Author: Sheetal Varma, Thakur Ramnarayan College of Law
To the point
Earth’s climate has been getting warmer, greenhouse gases are the cause of climate change, the numbers of mangroves are disappearing because of urban expansion. Our planet is experiencing record floods, droughts, earthquakes, heat waves, extreme cold temperatures, storms which are faced by people who are already suffering from poverty, food crisis, ill-health, illiteracy etc. So, there are various questions that arise in the minds of the people. Who is responsible for all of this? Are humans at fault? Is climate change a political issue?
Abstract
The core assertion of this abstract revolves around the escalating peril posed by climate change. They are not merely environmental but they are deeply intertwined with democratic governance. The need for global cooperation, equitable resource distribution, and effective climate policies present a significant test for democratic institutions worldwide.
It is hereby stipulated that there is a demonstrable nexus between the climate change and the mortality rates. It already causes 40% of heat related deaths worldwide (at least 15,000 people have died because of heat wave in Europe in 2022). Scientists at NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies recently documented that May 2024 was the warmest May on record. As of June 19, 2024, the Northern Hemisphere’s temperature was 1.1 degrees Celsius (1.9 Fahrenheit) above normal as derived from Climate Reanalyzer’s meteorological analysis. Further exacerbated by droughts and floods that leads to spreading of new diseases and profoundly impacting the psychological well-being of the populace. Moreover, we cannot ignore that it also greatly effects the ecological equilibrium and welfare of animal population is also under threat and wildfires can wipe out the entire indigenous wildlife population.
Use of Legal Jargon
This whole issue focuses the core mental of environmental democracy that emphasizes transparency, public participation in the formulation of policies using the bottom to top approach, justice in environmental decision-making and addressing environmental crisis. It also highlights the need for inclusive governance. The Indian Constitution casts a duty on the state as well as citizens to protect and improve the environment. The judiciary through its interpretive approach has established the right to a healthy environment as a foundational human right, now regarded as an integral to the Right to Life under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Indian Judiciary has made extensive use of the Constitutional provisions and developed a new environmental jurisprudence in India. Several International and national instruments address climate change and its intersection with governance. The notion of sustainable development began with the coinage of the term in the Cocoyac Declaration. Its foundational principles, however, truly advanced from the Stockholm Declaration of Human Rights. It marked a watershed in international relations. It asserted that humans both generate and transform the environment. It advocated for joint endeavors by governments and the public to safeguard and improve the human habitat. Principle 18 incorporates the “precautionary principle” which provides that science and technology as part of their contribution to economic and social development must be applied to identify, avoid and control the environmental risks and find solutions. Principle 22 focuses on Polluters Pays Principle which provides that states should co-operate and develop further the international law regarding the liability and compensation for the victim of pollution and environmental damage caused by activities. The United Nations framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) which was negotiated at the UN Conference and Environmental Development held at Rio de Janeiro which is also known as Earth Summit. Acknowledging the threat of climate change and seeks to stabilize the concentration of greenhouse gases. Kyoto Protocol that reached a historic accord calling for mandatory cuts in emission of green-house gas and introduced carbon trading. As a part of the UNFCCC’s progression, the Paris Agreement represented a crucial stage. The UN Convention divided the world groups into two which were based on developed who need to cut green-house gas and developing country which need not do the same. The Paris Agreement which deals with greenhouse gases, emissions, mitigation, finance. The UN General Assembly adopted the 2030 Development Agenda which is based on 5 Ps which is People, Planet, Prosperity, Peace and Partnership. Building upon the foundation of Millennium Development Goals, these sustainable development objectives are structured into four key sections that are i: A political declaration, ii: a set of seventeen Sustainable Development Goals accompanied by 169 targets, iii: methods of implementation, iv: A structured framework for a subsequent follow up and evaluating the agenda. It is further complemented by Addis Ababa Action Agenda.
The Proof
Climate change is making wildfires worse:
Climate change is the primary reason in the increase wildfire season at length, increased wildfire frequency and burned area. These fires pose significant threats to property, livelihoods, and human well-being. But, beyond the human and societal impacts, it also influences the Earth’s climate. Forests in particular serve as a vast carbon sinks. When incinerated they significantly discharge considerable quantities of carbon dioxide, which accelerates the climate change.
