carbon fundamentalism vs. climate justice

The potential for such a political moment is onceagain upon us, exactly 10 years after the collapse ofthe WTO in Seattle, Wash. This time, it’s the 15thConference of Parties to the United Nations Frame-work Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC),which will meet in Copenhagen, Denmark onDecember 7, 2009, for 12 days to forge a climatepolicy that will succeed the initial commitments setby the Kyoto Protocol of 1997. The goal is to sub-stantially reduce atmospheric concentrations of heat-trapping greenhouse gasses while addressing the con-sequences of climate disruption already underway.Global warming has already disproportionatelyimpacted the small island states, coastal peoples,indigenous peoples, and the poor throughout theworld, particularly in Africa.As Clayton Thomas-Muller of the Indigenous

Environmental Network (IEN) observes, “In theU.S. and across the globe, the movement for climatejustice has been steadily growing; not simplydemanding action on climate, but demanding rights-based and justice-based action on climate that con-fronts false solutions, root causes of climate change,and amplifies the voices of those least responsible andmost directly impacted. Not only are we the frontlineof impacts, we are the frontline of survival....”UNFCCC should not be thought of as being just

about climate change, nor should climate change bethought of as simply setting targets for reducingatmospheric concentrations of carbon. These negotia-tions are about everything: international trade;forests; food and agriculture; the rights of the indige-nous and forest peoples; resource privatization; inter-

national finance (private and public); developmentrights; oceans; rivers; technology; intellectual proper-ty; migration, displacement and refugees; and biodi-versity, to name a few. The reduction of emissions isonly one part of the negotiations.The Framework Treaty itself mandates that we

“protect the climate system for the benefit of presentand future generations of humankind, on the basis ofequity and in accordance with their common but dif-ferentiated responsibilities and respective capabili-ties.” How we implement, calculate, and pay for it allis the heart of the matter.

Inside the OutsideWe all have a lot at stake. Ruling elites and corpo-

rations are exercising disproportionate pressure onclimate policy both domestically and internationallyto ensure that their interests—continued industrial

7

Race, Poverty & the Environment | Fall 2009

By Gopal Dayaneni

Carbon Fundamentalism vs. Climate Justice

magine waking up on December 1, 1999, and learning about the World Trade Organization (WTO) for the firsttime by watching it fall apart. The catalyst? An internationalist “inside-outside” strategy that leveraged people poweron the outside to provide political space inside for the Global South and civil society organizations. (See box.)I

The Battle of Seattle At the third WTO Ministerial Conference in 1999, negotiations werestopped in their tracks by massive street protests outside the conven-tion center and by concerted resistance from the governments of theGlobal South who were represented inside. The scale and breadth of thecoalition against ever more inequitable trade agreements is a landmarkin progressive organizing. Labor, environmentalists, faith-based organi-zations, and non-governmental groups of all sorts made common causewith the demands of the Global South. Despite six Ministerial discus-sions which have been organized since 1999, the WTO still has not beenable to reach substantial new agreements and looks likely to miss itsnewest deadline in 2010.—Ed. n

8


Climate Change: Catalyst or Catastrophe?

exploitation of land and people in the service ofgrowth and profit, and the commodification ofatmospheric space through carbon trading—are pre-served. Whereas, social movements like ViaCampesina, Third World Network, the indigneouspeoples’ movement, and international labor organiza-tions, together with the African Union, a few LatinAmerican countries, and the Association of SmallIsland States are working to create the political spacefor a rights-based, justice-based approach to ecologi-cal sustainability that addresses the historic causes ofclimate change and its disproportionate impacts. In the United States, the Environmental Justice

movement has given rise to the Climate Justice move-ment, which has fought to raise the voices of those com-munities least responsible but most severelyimpacted—viz., poor people of color and indigenouspeoples—and demands a climate policy that redressesexisting economic and environmental inequality. Ac-cording to Nia Robinson, director of the Environmen-

tal Justice and Climate Change Initiative, “The success-ful creation of climate policy cannot happen withoutthe input of communities that have suffered as a resultof the United States’ fossil fuel addiction. Our govern-ment must begin to recognize these communities as ex-perts or run the risk of creating policies that will do asmuch harm, if not more, than climate change itself.”But Orin Langelle, co-director of the Global

Justice Ecology Project believes that, "The Copen-hagen climate talks have been hijacked. Copenhagenis becoming no more than a CorporateHaven fortrade talks by corporations." The best we can hopefor then is to stop some of the worst policies fromtaking hold and create the political space needed forsocial movements to pressure governments intoresponding to the needs of the people and the bios-phere. If we can weaken the influence of corporationsdirectly or through their proxy states, most notablythe United States, we may be able to put the brakeson their attempted land, air, and water grab.

