Climate change: Why Good Intentions Won’t Save Us

The urgency of tackling climate change has never been greater, yet our response still falls far short of what’s required. For years, we’ve been hearing about the looming dangers of a warming planet—extreme weather, rising sea levels, and widespread ecological disruption. The science is clear, the evidence is all around us, and yet, our policy responses have been frustratingly inadequate. As we look ahead to COP29, the next major climate conference, it’s clear that we need a new approach, one that’s grounded not just in good intentions but in serious, actionable policy.

Let’s start with what’s been done so far. Recent years have seen some significant policy moves, especially in the United States and Europe. The Biden administration’s decision to rejoin the Paris Agreement was an essential step, signaling that the U.S. is back at the table when it comes to global climate cooperation. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), passed in 2022, represents one of the most ambitious climate efforts in U.S. history. It includes major investments in renewable energy, electric vehicles, and technologies designed to capture carbon emissions before they enter the atmosphere. Meanwhile, the European Union has been pushing forward with its Green Deal, an ambitious plan to make Europe the first climate-neutral continent by 2050.

These are important developments, but let’s not get carried away. While these policies mark progress, they’re nowhere near enough to address the scale of the crisis. The latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) couldn’t be clearer: the world is not on track to meet the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C. In fact, current policies, even if fully implemented, are likely to result in a temperature increase of around 2.7°C by the end of the century. That’s a catastrophic level of warming, with dire consequences for the global economy, public health, and social stability.

Why, despite all the talk and some meaningful action, are we still so far off course? The answer lies in the gap between what’s politically feasible and what’s actually necessary. Politicians are often reluctant to take the bold steps needed because those steps can be economically and politically challenging in the short term. But as any economist will tell you, the cost of inaction far outweighs the cost of action. Climate change isn’t just an environmental issue—it’s an economic issue, and a failure to address it now will lead to enormous economic costs down the road.

So what should be done? First, we need to revisit the commitments made under the Paris Agreement, known as Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). These are essentially the climate action plans that each country submits, outlining how they intend to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. Right now, these plans are falling short. At COP29, countries need to come to the table with far more ambitious targets. And yes, that means making tough decisions, like putting a price on carbon, phasing out fossil fuel subsidies, and investing heavily in renewable energy and energy efficiency.

Speaking of fossil fuels, they remain the elephant in the room. Despite all the progress on renewables, fossil fuels still account for the vast majority of global energy consumption. That’s a problem. Recent moves by the European Union to ban new internal combustion engine vehicles by 2035 and the U.S. ban on new oil and gas leases on federal land are steps in the right direction, but they’re not enough. We need a global commitment to phase out coal, oil, and gas, and that means not just setting ambitious goals but also providing the financial and technical support needed to help countries make the transition.

Then there’s the issue of climate finance. It’s been over a decade since wealthy nations promised to deliver $100 billion a year in climate finance to help developing countries cope with the impacts of climate change and transition to clean energy. That promise has yet to be fully realized. This is not just a moral failure; it’s also a practical one. Developing countries, which are often the most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, need financial support to build resilience and reduce their emissions. Failing to provide that support not only harms those countries but also undermines global efforts to tackle climate change.

Adaptation is another area where we’re not doing enough. Even if we manage to drastically reduce emissions, we’re still going to see significant warming, and that means we need to be prepared for the consequences. This includes everything from building more resilient infrastructure to developing new agricultural practices that can withstand extreme weather. At COP29, adaptation needs to be a central focus, with concrete plans and funding to help countries prepare for the inevitable impacts of climate change.

Finally, there’s the issue of loss and damage—compensating countries for the irreversible harm caused by climate change. This is a particularly thorny issue, but it’s one that can’t be ignored. At COP28, we saw some progress with the agreement to establish a loss and damage fund, but there’s still a long way to go. COP29 needs to build on that progress by ensuring that the fund is operationalized, with clear guidelines on how it will be governed and who will be eligible for support. And let’s be clear: this isn’t just about charity; it’s about fairness. The countries that have contributed the most to climate change should bear the greatest responsibility for addressing its impacts.

As we head into COP29, we need to be honest about the scale of the challenge we face. Climate change is not just an environmental issue; it’s an economic, social, and political issue that requires a comprehensive and coordinated response. The policies we’ve seen so far are a start, but they’re not enough. What we need now is bold, decisive action that goes beyond what’s politically comfortable and tackles the root causes of the crisis head-on.

The decisions made at COP29 will have far-reaching consequences, not just for the environment but for the global economy and the future of humanity. We can’t afford to wait any longer. The time for half-measures is over. If we’re serious about tackling climate change, we need to act now—and we need to act decisively. The future depends on it.