Speech by Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP to the Institute of Development Studies, Sussex University, "Climate Change - poverty's new ally" - 24 April 2008
Thank you for inviting me to give this Sussex Development Lecture. I am delighted to be back!
And can I take this opportunity to thank you for everything you do to further our understanding of global poverty and what we can do about it.
I am delighted to hear that the IDS and its partners at Sussex University and in developing countries will soon be launching a Research Centre on climate change and development.
I want to speak to you today about climate change and development – two challenges which bring together the global and historic struggles facing humankind.
Two challenges which confront our world with a clear choice.
Two challenges which are bound together so tightly that we must either succeed in meeting both or we will fail to in both.
I’ll begin with the relationship between climate change and development.
Unchecked climate change poses a grave threat to many people’s prospect of a better life.
In his review of the Economics of Climate Change Nick Stern argued strongly that developing countries are especially vulnerable to climate change because of their geographic exposure, low incomes and reliance on natural resources.
And the forecasts are stark.
By 2035 the Himalayan glaciers which help to provide water for 3/4 billion people could disappear.
By 2050 there could be as many as 200 million people forced from their homes because of rising sea levels, heavier floods and more intense droughts.
By 2080 an extra 600 million people could be affected by malnutrition.
A future in which stable food production would be threatened. Disease more likely. Wildfires more widespread. And daily hardships increased.
How can development succeed in these circumstances?
Just as war was poverty’s greatest ally in the 20th century, so climate change could be in the 21st.
What is more, climate change itself could be a herald of conflict.
Just yesterday the Royal United Services Institute issued a report arguing that uncontrolled climate change will have security implications of a magnitude similar to the two World Wars but which will last for centuries.
And they are not alone in thinking this.
Javier Solana’s report to the European Council last month identified a series of potential security threats, including:
- Conflict over resources such as arable land, food and fish stocks, and – not politics – but fresh water
- ‘Environmentally-induced migration’ on a huge scale as human beings seek somewhere else to live
- And collapsing failed states which can no longer meet the needs of their citizens
But what will be the flashpoints? Where might these conflicts arise?:
- In North Africa and the Sahel degraded soil could lead to a loss of 75% of arable land
- In the Middle East water supply systems are under significant strain. In Israel the water supply could drop by 60% over the course of this century
- Kyrgyzstan has lost over 1000 glaciers in the last four decades
- And of course in Bangladesh 35 million people live within the coastal floodplain.
The UK is alive to the security implications of climate change – in fact Margaret Beckett, as Foreign Secretary, was the first person to raise the issue at the Security Council.
And if these predictions seem outlandish or overly pessimistic, then just consider for a moment the situation today.
The UN estimates that all but one of its emergency appeals in 2007 were climate related.
The current conflict in Darfur has been exacerbated by shifts in rainfall which have brought conflict for grazing land between nomadic and settled herders.
The World Health Organisation estimates that 150,000 people are already dying each year from climate change. 150,000 people each year.
That’s the equivalent of Brighton slipping into the sea this year, French Guiana next year and Jersey, Gibraltar and Tuvalu the one after that.
And I have seen the impact that climate change is already having: in Bangladesh, in Malawi, in Sudan, and in Somalia where as Secretary of State for International Development, I visited a place called Wajid.
Eleven thousand people had moved there because it had stopped raining where they had been. Their homes were the most pitiful shelters I have seen in my life - made of turned over twigs covered in scraps of clothing and plastic taken from the town rubbish tip. They were waiting. Waiting for rain.
And so as we must act to tackle climate change in the long-term, we must also adapt to the inevitable changes which are already in the system – the problems that people are struggling with now.
To successfully adapt to climate change however we need better to understand when, where and on what scale these effects will occur. We need better climate information. DfID’s Chief Scientist, Sir Gordon Conway, has pointed out that global networks of weather stations provide poor coverage of Africa. So we are supporting efforts to develop these systems.
And there is also a need to improve scenario planning. What are developing economies going to look like in 30 years? Exactly how will climate change affect economic growth? What challenges will it bring?
So development must build in adaptation to climate change. And as my esteemed former colleagues at DfID will tell you, development provides the best sort of adaptation – strong institutions, education, health, infrastructure and a diversified economy.
In this way development can provide resilience and the flexibility to deal with economic shocks, natural disasters and other adverse global trends.
