I have recently been participating in a series
of webinars examining the nature and scope of media coverage of the climate
crisis with closer focus on the inequities that have marked its occurrence,
impacts and the measures to minimise its effects.
In my view, even in the face of a pandemic,
this remains the survival issue of our time, especially for small island states
and low-lying coastal regions of the developing world.
In fact, the lessons of the climate crisis
persist as precursors to the pandemic challenge through the convergence of
science, public policy, domestic and international politics, and the work of
mass media in exploring their true meaning for our societies.
This is no newfound concern of mine or of the
Caribbean journalistic community. Seventeen years ago, I edited the Climate
Change Handbook for Caribbean Journalists published by the Mainstreaming
Adaptation to Climate Change (MACC) Project of Caricom – now the Caribbean
Community Climate Change Centre (CCCCC) based in Belize.
It was a collaboration involving journalists
and climate scientists and was among the first resources of its kind globally.
Then, last year, as an initiative entirely
conceived by the Association of Caribbean Media Workers (ACM), with support
from UNESCO, together with scientists Dr Dale Rankine and Steve Maximay, I
co-authored Reporting the Climate Crisis – A Handbook for Caribbean
Journalists.
Yesterday’s launch of Climate Justice:
Journalistic Perspectives Workshop by the Media Institute of the Caribbean
(MIC) signified an even deeper dive into the subject of climate change and its
accompanying crises. This is particularly so when you consider the inherent
inequities I mentioned earlier.
It is also absolutely relevant to the current
challenge of pandemic management in that science is often challenged by a toxic
concoction combining baseless scepticism and campaigns of disinformation.
In the process, there is a tragic devaluing of
the impact of unjust antecedents. For, not unlike climate change, the pandemic
has had uneven global impacts. From situationally specific pre-conditions, to
access to the tools of correction, to the distribution of costs associated with
varying levels of responsibility.
So, today, while less than a quarter of the
population of the planet consumes over 80% of its national resources and
generates over 90% of its pollution and waste, the remaining 75% are bearing
the heaviest comparative burdens of adaptation and mitigation.
This raises the question of geo-political
justice, including the distribution of liabilities, as the world now attempts
to slow, if not halt, the prospect of ecological disaster.
This raises the question of geo-political
justice, including the distribution of liabilities, as the world now attempts
to slow, if not halt, the prospect of ecological disaster.
Yes, there remain those who are either
suspicious of the doomsday scenarios being projected or doubtful about the link
with human activity. But as is the case with COVID-19, it is best to go with
the tested views of the vast majority of real scientists.
If the 2021 UN Climate Change Conference
(COP26) meant anything, it is that the transition from the status quo to
dramatic reduction in carbon emissions – the Caribbean’s rallying cry has been
“1.5(%) to stay alive” – will require adjustments that stand in contradiction
with the developmental aspirations of many of our countries.
In our region, T&T, Suriname, and emerging
energy giant, Guyana, are facing the long-term prospect of economies
constructed on pillars whose value it is the concerted effort of the global
community to diminish. It is estimated in some quarters, for instance, that in
order for the world to meet emissions targets, oil production must be reduced
by up to 90% over the next decade.
The measure used to describe the balance
between emissions and captures is “net zero.” To me, this also signals
prospective anomalies in the process of determining who cuts how much.
I remember sitting on an airline flight with a
former energy adviser to the government of T&T many years ago and asked
him: “What do you think will happen when all the oil and gas goes away?” (There
was an estimate at that time of about 30 years probable oil reserves). He
responded: “Don’t worry about that. For as long as the planet is viable, there
will be oil to be found.”
That was just about 30 years ago. Today, the
question has to be revised to focus on our share of a burden placed on the
shoulders of the world by a few. Steve Maximay talks all the time about a “just
transition” to accompany the amelioration of the climate crisis. That appears
to be the more important question of today.
