly indicates that these predictions are coming true; our actions
have indeed had consequences, consequences that are deeply threatening for many of the poorest
communities in the world.

The waves that destroyed railway lines in the South West and the record-breaking rainfall that flooded
homes and led to the Severn and the Thames bursting their banks show what we can expect as average
temperatures increase worldwide. Rising sea levels, absorbing glacial melt from polar waters,
exacerbate the severity of tidal storm surges; warmer air containing more moisture will lead to
increasing rainfall. The chaos experienced in Britain came as a shock to many; but for millions around
the world, this is nothing new. And there is a particularly bitter injustice about the fact that those
suffering its worst ravages – such as the pastoralists of northern Kenya or the Quilombolas of Brazil,
descendants of former slaves cultivating territories increasingly desolated by deforestation – have
done least to contribute to it.

Rich, industrialised countries, including our own, have unquestionably contributed most to
atmospheric pollution; the development of profitable heavy industry relied on what we now think of as
"dirty" energy sources, and involved environmental degradation on an unprecedented scale. Both our
present lifestyle in the developed world and the history of how we created such possibilities for
ourselves have to bear the responsibility for pushing the environment in which we live towards crisis.

To say this is not a plea for handwringing over a history that is what it is. But, as Professor James
Hansen, a former NASA climate scientist, has said: "Our parents honestly did not know that their
actions could harm future generations. We, the current generation, can only pretend that we did not
know." The new scientific mapping of what climate chaos is doing leaves us with little choice but to
face the unpalatable fact that, unless our societies and governments step up the urgency of their
response, profound injustice will be done both to the poor of today and to the entire global population
of tomorrow.

What we tend not to hear enough of in the UK is the first-hand experience of those who live with
devastating climatic insecurity. It is sadly easy to treat the scientific evidence as adding up to no more
than alarmist predictions which may or may not be realised. So it is vital that we hear the voices of
those on the front line, for whom this is a present, not a future catastrophe. A report published this
week by Christian Aid, Taken By Storm: Responding to the Impacts of Climate Change, gives us a
chance to listen to these voices directly.

It sets out various examples of how communities are being forced to adapt to a distorted climate. In
Bangladesh, rising sea levels have contributed to the salinisation of inland water and the loss of the
mangrove forests which historically have provided a buffer against increasingly severe storm surges.

In Bolivia, farmers living on the Illimani glacier have been forced into fierce conflicts over scarce
resources as a result of the irregular melting of their previously stable water source; many have had to
migrate.

There are, of course, some in the current debates around climate change who are doubtful about the
role of human agency both in creating and in responding to climate change, and who argue that we
should direct our efforts solely to adapting to changes that are natural and inevitable, rather than
modifying our behaviour.

This feels all very well in the UK, where we can adapt to some extent with better flood defences and
by banning building on flood plains. And of course adaptation and behaviour modification do not
constitute an either/or. But these options are not so readily available in the most vulnerable
communities around the world. People in these communities would agree that adaptation is crucial to
save lives, livelihoods and investments – and they have some good examples to demonstrate this; but
they are adamant that it won’t be enough on its own.

Current examples of climate change are the result of a global temperature rise of just 0.8C. Doing
nothing about levels of fossil fuel-based pollution sits uncomfortably with the fact that, if
temperatures rise by 2.5-5C above pre-industrial levels – something that many scientists believe to be
possible without modifying present patterns – many adaptation measures will simply be too late.

So the communities on the front line, the communities whose voices Christian Aid is seeking to make
audible, need the world to tackle the root causes and to do so urgently. A good place to start would be
ending the $523 billion (£314 billion) the world spends on fossil fuel subsidies (more than six times
the support given to renewables). But whatever the exact response, these two reports make it clear that
we have to stop subsidizing the degradation of the planet – and that this is not a question to be tackled
the day after tomorrow. The cost is now – as so many in the UK have discovered in recent months.

Dr Rowan Williams is chairman of Christian Aid