And this brings me to the current food crisis. A crisis which seriously threatens to undermine the progress we have made in tackling poverty in the developing world.
25,000 people will die today from hunger-related causes – including a child every 5 seconds. Food prices are the highest they’ve been since the Second World War and the cost of rice has hit an all-time high. Haiti, India, Cameroon and Mexico have seen riots. Last month President Mubarak ordered the Egyptian army to start baking bread to cover serious shortages, and there are reports that in the Philippines hoarding rice now carries a life sentence.
And we are not immune in the UK. New research suggests that families are having to spend almost £800 more a year on their groceries.
So, as you will know, the Prime Minister convened a summit to respond to the crisis earlier this week. Sitting around the cabinet table we heard the evidence of experts – from scientists to producers. And Douglas Alexander announced that the UK would be providing an extra £30 million to support the World Food Programme and an additional £25 million for Ethiopia’s national safety net programme. I’ve seen that programme working and there’s no doubt in my mind that cash transfers work well.
But of course, it’s long-term action we need.
This ‘silent tsunami’ as Josette Sheeran has described it is not solely a consequence of climate change – rising prosperity, biofuels, and future speculation – all have contributed.
Biofuels are intended as way of promoting energy independence and tackling climate change. But are they better than what they replace? Are they cost-effective? And what impact do they have on commodity prices and on the environment?
The question has fairly been asked – is it right to use food to produce fuel when people are starving?
I am acutely aware of this conflict. So we are already acting to examine our support of biofuels – looking closely at their impact on the environment. And if this review shows a need for change then we will change in the UK and we will push for change in the EU biofuels target.
So how can development succeed if all these threats become the reality? Especially when you consider that by 2050 we will be sharing this small and fragile planet with another 2.5 billion people?
We are now past the halfway point towards the Millennium Development Goals. But we remain a long way from meeting them.
Indeed, they won’t be achieved if climate change is not tackled.
And we cannot tackle climate change unless we pursue development in a sustainable way.
So we have to do the two together.
Ban Ki-moon is clear on this. He has argued that it will be crucial for sustainable development.
And there is an issue of justice here. Helping to eradicate poverty is about social justice. But so is tacking climate change.
By capping emissions we are effectively saying that carbon is a finite resource. So how do we share it out? At present there is an imbalance in both emissions and risks. Research by Oxfam has found that the average Somali is about 100 times more likely to die from events caused by climate change than the average American, despite emitting roughly 16,000 times less carbon.
The developed world grew rich through burning fossil fuels, which in turn caused global warming. So it is our absolute responsibility to tackle this issue and to help developing countries to do so while not undermining their growth.
And growth is essential for development.
High and sustained growth in successful Asian countries has led to the greatest number of people being lifted out of poverty in human history.
Because of this, the number of people living on less than a dollar a day dropped over the last 20 years from 1.5 billion to 1.1 billion - an incredible achievement especially given that the world's population grew by 1.6 billion during that time. China alone lifted 400 million people out of extreme poverty.
Vietnam has doubled the size of its economy in the last decade. This was accompanied by a fall in poverty from three-quarters in the late 1980s to under a third in 2002, with "extreme poverty" half that - the most rapid poverty reduction on record.
So the starting point for me is that continued growth is absolutely necessary. And that’s one reason, among many, why tackling climate change is so important.
Because dangerous climate change could fundamentally undermine growth across the world, particularly in developing countries, impacting most on the world’s poorest people. As last year’s Human Development Report shows, development will go into reverse if we don’t face up to climate change.
Last year, according to the Chinese Government’s own estimates, pollution cost China 3% of total economic output - £32 billion in just one year.
So development without action on climate change will not be sustainable development.
But the question is this: Is it possible to sustain growth without making climate change worse?
And the answer must be an emphatic ‘yes’.
The old model of development, the high carbon path that all developed countries have taken so far, is no longer possible.
Developed countries need to take the lead and decarbonise, fast.
And we can do it.
Indeed in the UK we have broken the link between economic growth and growth in emissions. Between 1997 and 2006 our economy grew by 47% while greenhouse gas emissions fell by almost 7%. And we will reduce our emissions by at least 26% by 2020 compared with 1990. This shows what is possible, and opens up a conversation with developing countries.
We are committed to the biggest and fastest expansion in renewable technology in the history of this country. But we need to do more.
