As we struggle to respond to the challenge of Covid-19, recent articles in North American media point to an increasing concern that governments are not doing enough to prepare for climate change.
Government needs to act on climate change
Linda Solomon Wood, an innovator, entrepreneur, award-winning journalist, CEO of Observer Media Group, and founder and editor-in-chief of the National Observer, offers the opinion that Canada's government can and must boldly lead the way in a $100 billion climate plan.
We can all write letters to our MPs, demand more action from the federal government now, for a start. We depend upon the government to do the right thing, to create a secure future and to protect public health. Protecting the lives of Canadians is crucial and, like Covid-19, climate change mitigation is urgent, too. As climate chaos intensifies and COVID-19 rates swing upwards, trustworthy journalism is more important than ever. As we watch the West Coast go up in flames, let's be sure the sight of smoke doesn't blind us. Let's be proactive and do whatever we can to protect the earth's climate, reduce global warming to bring about real and meaningful change.1
Seth Klein, adjunct professor with Simon Fraser University’s Urban Studies program and the former BC director of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, explains why inequality must be linked to climate emergency action.
these issues are actually deeply intertwined. Lower income people and countries are more vulnerable to the impacts of the climate crisis. Those with higher incomes and wealth have greater GHG emissions. Conversely, many climate action policies impact lower-income people harder, and thus these impacts must be mitigated.... It is only by linking these issues that we win over and mobilize broad popular support. We cannot ask people to separate their fears about the climate crisis from the other affordability anxieties, economic pressures and systemic crises they face. At a very basic level, inequality undermines trust that “we are all in this together.”2
Top 1% Income Shares
Source: World Inequality Database: Paris School of Economics; for Canada after 2011: Statistics Canada: 11-10-0055-01. Notes: Pre-1950 UK data is limited to only some data points. World Inequality Data based on pre-tax market income. Statistics Canada Data also based on pre-tax market income (the sum of earnings, net investment income, and private retirement income before tax).In polling I commissioned for my book, research from Abacus data in the summer of 2019, affordability was named as the top concern of Canadians, just ahead of climate change. That only stands to reason; it is a more immediate concern to most people. Hence the powerful need to link these issues. When we do so, the appeal is dramatic, far surpassing the levels of support for any one political party. As the Abacus poll revealed, when Canadians were given a short explanation of the Green New Deal—describing it as an ambitious vision for tackling the twin crises of climate change and inequality—it proved immensely popular, supported by 72% of Canadians surveyed. Another key finding from the Abacus poll: The more a bold and transformative climate plan is seen as linked to an ambitious plan to tackle inequality, economic insecurity, poverty and job creation, the more likely people are to support it.2
Justin Worland reports for Time that Republicans claim addressing climate change is too expensive but most Americans aren’t buying it according to a new poll.
Support Green energyThe report—shared exclusively with TIME—relies on a survey of 999 American adults between May and August and shows broad U.S. support for a range of climate policies. Significant majorities support tax incentives, carbon pricing and regulations as means to reduce emissions. More than 80% of Americans believe the U.S. should offer tax incentives for utilities that make power with renewable energy; more than 80% support key U.S. commitments under the Paris Agreement; and nearly two-thirds support a requirement for all cars to get at least 55 miles per gallon by 2025. “It’s not like 52-48, or that kind of thing,” says Krosnick. “There are clear leanings.”... most climate scientists and economists agree that leaving climate change unchecked will create a wide range of environmental and social harms that will significantly hinder the global economy.3
Support for an increase in government action on addressing the climate emergency is being reflected in polling data from Canada and the United States. This action must consider the impact of climate change action on those who may face economic decline as a consequence of our transition.
References
No comments:
Post a Comment