The latest Economic Survey has stirred a debate by suggesting a departure from the widely accepted 1.5°C target for limiting global temperature rise. Instead, it advocates a shift towards a unique, if not out of the box, approach that prioritises adaptation strategies over traditional mitigation efforts. The stance stems from the recognition that the impacts of climate change are already manifesting and the likelihood of limiting global warming to 1.5°C is rapidly diminishing. These arguments are well established and have long been prevalent in the developing world.
However, it remains unclear whether the stance presented in the Economic Survey signifies a genuine policy change or is merely an academic perspective. If widely adopted, this approach could challenge the existing global consensus on climate action. The core framework of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) and voluntary contributions, which have played a crucial role in climate negotiations, might have to undergo significant changes that may unravel a hard-worked global consensus. Such a shift could have broad implications, affecting not only India’s domestic policies but also the global strategy.
The 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro marked a pivotal moment in global environmental governance, leading to a consensus that global warming must be limited to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. Scientific evidence shows surpassing this threshold could lead to severe outcomes such as extreme weather events, rising sea levels and loss of biodiversity. This laid the groundwork for future international climate policies.
The Paris Agreement was another crucial milestone, galvanising nations to enhance their climate commitments through nationally determined contributions. At the heart of the agreement is the CBDR principle, which acknowledges that while all nations share the responsibility for addressing climate change, they have different levels of obligation based on their historical emissions and current capacities. This allows developing countries like India to commit to climate action while still prioritising developmental needs, given that India’s per-person primary energy consumption in 2023 was 27.3 gigajoules (GJ), compared to 120 GJ in China and 277.3 GJ in the US.
Global implications of India’s stance
India’s focus on adaptation is rooted in the recognition that developing countries are especially susceptible to the impacts of climate change. With the country experiencing growing risks from extreme weather events such as unseasonal rains and cloudbursts, the necessity for adaptive measures is clear.
Nevertheless, moving the emphasis away from mitigation could have considerable repercussions for India’s international obligations. India’s decision to prioritise adaptation could be perceived as a retreat from its earlier commitments, potentially undermining global efforts to combat climate change and perhaps upending aeons of torturous negotiations that have gone into crafting the international climate covenants.
The new approach may have extensive global consequences. As the world’s third-largest emitter of greenhouse gases, India’s climate policies are closely watched by other countries, particularly those in the Global South. If India shifts its focus away from mitigation, it could influence others to do the same, potentially weakening global climate action. Such shift away from aggressive mitigation strategies would come at a time decisive measures are becoming more critical. It could prompt a reevaluation of the roles and responsibilities of major emitters, affecting the dynamics of international climate negotiations.
The call for climate change mitigation has evolved into a demand for reparative action, where high-income countries are urged to address their historical and ongoing contributions to the crisis. This approach aligns with the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, which promotes climate justice by acknowledging the disproportionate historical responsibility for the climate crisis. It underscores that wealthier nations, having benefited from high-emission activities, have a greater duty to lead in mitigating these impacts. This responsibility includes not only reducing their own emissions but also assisting vulnerable countries in transitioning to low-emission development pathways.
International cooperation and technology transfer are essential due to the global scale and nature of the climate challenge. A responsibility the industrialised West or the Global North is willing to pay lip service to, but is unwilling to walk the talk—especially when climate denialists start taking centre-stage in Western political establishments.
Navigating future of climate policy
It’s important to understand that adaptation and mitigation are complementary rather than mutually exclusive. A balanced strategy is vital for ensuring long-term climate resilience. While adaptation measures can offer immediate relief, they alone may not be sufficient if robust mitigation efforts are lacking, as future climate impacts could exceed the capacity for adaptation.
Additionally, the 1.5°C target functions as a key benchmark for climate action, offering a clear and measurable goal to strive towards. Weakening this target could result in a loss of momentum in global climate initiatives, with significant repercussions for both the environment and human societies.
The challenge lies in finding a path that balances these priorities, ensuring immediate human development needs are met while also safeguarding the planet. As the world faces the intricate challenges of climate change, it is vital to uphold a cohesive global strategy that acknowledges the interdependence of mitigation and adaptation.
India’s appeal for a shift in focus serves as a reminder that climate policy must be adaptable to the varying needs of different nations. However, any change must be carefully balanced to ensure it does not weaken the global consensus meticulously developed through decades of negotiations.
The future of global climate governance depends on nations’ ability to collaborate, even as they follow different paths toward a shared objective. In managing this delicate equilibrium, international cooperation and dialogue will be crucial. The stakes are high, and the decisions made in the coming years will shape the future of our planet.
As India forges its path, the world will be watching closely, aware of the need to balance adaptation and mitigation in the global battle against climate change. The shifting climate narrative demands that leaders stay engaged and flexible, creating a space where diverse strategies can coexist and contribute to a sustainable future.
(Views are personal)
(manishtewari01@gmail.com)
Manish Tewari | Lawyer, MP and former I&B minister