We are changing the world to fight COVID-19: can we do the same for climate change?

GUELPH, ONT.—I lead a lab that has been conducting research on the impacts of climate change on ecosystems in Canada and worldwide for decades. While knowing the details of these impacts is important, knowledge must be followed by action. Realizing this, we have also studied how human behaviour and social dynamics can determine the success of climate change mitigation. We published one of the first mathematical models of interactions between human behaviour and climate dynamics showing that the human dimensions of change (social norms, social learning, perceived costs of mitigation) are at least as important in reducing long-term emissions and temperature changes compared to biophysical changes alone. Our work shows that social learning, incentivizing behaviour change, and evolving social norms can influence the projected peak global temperature by as much as 1 degree Celsius. These mitigative strategies need to address multiple aspects of human behaviour in combination in order to reach IPCC targets. Emission targets need to account for both social-cultural processes and political speed bumps—reducing mitigation costs alone is not enough. It matters very much what we do, and we can reach recommended IPCC targets if we get our act together. According to international climate agreements, Canada has not met its obligation to reduce emissions, and this may very well be because we lacked legislation such as Bill C-12, the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act. Research on more than 100 countries worldwide shows that passing a new climate law is correlated to reduced emissions. Our own research, published this past month, shows that a growing number of national- and regional-level climate agreements can tip the balance towards achieving global targets. Using models based on game theory, we focus on legally binding agreements that hold states accountable for meeting climate change targets using penalties or trade tariffs. Such legally binding agreements have thus far been untenable on the global stage, leaving existing climate agreements like the Paris, Kyoto, and Copenhagen with no method of accountability on mitigation targets. We show that addressing climate change requires states to take early action by building up national and regional (e.g., the European Union) legally binding agreements. We demonstrate that such regional initiatives eventually tip the scales in favour of a global, legally binding treaty that rapidly pulls the world towards effective climate mitigation. Our work highlights the key importance of sanctions and penalties such as trade tariffs or fines against emitters. So far, global negotiations have relied on voluntary commitments from signatories. At that scale, committing to mitigation measures is overly costly. The federal government’s Bill C-12 offers a promising national approach. However, its plans must be transformative in all sectors and aspects of society in order to account for social systems. The best way to ensure this is to offer well-informed modelling scenarios with the input of the broad scientific community (natural and social scientists). The unaggregated emissions data collected by various sectors must be accessible to both scientists and the public, allowing for continual updating and improvements. Regarding scenario planning for meeting targets, plans must incentivize change, through tax policy, for instance, but also through fostering new social norms and accelerating learning about climate change. These could also include consequences of missing targets, effects that will be cumulative and even harder to mitigate. Rapid societal change is possible. We have seen in this pandemic how willing the public and private sectors are to work together for a common goal and adopt new behaviours, if they understand the risks and benefits. The strategies should therefore demonstrate the economic, social, and environmental benefits of emission reductions, so people and sectors can see its net benefits for Canada. In developing its strategies, the government must consult not only with natural scientists and economists, but also social scientists and those working across the arts, both within and outside of academia, and with Indigenous groups, all of who are able to help us change the language, change the culture, change the narrative, around climate change mitigation. We simply cannot afford to reach Sec. 16 of the currently articulated bill (‘failure to achieve targets’). We know that time is short to head off a cascade of climate tipping points; the nation isn’t going to get a second chance to do this right. Dr. Madhur Anand is a professor at the School of Environmental Sciences and director of the Guelph Institute for Environmental Research at the University of Guelph. The Hill Times

We are changing the world to fight COVID-19: can we do the same for climate change?

The federal government’s Bill C-12 offers a promising national approach. However, its plans must be transformative in all sectors and aspects of society in order to account for social systems.

Canada’s aging crisis and a call for reform in eldercare

Sudan’s warring sides and the long-simmering ethnic conflict

Balanced approach needed on right-to-repair bill, protecting IP rights and public safety

Reflections from a new citizen

Public Safety Canada’s dealing with natural and communication infrastructure disasters

As COP29 wraps up, will Canada finally stop funding fossils this fall?

UN secretary general calls on developed countries to accelerate net-zero timelines to 2040

COP15 is not just a numbers game: it’s inspiration for a generation

Can weakened democracies survive global warming?

The elephant in all rooms

The science is clear, so why aren’t we listening?

News

Get free news updates

Opinion

Submit a guest opinion article

resources

Advertise

subscribe

get help

Get free news updates

Submit a guest opinion article

We are changing the world to fight COVID-19: can we do the same for climate change?

The federal government’s Bill C-12 offers a promising national approach. However, its plans must be transformative in all sectors and aspects of society in order to account for social systems.

Get The Policy Briefings Newsletter