A Guide to Global Environmental Policies During COVID-19
- ecogenzine
- Aug 15, 2020
- 4 min read
Updated: Jan 4, 2021
By Yamila Frej
During the past three months, COVID-19 lockdowns have kept millions of people confined to their homes around the world. With empty roads and the usual hustle and bustle of society at a virtual halt, media headlines have featured seemingly optimistic environmental improvements, such as global carbon emissions down by an average of 17 percent and wild animals roaming the streets of New Delhi and Buenos Aires.
Nevertheless, the coronavirus pandemic is in no way a cure to the climate crisis, and these environmental improvements are anything but permanent. Governments are already reopening, reverting to pollution practices, and planning to spend $9 trillion on economy restoration plans, as calculated by the International Energy Agency. In these efforts to compensate for lower productivity during lockdowns, the 17 percent plunge in global emissions during April has already resurged to within five percent of 2019 levels. Where does this leave us? We may only have six months to change the course of the climate crisis, as reported in The Guardian.
A just, sustainable recovery after COVID-19 is important now that society has seen the risks of its unsustainable relationship with the environment. If governments around the world were able to collaborate rapidly for the good of public health and humankind during the pandemic, we should be even more convinced of their ability to mobilize for the well-being of the whole planet.
Moreover, with the current civil and human rights issues, now is the most opportune time to incite international cooperation and change by revealing that attaining climate justice includes addressing racial, socioeconomic, and human rights issues in that the climate crisis is a human rights crisis, too.
Below are a few solutions and plans that, if implemented, may advance just, sustainable COVID-19 recoveries worldwide:
The Green New Deal (GND) is a 10-year plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S. to net-zero and commit 100% of power demand to clean, renewable energy sources by 2030. In the process, this deal guarantees any workers in the fossil fuel industry an equitable transition into jobs in the clean energy sector. Some of the GND’s goals include:
Increasing funding to communities on the frontlines of climate change
Upgrading infrastructure to endure extreme weather
Ensuring that all infrastructure-related congressional bills account for climate change
Building energy-efficient power grids to provide affordable electricity
Ensuring that all existing and future buildings achieve maximum energy and water efficiency
Designing and investing in a more sustainable and equitable food system
Investing in public transportation, zero-emission vehicle infrastructure, and high-speed rails
Restoring ecosystems and cleaning abandoned and hazardous waste sites
The circular economy can be thought of as the three R’s (reduce, reuse, recycle) on an industrial level. The concept is modeled after nature’s closed-loop system of plants producing oxygen for animals who in turn produce carbon dioxide for plants. Nothing is wasted as opposed to the linear economy of “take-make-waste,” in which goods are produced and discarded after a single use.
On the other hand, the circular economy is designed so that products can be reused in either biological or technical cycles. In other words, all products are manufactured so that they can be disassembled into materials that can be decomposed by nature or reused in production. The aim is to reduce the demand for purchasing new products by establishing a self-sustainable society.
The European take on the American model aims to transition to a circular economy, restore biodiversity, and establish climate neutrality across Europe by 2050. The European Union will mobilize all sectors of its economy with the European Climate Law, which will legally bind countries to the Deal and encourage investment. The Deal’s actions range from investing in environmentally-friendly technologies and cleaner public transportation to decarbonizing the energy sector and building energy-efficient buildings.
Another beneficial aspect is the Just Transition Mechanism, which will allot €100 billion to supporting businesses and frontline regions with the funds and technology needed to advance toward a green economy.
The Cap and Trade system both limits greenhouse gas emissions and puts a price on them in order to reduce pollution in the atmosphere. Governments can set caps and violation penalties on specific industries while the companies engage in a trade market, in which they buy and sell allowances that permit them to emit a specific amount of carbon. The price is determined by supply and demand, and the concept of trading incentivizes saving money by decreasing emissions.
Even more, carbon dividends would hold 100 percent of the revenue accrued from carbon taxes in a Carbon Fees Trust fund and redistribute the profits to low-income families on a monthly basis. Two-thirds of American families would receive more in dividends than they would pay in higher household bills and prices. This plan would stimulate the economy with billions of dollars, establish more equity, and empower low-income households.
Arguably the most controversial proposal, degrowth, as seen in Cuba, is the idea that capitalism should be replaced with an economic model that puts social and ecological well-being first as opposed to corporate profit, overproduction, and consumer culture. Advocates for degrowth argue that capitalism prioritizes economic growth and enables human and environmental exploitation in the process. Degrowth would require wealth redistribution and reduction in global economy size to ensure environmental justice for those that are marginalized by capitalistic systems. Some degrowth practices would include reducing work hours, localizing economies, growing food in neighborhood farms, dismantling the fast fashion industry, and recycling more. While degrowth would have an impact on the global scale, on a smaller scale, it would only require participation in the countries that consume the highest amount of global resources.
Though the coronavirus crisis presents many challenges in the fight towards climate justice, it can definitely be a cultural reset. With clear skies in some of the most polluted regions in the world, we’ve now had a preview of some of the benefits of global cooperation. The fact that clear skies make news headlines worldwide should speak to how numb we have become to pollution.
Whether countries decide to start with carbon taxes, clean renewable energy, or a shift from consumer culture, it is the responsibility of governments to subsidize companies’ green technology adoptions in order to make clean lifestyles an accessible fixture for all. Global climate action shouldn’t be a far-fetched idea anymore, and by sharing proper education and connection to the COVID-19 crisis, members of the climate movement may bridge the gap for many who once questioned the feasibility of climate activists’ efforts. Without global cooperation and economic commitment to the planet, all other endeavors will be in vain.
Photo Credits: Patrick Hendry, Unsplash
Article originally published in Gen Rise Media.
Comments