And that is why we introduced the Climate Change Bill – which I will shortly be bringing before the House of Commons. With this Bill we are making an absolute commitment to a legally-binding, long-term framework of targets for cutting emissions – currently 60% by 2050, possibly rising to 80%.
This commitment is unique. We are the first country to propose this and the eyes of governments around the world are on this legislation.
The Bill will introduce carbon budgets to the UK – and this is truly groundbreaking. As a nation, just as we need to live within our financial means, under the Bill we will be bound to live within our carbon means. If emissions are going up in one part of the economy, they will have to come down somewhere else.
This will put the environment at the heart of every decision the government makes. Every new policy will have to be judged against its carbon cost.
This won’t be easy, but we are making it happen.
And we can see the opportunities that moving to a low carbon economy can create for Britain and the world – opportunities in developing new low carbon technologies flowing from, and creating, new markets.
The picture is different for many developing countries who will not be able to grow over the next few years without exacerbating climate change. Developed countries will need to provide space for them to do so in the short-term while helping them onto a low carbon path through technology transfer and financing. That’s what our £800 million contribution to the new Strategic Climate Fund with the World Bank and other donors is all about, but we will need much more.
But there are some truths we now face that are harder to answer, and will need to be resolved before we get a global deal.
The McKinsey Global institute estimates that developing countries will generate nearly 80% of growth in world energy demand between now and 2020.
Take India.
The Indian Energy Minister told me last November that 45% of his citizens don’t have electricity. Their schools need lighting so the children can study. Their industry needs power so it can provide jobs. And their clinics need fridges so they can keep the vaccines cold.
We need to help India, and other countries provide these jobs, and medicines, in a low carbon way.
But finding a low carbon path to development and growth should also be seen as an opportunity for developing countries to compete in a new market.
They could potentially move straight onto new technologies without some of the initial costs of adjustments that developed economies will face – perhaps bringing them first mover advantage in the process.
For in the poorest countries, particularly in Africa, there is an opportunity to ensure that energy for development is low carbon. Setting aside emissions for a moment, renewable energy can often be the best form of energy in the developing world – after-all solar power and biogas are abundant and do not require expensive transmission mechanisms. But these technologies are still relatively expensive.
So we must focus our efforts on this, through the Clean Development Mechanism and other means, especially in Africa where the take-up has been very low. If we could work to assist investment in this way it would help to create a truly global carbon market, its benefits available to all nations not just a few.
Ultimately it will be essential to develop a new model of growth which does not simply follow the path taken by the industrialised world. A new model which helps to correct the old imbalances.
Because of course as things stand it will be the developed countries - and emerging economies - that will have the resources and technology to make these changes quickest, to capitalise on the new opportunities.
And there is a danger that our current systems of development could entrench this problem. Equally it could be exacerbated by the post-2012 climate change framework. So our challenge is to work together to ensure that development – in the north and south – is fair and sustainable. If we don’t it will hurt us too.
So how do we make this happen?
Well, reinforcing the link between climate change and development is a good place to start.
Later this year the UN will hold a global summit – a ‘call to action’ – to renew the international community’s commitment to the Millennium Development Goals. And the environment must play a large part in this.
I am confident that there is a growing belief that the 7th MDG – ensuring environmental sustainability – should be central to the all the MDGs and therefore central to major development programmes.
But to do this, we have to address the broader problem in international governance. Development and the environment are still treated separately.
That is why the Prime Minister, on his visit to the US last week, made the case for strengthening our international institutions, and increasing their focus on the environment.
He proposed that we should ‘make the World Bank a bank for development and the environment’.
And he rightly argued that by doing this we could ‘transfer billions in loans and grants to encourage the poorest countries to adopt alternative sources of energy and in doing so ensure that its development programmes provide an integrated approach to both poverty eradication and global warming.’
Across the UN system there is a huge amount of good work being done on climate change. However there is a need for coordination so that the full potential of the UN is realised. We must ensure that the UN has the capacity equal to our ambition for a new international settlement on climate change.
Member states have their role to play in this, but the UN must also take responsibility and I welcome the leadership that the Secretary General has shown.
So in political terms we are committed to placing climate change at the centre of development. But what about integrating development into climate change?
