The fight to reduce global warming is on the agendas of all the major countries in the world, and doing so carries a big price tag. As the larger developed countries joined in discussions on this topic with developing nations, no arrangements were made regarding how the expense would be covered.
Shikha Delmia wrote about the situation in TheWeek.com:
A Third World revolt in Bonn, Germany, this week almost derailed the Paris climate change negotiations in November. The revolt was triggered when 130 developing nations including India and China noticed that the draft action plan that is supposed to serve as the blueprint for the Paris negotiations had omitted their most important conditions about the “fairness and financing” of the final deal — in other words, who is going to take responsibility for the warming and who should pay to reduce it? The South African delegation condemned the omission as “apartheid” that would penalize poor countries for the sins of the rich.
It has a point.
When the world has a problem, all the countries are called on to come together and solve it. However, not every nation has the same resources in place to contribute, so some sort of agreement must be reached to finance the solution which will benefit everyone.
More from Shikha Dalmia:
All issues that require collective action, especially on a global scale, are difficult to resolve because they suffer from the free-rider problem, i.e. some parties seek to benefit from the “common good” without springing for it. But as Oren Cass, a Manhattan Institute analyst, notes, fighting climate change is a particularly vexing problem because the individual cost to each country, especially Third World ones, will be immediate and huge — and the benefits distant and uncertain. The notion that emission cuts can pay for themselves through increased energy efficiency is at best fanciful and, at worst, a lie.
The worst part of this problem is that the wealthy western nations are imposing their decisions on global warming on the third world nations. They are like someone’s rich friend who insists that the whole gang go out to dinner at the most expensive restaurant in town and insisting that everyone pay up when the bill comes. They never really asked for the opinion of the poorer countries or if they can afford to pay for the ongoing programs to get rid of the problem.
But there is an even bigger problem. The science behind global warming has not done enough to prove that global warming is truly a problem worth fixing. Paying a lot of money that most nations don’t really have to solve a non-existent problem has the potential to become a full-blown economic crisis.