Tom GoldtoothThe climate bill, unfortunately, has

been co-opted by the oil and coal indus-try. It’s a situation where we again havepolitics over science. And for our networkand our constituency on the frontline ofunsustainable energy policy, from Alaskato the tip of Argentina, to the indigenouspeople in Nigeria, it’s business as usual.We don’t see democracy in the process ofdecisions being made around climatepolicy, whether it’s domestically, like theWaxman-Markey bill, or globally. It’s busi-ness as usual.

We had high hopes, and we still do,but it’s going to take the political will ofthe people, [not] discussions behind closeddoors. That’s something that’s really a bigconcern for us here as American Indianand Alaska natives. Our communities andmany of the people in America have beenlocked out of the process that’s happeningbetween the big environmental organiza-tions and big industry.

We are part of the 350 million indige-nous peoples throughout the world. The[U.N. meetings concerning the Declarationon the Rights of Indigenous Peoples] markthe first time that 400 indigenous peoplescame together from every region in theworld to discuss the impacts of climatechange.

We all agreed that we are at the front-lines with disproportionate impacts. Therehas to be a human rights framework toaddress this issue. We came out of thismeeting in consensus: we’ve got to haveaggressive emission targets. We agreed

that we need to push the industrializedcountries like America and Canada toreduce greenhouse gas emissions by 45percent by 2020 using 1990 levels, and 95to 100 percent by 2050. We have the tech-nology to do that.

A well-financed and very powerful oiland coal industry is [in negotiations] withthese large environmental organizationsthat don’t have constituencies. I think [sup-port for the current climate bill] is a selloutposition. I think the people of America aresmarter than that. But America needs tohave more understanding of where we’re atwith climate change and what market-basedsolutions the government and corporationsare developing. n

Tom Goldtooth is the co-director of theIndigenous Environmental Network head-quartered at Bemidji, Minnesota. This inter-view is excerpted from a transcript courtesyof Democracy Now. Photo courtesy of theInternational Institute for Sustainable Devel-opment.

Voices for

Cli

mate

Ju

sti

ce

9


n

Photo:

Climate Justice Now!action at United Na-tions conference, Poz-nan, Poland.

©2008 Orin LangelleGJEP-GFC

Carbon Fundamentalism: False FramingThe current focus on climate change provides an

unprecedented opportunity to make much neededdeep systemic alterations necessary to achieve greaterequity, justice, and democracy as we weather theunavoidable transition. Unfortunately, the narrowfocus on “carbon reduction” only serves to exacerbatethe root causes of inequity. The view that the problem is a technical one,

which can be addressed through narrow technologicalor policy solutions, is a strategic construct of thecenter-right.The dominant framing of the problem is that we

must stabilize the amount of carbon in the atmos-phere at 450 ppm, or more aggressively, at 350 ppmby 2050, to avoid a mean atmospheric temperaturerise of 2° Celsius. Getting national governments toagree to such targets is considered better thannothing. Granted, the atmospheric carbon concentra-tion levels are an indicator of the problem and mustbe addressed, but such a narrow framing hides thelarger ecological context and the inequitable econom-ic system that got us here.The technical framing of popular films, such as

“An Inconvenient Truth,” which detail the growthand consequences of atmospheric concentrations ofcarbon, including some doomsday predictions, only

reveal the tip of the melting iceberg. Such films havebeen used to promote solutions that seem “practical”because they are politically “viable” and considered“reasonable” under the current system. In truth,many of these proposals—such as, the large-scaleshifting of arable land use from food production toagro-fuel production, carbon trading regimes, andsynthetic biology—have huge negative consequencesfor poverty, food security, water security, humanrights, and biological and cultural diversity. Nor dothey resolve the carbon problem.As Anne Petermann of the Global Justice Ecology

Project puts it, "Carbon Fundamentalism corruptsthe science, ignores the interrelationships of the bios-phere, and ignores human rights and equity byencouraging the continuation of over-production forover-consumption, entrenching the consolidation ofprofit and power."Without a holistic, integrated approach to the

ecological crisis that is grounded in science but predi-cated on justice and equity, we will simply shift theproblem around, make it worse, and further compro-mise our survival.