For instance, the August Complex Fire, fueled by extreme heat and prolonged drought, ravaged over a million acres across Northern California. And then the January 7, 2025 Los Angeles County Wildfire which burned more than 23,000 acres.
The annum 2021 witnessed an upward deviation in the US mean surface temperature which ascended by roughly 2.5 degrees Fahrenheit. Projections indicate a further increase in 3 to 12 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100, leading to more frequent and severe heatwaves. Both the West and the Midwest experienced intense heatwaves, and critical water resources like the Colorado River reservoir, along with Lake Powell and Lake Mead, reached record low levels, triggering water restrictions. Conversely, the country also saw major flooding in various cities and regions, from Death Valley to the mountainous areas of eastern Kentucky.
Are humans at fault?
Anthropogenic climate change is intrinsically linked to the release of greenhouse gases, stemming from a vast array of human endeavours. These activities are so widespread that they touch nearly every facet of daily existence, from the heating and illumination of our residences and workplaces, to agricultural practices, various forms of land utilization, transportation, and certainly industrial manufacturing processes. In recent decades, the most significant surge in global greenhouse gas emissions attributable to human activity has originated from energy generation, commute systems and industrial sectors.
Democracy’s Role in Addressing the Climate Crisis:
The resolution of the climate crisis hinges on the capacity of the democratic nations to substantially decrease their carbon emissions in the forthcoming years. Climate change is already influencing democratic governance by affecting food availability, igniting conflicts, straining water resources, prompting migration, and exacerbating natural disasters, among other ramifications. Furthermore, climate change serves as a critical test of how effectively democracies can collaborate and collectively address global challenges facing humanity. It is imperative for democracies to devise and implement robust strategies to tackle climate change, thereby meeting the needs of both present and future generations.
Our contemporary society operates within a framework deeply reliant on carbon. This reliance is partly fueled by technological advancements that deliver numerous conveniences at low costs: readily available electricity, personal mobility, inexpensive consumer goods, and comfortable heating and cooling. Governments further foster this carbon dependency by offering seemingly straightforward pathways to lower carbon outcomes, often without adequately informing the public about the true implications. Consequently, for the most part, there appears to be a general disinterest as long as consumer goods and services remain consistently available.
Democracy, by its very nature, isn’t structured to easily confront long-term challenges. Its typical processes, characterized by short-sighted decision-making and a tendency towards inconsistent policies, are often hampered by ineffective accountability mechanisms. Furthermore, the political landscape frequently sees financial interests undermining efforts to combat climate change. Democracy often prioritizes immediate concerns, making it particularly vulnerable when the benefits of climate action, which often manifest in the distant future, are outweighed by immediate costs.
The democratic framework within a nation significantly influences its capacity to address climate change. This is because democracy itself facilitates the emergence of effective responses to climate change. Without novel approaches and a robust system of democratic governance, it becomes challenging, if not impossible, for democracies to adequately tackle the complex issue of climate change.
Climate disruptions and related emergencies could themselves pose a threat to democratic systems, particularly in regions where sustainable mitigation and adaptation strategies are not yet established as a viable option. The likelihood of climate changes materializing in the first instance is reduced through mitigation efforts, which enhance the capacity of individuals, societies, and natural systems to adapt to the impacts of climate change.
Effectively tackling climate change presents a greater challenge for democracy in terms of mitigation compared to adaptation. Mitigation, within a democratic context, often requires interventions that are distant in both time and physical space. This makes it more demanding to garner support, as climate impacts are frequently perceived as remote. Therefore, inspiring collective altruism rather than relying on self-interest and community engagement becomes crucial in the face of climate change.
Democracy also faces erosion due to the combined forces of mass affluence, consumerism, and globalization. These factors diminish national capacity and resolve in the face of powerful international market forces. Globalization also constrains national politics, narrowing the scope of policy choices and identities presented by major parties. This can lead to a perceived lack of robust political leadership and a failure to address pressing issues.
Engaging in participatory and democratic decision-making is more complex and labor-intensive, especially when contrasted with Western consumer culture. Democracies often struggle with inefficiencies and stagnation in their current forms. Public support can wane when facing long-term societal shifts, such as reducing reliance on fossil fuels, or confronting challenges like climate change, where scientific uncertainty and a broad public involvement are inherent aspects.