The best way of doing this will be by achieving a fair deal in Copenhagen next year under the UNFCCC. We need a global climate change framework that takes action on the environment while delivering justice for the developing world.
That’s why when I travelled to Bali last year to negotiate an action plan on climate change, I went there with colleagues from the Department for International Development, as well as DEFRA.
And we are learning from DfID’s experience on this. Moreover, we are working together on designing and winning a strong deal in Copenhagen next year, which has development at its heart.
Central to this deal should be economy-wide emissions caps for all developed countries and new incentives for developing and emerging economies to pursue low-carbon growth.
On this basis the government has designed five development tests against which we can judge the effectiveness of the international response to climate change at Copenhagen.
- It must include an ambitious long-term goal that is high enough to avoid dangerous climate change – it is essential that we have an over-arching target, with graduated targets so that we can judge our progress
- It must contain a fair and equitable way of delivering emissions reductions to meet those targets – with developed countries taking the lead but with all countries, and particularly the emerging economies, doing more.
- It must provide support for developing countries to build their resilience and adapt to climate change.
- It must deliver a reformed and expanded carbon market – so that we can support developing countries to pursue low-carbon growth. Indeed a fair carbon market could mean a significant change in financial flows, spurring countries to develop cleanly, and potentially rivalling flows of aid.
- And finally it must deliver support for technology development and transfer that benefits developing countries based on their needs and circumstances
These are ambitious tests. And there are some really serious and difficult questions here – questions which academics and policy-makers the world over are beginning to struggle with.
- How do we identify the global transformational changes necessary, and the role of different countries and actors in delivering them?
- How can we make carbon markets work for the poorest countries in the world – should there be development levies, for example?
- Which sectors should we focus on first?
- How do we get the Clean Development Mechanism working in Africa?
- Which technologies should we support most, and how can we get Carbon Capture and Storage for coal-fired power stations working as fast as possible?
- What about deforestation which is responsible for just under a fifth of all emissions? How do we change the incentive structure so that countries make money from conserving forests rather than cutting them down? We are taking steps to tackle this problem and are investing £50 million to tackle deforestation in the Congo Basin. It was hugely significant that deforestation was included in the deal we reached last year in Bali. We must see this commitment through.
- And finally how are we going to face up to the most inconvenient truth of all? Namely that even if the rich world could kick carbon now we would still face dangerous climate change because of rising emissions from developing countries like China and India.
None of these is easy. It will require serious debate and serious effort.
But the lives of millions – perhaps billions – of people depend on getting this right. And those with the smallest political voice on the world stage are those who need to be heard loudest – now – if we are going to do it.
Because of course, huge changes in climate or catastrophic events are not necessary to undermine development. Small changes in people’s daily lives can also have significant effects.
I’d like to share with you just one example of what I mean by this. Last year I was visiting a village in Malawi, when some local women offered to take me to the water pump.
I readily accepted. And on the way back, I carried a half-full bucket of water. By the end of the fifteen minute journey, walking slowly and trying not to spill the water down my shirt, my neck was seriously aching.
Those women do that journey every single day, five times a day, with full buckets. I have no doubt that they did it today, and they will do it tomorrow and the day after.
But gradual changes in climate will mean that they – and thousands like them – will have to walk further each day and carry water for longer. It means their daughters won’t be able to go to school. It will limit their chances of building a better life. And in turn it limits their ability to overcome the challenges that face them living in an economy that is stagnant.
It is their voices that need to be heard loudest. And their demand is a simple one: give us the chance to improve our lives.
Leading the movement to prevent dangerous climate change is one of the single most important contributions the UK can make in tackling global poverty.
And if we are to achieve all that we set out to achieve – a high-growth, low carbon future – it will not simply be through our own efforts.
If we are to achieve all of this, it will be because you all played your part as well.
We need to build momentum towards Copenhagen to achieve a fair deal for the developing world.
And that will require a public movement on the scale of the Make Poverty History campaign.
Development and climate change both cover the great cause of our age. But ultimately they are about justice. Global social justice. They are about the right to pursue a life of freedom and opportunity. And in that, they are, ultimately about politics.
And to make our politics work, our anger about poverty should extend to its new ally – climate change.
We must focus all our efforts on tackling both of these threats together. And by working together I believe we can take a first step towards dismantling this unholy alliance for good.
Thank you.
Page modified: 25 April 2008
Page published: 25 April 2008