Hello Mehdi. I am a social sciences researcher at CNRS and at the International Centre for Research on Environment and Development (CIRED). I study international policies that could end climate change and poverty, and conduct surveys among populations in different countries to understand how they would be received.
To end global warming, the safest approach is to cap emissions at the international level, with a cap that decreases each year in line with the Paris Agreement's climate objectives. The European Union is implementing this at its own scale, by generalizing the European carbon market. The idea is to extend this system worldwide, and to distribute the revenues generated in an equitable way. In practice, emission permits would be auctioned to fossil fuel companies at the source of CO2 emissions, within the limit of the annual cap. The revenues generated would be distributed in the form of an equal transfer to all human beings. This global basic income, which would amount to €50/month, would lift 700 million people who live on less than €2 per day out of extreme poverty.
For three reasons: moral, pragmatic, and political. Morally, I care about human well-being: that is why I care about climate change. For the same reason, I want to end extreme poverty, which is rightly the first Sustainable Development Goal adopted at the UN. It would seem absurd to me for humanity to fight climate change without tackling poverty, which is equally a global problem. Furthermore, there is climate injustice to repair: the poorest people are also the most vulnerable to the consequences of climate change, yet they have barely contributed to greenhouse gas emissions. Pragmatically, Southern countries do not have the means to decarbonize without financial transfers from Northern countries. Politically, these countries are actually demanding such transfers in order to increase their climate ambition. For a country like India to develop sustainably, rich countries must help it achieve its priority goal: the eradication of poverty.
Financially, Northern countries would indeed be losers, because the increases in fossil energy costs would be higher than the basic income received, for people with a carbon footprint above the global average. Thus, Northern countries would contribute approximately 1% of their income in North-South transfers. But this doesn't prevent these populations from supporting the Global Plan for Climate. Even after being told they would lose about €20 per month, 76% of Europeans support the Plan. There is even a majority of support in the United States: 54% of Americans support the Plan after learning they would lose $85 per month. It is the sincere support of the majority, observed in surveys I conducted on representative samples of the population in 20 countries, that convinced me this Plan was politically possible. In fact, surveys show that citizens overwhelmingly prefer a global climate measure over a national measure, because they are willing to lose a few dozen euros per month if they are sure the measure will end climate change and extreme poverty.
Convincing governments is another matter entirely, and I think some of them (in Russia, Saudi Arabia, and even in the United States) will not be able to be convinced. So be it, the Plan can be implemented by willing countries, provided they are sufficiently numerous. The Plan could be implemented by Northern countries whose populations widely support it (such as the EU) and by Southern countries (which would be financially gainers or at least not losers); two-thirds of global emissions would thus be covered, and positive momentum would be generated.
Now, how do we convince governments to rally behind such a plan? We must talk to them and explain that the population is ready to accept such a measure. This is what I decided to do after discovering the results of my surveys, by founding the advocacy organization Global Redistribution Advocates. We meet with ministerial advisors, parliamentarians and diplomats from around the world, and most are receptive to the idea. So far, no country dares to officially support this initiative, but we are working on it.
The main gain, which is difficult to quantify, is a climate stabilized at a still livable level. Morocco would also be a financial winner, but only slightly, since Moroccans have on average a carbon footprint only slightly below the global average. According to my estimates, Moroccans would gain on average $17 per year by 2030. Over the entire 21st century, transfers to Morocco would amount to 0.1% of its GDP, as you can see on this map.
To learn more, you can:
- Buy the paperback or read it for free online
- Follow the advocacy organization Global Redistribution Advocates
- Watch a video that presents this plan in more detail
- Follow Adrien on social media
Interview conducted by Mehdi Mikou