Addressing climate change necessitates a coordinated global response. However, the slow progress in intergovernmental climate negotiations highlights this difficulty. While national innovation is crucial for climate solutions, the notion that democracy alone can achieve sustainable development seems insufficient. Local-level action, lacking clearly defined mechanisms, offers limited assurance of integrated approaches to environmental protection. Furthermore, national or local efforts alone, without a broader temporal and geographical scope, are unlikely to foster the transformative change needed. Coordinated actions involving individuals and communities are essential for the earth system as a whole to effectively respond.
Addressing climate change presents significant political hurdles that persist across different governance structures.
The perceived legitimacy of ruling groups is often tied to economic growth. Climate action can be viewed as an impediment to this growth, as it necessitates constraints that could hinder economic activity, thereby creating a challenge for the climate.
Powerful interest groups, particularly those tied to fossil fuels, wield considerable influence, often obstructing efforts to address climate issues.
A fundamental tenet of democracy asserts that every individual or nation should have an equitable voice. If this holds true, it becomes evident that the global majority – those contributing least to carbon emissions – should not bear the brunt of climate change’s adverse effects. Instead, the minority responsible for the bulk of emissions should be held accountable and compelled to contribute whatever is necessary for a global shift towards renewable energy, thereby preserving the crucial 1.5-degree temperature limit.
Case Laws
1: Fridays For Future Estonia v. Eesti Energia (2020).
The Tartu Administrative Court allowed Fridays For Future Estonia to challenge a permit granted to Eesti Energia for a new shale oil plant. The Fridays For Future argued that the municipality improperly assessed the plant’s climate impact, violating the Paris Agreement and the EU’s climate neutrality goal. The lower court dismissed it by stating that it didn’t cover emissions from oil production or future building impacts. However, the Tartu Circuit Court acknowledged potential future impacts suspending the permit in May 2021 before reinstating it after 2 months finding no immediate harm. On October 11, 2023, the Supreme Court affirmed the decision with primarily focusing on climate arguments and for the first time the Court declared climate change mitigation a constitutional duty, requiring Estonia to contribute proportionally to the Paris Agreement’s goal of limiting global temperature increase to below 2 degrees, ideally 1.5 degrees. Moreover, the court mandated municipality to re-evaluate the environmental impact assessment before deciding on a new construction permit.
Conclusion
Climate change is not the responsibility of one person or single nation but it’s a global problem that requires cooperation of each and every individual living on the planet. So, everybody has to work on it together. It is true that there are numerous shortcomings of participatory model of democracy and neither it is feasible or practical to have negative approach towards development process of the country or the society but that does not mean that we should avoid the environment. The society have to prosper but not at the cost of the environment and in the similar the environment shall have to be protected but not at the cost of development of the society. Thus, sustainable development is the only answer and administrative actions ought to be proceeded in accordance with it.
FAQS
1: What are the inherent difficulties encountered by democratic systems in effectively mitigating climate change?
Answer: Democracies face challenges such as short-term biased decision-making, policy inconsistency, weak accountability, and the influence of interests adverse to fighting climate change due to money in politics. Democracy often shuns long-term solutions, as the costs present action fall on current voters while benefits accrue to an unknown future.
2: Why is effective mitigation more challenging for democracies than adaptation?
Answer: Mitigation within a democracy, especially when climate impacts seem distant, is more demanding of people’s altruism. Adaptation, on the other hand, can appeal to self-interest and community engagement in the face of clear and present dangers at the local level.
3: How does globalization affect a democracy’s ability to address climate change?
Answer: Globalization can hollow out democracy through mass affluence and consumerism, and it can narrow the effective range of policy options offered by political parties, making national politics less significant. This can hinder a nation’s capacity and will to go against international market forces.
4: What are some examples of non-political actors stepping in to address climate change?
Answer: As government’s fail to stop climate change, other players beyond typical political boundaries are stepping in. Examples include movement like FridaysForFuture, which urges the government to take more radical action. Activists have also engaged in direct action, such as throwing soup on a Van Gogh painting or supergluing their hands to it, to draw attention to the climate crisis.
