Chapter 4: Sustainable Development and Equity
[...]
4.2 Approaches and indicators
[...]
4.2.2 Equity and its relation to sustainable development and climate change
The third justification is the positive claim that equitable burden sharing will be necessary if the climate challenge is to be effectively met. This claim derives from the fact that climate change is a classic commons problem (Hardin, 1968; Soroos, 1997; Buck, 1998; Folke, 2007) (also see Section 13.2.1.1). As with any commons problem, the solution lies in collective action (Ostrom, 1990). This is true at the global scale as well as the local, only more challenging to achieve (Ostrom et al., 1999). Inducing cooperation relies, to an important degree, on convincing others that one is doing one’s fair share. This is why notions of equitable burden-sharing are considered important in motivating actors to effectively respond to climate change. They are even more important given that actors are not as equal as the proverbial ‘commoners’, where the very name asserts homogeneity (Milanović et al., 2007). To the contrary, there are important asymmetries or inequalities between stakeholders (Okereke et al., 2009; Okereke, 2010): asymmetry in contribution to climate change (past and present), in vulnerability to the impacts of climate change, in capacity to mitigate the problem, and in power to decide on solutions. Other aspects of the relation between intragenerational equity and climate response include the gender issues noted in 4.3, and the role of virtue ethics and citizen attitudes in changing lifestyles and behaviours (Dobson, 2007; Lane, 2012), a topic analyzed in Section 4.4.
4.3 Determinants, drivers and barriers
[...]
4.3.3 Population and demography
Low development is widely understood to contribute to high population growth, which declines only after the appearance of widespread access to key developmental needs such as perinatal and maternal healthcare, and female education and empowerment. Conversely, high population growth is widely regarded as an obstacle to SD because it tends to make efforts such as the provision of clean drinking water and agricultural goods and the expansion of health services and school enrollment rates difficult (Dyson, 2006; Potts, 2007; Pimentel and Paoletti, 2009). This has given rise to the fear of a vicious circle of underdevelopment and gender inequity yielding high population growth and environmental degradation, in turn inhibiting the development necessary to bring down fertility (Caole and Hoover, 1958; Ehrlich and Holdren, 1971; Dasgupta, 1993). However, history shows that countries can break this vicious circle with the right social policies, with an early emphasis on education and family planning; prominent examples include South Korea and Mauritius, which were used in the 1950s as textbook examples of countries trapped in such a vicious circle (Meade, 1967)....With respect to adaptation to climate change, the literature on population and environment has begun to explore more closely people’s vulnerability to climate stressors, including variability and extreme events, and to analyze their adaptive capacity and reliance on environmental resources to cope with adversities and adapt to gradual changes and shocks (Bankoff et al., 2004; Adger et al., 2009)—see also Section 4.6.1 and WGII AR5. Generally speaking, not only does the number of people matter, but so does their composition by age, gender, place of residence, and level of education, as well as the institutional context that influences people’s decision making and development opportunities (Dyson, 2006).
(...)
4.3.5 Human and social capital
Human capital can thus be viewed as a critical component of a broader-encompassing human capability, i.e., a person’s ability to achieve a given list of ‘functionings’ or achievements, which depend on a range of personal and social factors, including education, age, gender, health, income, nutritional knowledge, and environmental conditions, among others (Sen, 1997, 2001). See Clark (2009) and Schokkaert (2009) for a review of Sen’s capability approach and its critiques.
4.3.6 Technology
The public perception and acceptability of technologies is country and context-specific, mediated by age, gender, knowledge, attitudes towards environmental risks and climate change, and policy procedures (Shackley et al., 2005; Pidgeon et al., 2008; Wallquist et al., 2010; Corner et al., 2011; Poumadere et al., 2011; Visschers and Siegrist, 2012) and therefore resolution of these kinds of tradeoffs and conflicts may not be easy.
4.8 Implications for subsequent chapters
[...]
4.8.2 Sustainability and equity issues in subsequent chapters
Chapter 11 frames the discussion of mitigation options in the Agriculture, Forestry, and Other Land Use (AFOLU) sector within a systemic development context (11.4.1). It thoroughly examines the socio-economic impacts of changes in land use (11.7.1). Increasing land rents and food prices due to a reduction in land availability for agriculture, and increasing inequity and land conflicts are serious concerns (11.7.1). Special care for small holders and equity issues, including gender, should accompany mitigation projects (Box 11.6).
