[ad_1]
The world’s richest 10%, those who earn more than $ 38,000 (NZ $ 59,000) a year, are responsible for 52% of all greenhouse gases emitted in 1990 and 2015, according to a new Oxfam report.
A whopping 15 percent of all emissions came from the activities of the highest paid 1 percent, people with an annual income of $ 109,000 (NZ $ 170,000) or more. That’s more than the entire carbon footprint of the poorest half of humanity. The lowest income group of 3.1 billion citizens is responsible for only 7 percent of the world’s greenhouse gas production.
It can be a shock to find out that you are in the category of the richest 10 percent in the world, said Jo Spratt, Oxfam’s Director of Communications and Advocacy. “It really highlights how little poor people around the world do every day.”
READ MORE:
* Airlines blame Covid-19 for delaying climate commitments
* We have wasted too much time, warns the UN in a report on the emissions gap
* Huge contribution to New Zealand’s climate change
The Confronting Carbon Inequality report, produced by Oxfam and the Stockholm Environment Institute, found that global emissions grew by 60% between 1990 and 2015. But once again, the rich made a disproportionate contribution.
Between 1990 and 2015, the carbon footprint of the poorest half of the world grew by 6%. During this time, the footprint of the richest 10 percent increased by 46 percent.
Between these two groups, the “middle 40 per cent”, a group earning between US $ 6,000 (NZ $ 9,000) and US $ 38,000 per year, increased their emissions by 49% in 25 years. . University of Otago economist Dennis Wesselbaum suspects this is due to the emerging middle class in countries like China and India.
Although the ultra-rich have contributed the most to climate change, the effects are and will be increasingly felt by lower-income populations.
In the Pacific, homes and farmland will be inundated by rising sea levels and increasing flooding, Spratt said. Poorer communities and countries will be less able to fund physical protections or initiatives to move to safer ground.
“We are already seeing in the Pacific that it is a struggle to cultivate … With the acidification of the ocean, it is more difficult to obtain shellfish and fish, sources of protein.”
123RF
The richest 10 percent produce more than half of the world’s carbon pollution, which is why Oxfam is proposing luxury taxes.
The report highlights that poorer neighborhoods tend to have fewer green spaces, which can mitigate increased heat. Consequently, these areas can experience temperatures up to 7 degrees Celsius higher than other neighborhoods in the same city.
Due to the huge carbon footprint of the wealthy, the Oxfam report suggests policy measures targeting this group, including taxes or bans on “luxury carbon” such as SUVs, business class flights and private jets.
“We’re suggesting targeting luxury items, so it’s not people, it’s consumerism,” Spratt said. “[These] contribute a lot to global carbon emissions and only the richest people can afford [them], but they are unnecessary. “
Although individual action is important, only governments have the power to impose measures capable of drastically reducing carbon, Spratt said.
“We need radical action. The report tells us that if we continue as we do, emitting at the same speeds, we will exceed 1.5 degrees Celsius. [of warming] in just 10 years. The consequences of that are tremendously dire. “
Although a luxury carbon tax seemed like a simple method to tackle climate change and inequality, Wesselbaum cautioned that such a policy could be challenging.
“It is possible, if you have a carbon tax to address inequality, in theory. In practice, I think it is very complicated. It may be the best we have. But it’s not as simple as saying: let’s tax private jets. And problem solved, ”he said.
A key decision would be the amount or flat rate of tax on high-carbon luxury goods and services, Wesselbaum said.
“Germany has increased the carbon tax on airline tickets. The increase for long haul flights is £ 17 or NZ $ 25 … If I fly from Germany to New Zealand for thousands of dollars, does $ 25 make a difference? I would say no, ”he said. “The question is: what is the correct tax size? I don’t know what the answer is. “
The Oxfam report notes that global emissions have decreased this year due to travel restrictions put in place to slow the spread of Covid-19. However, Spratt said this is just a temporary hiatus.
“We have to do it this year after year,” he said. “While it has been absolutely terrible, the coronavirus pandemic has created an opportunity for us to really think about how we want to live as a global human society and how we can restart our economies.”