Dirt Behind the Clean Development MechanismOne clear example of deliberate deception by the

Industrialized North is the Clean Development

10


Climate Change: Catalyst or Catastrophe?

Mechanism (CDM) established at the first round ofthe Kyoto Protocol. It is a system created to managecarbon “offsets” and give polluters the appearance ofreducing their overall carbon emissions by fundingpurported “low-carbon” development in the GlobalSouth. Under this scheme, the European Union, forexample, can increase the number of cars on its roadbut balance its carbon budget by paying a developingcountry to protect its own forests or use more effi-cient energy technologies. Not surprisingly, oppo-nents of the scheme call it, “trying to lose weight bypaying someone else to go on a diet.”David Victor, a Stanford University Law Professor

who coauthored a study of the CDM reveals that,"Between one- and two-thirds of all CDM offsets donot represent actual emission cuts." Another study bythe non-governmental organization InternationalRivers, shows that nearly three-quarters of all CDM-funded projects were already complete at the time oftheir approval, hence not dependent on the funding.According to Payal Parekh, an oceanographer andclimate scientist who works with International Rivers,“Ultimately, you cannot really prove or disprovewhether a project is truly ‘additional,’ because it

requires one to know what would have happened[without the funding]. Without the aid of a fortuneteller's crystal ball, this is simply impossible.” Clearly, CDMs provide little, if any, protection for

poor communities and communities of color impact-ed by existing dirty industry and destructive offsets.The narrowly focused “offsets” often finance suchecologically destructive projects as mega dams, plan-tation forests, and industrial agro-fuels—projectswhich invariably result in the displacement of peoplesand a violation of their rights. Yet, CDMs representone of the primary financing mechanisms advancedby the rich countries and corporations.On the other hand, several peoples’ movements

around the world and nations, such as Bolivia andthe entire African Union, are calling for “EcologicalDebt” as a fair financing mechanism for mitigationand adaptation. Ecological Debt is the debt owed bythe Industrialized North to the Global South for the“historical and current resource-plundering, environ-mental degradation, and dumping of greenhousegases and toxic wastes,” according to Acción Ecologi-ca, an environmental rights organization based inQuito, Ecuador. It is a reparations approach favored

n

Photo:

Members of GrassrootsGlobal Justice marchagainst the G-20 meet-ings held in Pittsburgh,Pennsylvania.

© 2009 Orin LangelleGJEP-GFC

11


n

Photo: Protest duringthe UNFCCC climate ne-gotiations launchingthe World Bank ForestCarbon Partnership Fa-cility at the GrandHyatt, Bali.

© 2007 Anne PetermanGGJEP-GFC

by impacted nations, as opposed to the “offset andobfuscate” approach supported by the United Statesand the European Union.As Patrick Bond, director of the Centre for Civil

Society in Durban frames it, there are basically twoways for the Global North to pay back the hard-hitGlobal South for the climate crisis: “Through com-plicated, corrupt, controversial [CDM] projects withplenty of damaging side effects to communities, or…through other mechanisms that must provide financ-ing quickly, transparently, and decisively, to achievegenuine income compensation plus renewable energyto the masses.”

The Tipping PointA recent poll by The Guardian of London revealed

that almost nine out of 10 climate scientists do notbelieve political efforts to restrict global warming to2° Celsius will succeed. “Given soaring carbon emis-sions and political constraints, an average rise of fourto five degrees Celsius by the end of this century ismore likely,” they say. Such a rise in temperature willalmost certainly be catastrophic for life on thisplanet.Additionally, a synthesis report on climate science

issued in June this year warns that climate changewill proceed faster than predicted over the next fiveyears, and that we are running a very high risk ofbreaching some tipping points, including the meltingof the Greenland ice sheet. The scale and pace of the crisis demands immedi-

ate, forceful, and systemic action. We must fullyappreciate and understand that we are in the throesof a climate crisis and that change is inevitable. Whatmatters most now is how that change occurs andwho leads the transition. History teaches that whensocieties and economies go through major transitions,the balance of social forces is incredibly important.The degree to which our new future embodiesequity, justice, and democracy as we move throughthese economic and ecologic changes depends entire-ly on how well we position popular social movementsto take control of the transition.

Road to Copenhagen Paved with OpportunitiesCopenhagen is a strategic opportunity to further

build a trans-local movement that integrates ecologi-cal sustainability and economic justice and coordi-nates the power of social movements to build thecapacity of communities to weather the transition.Beyond Copenhagen, we must set our sights on theUnited States Social Forum in Detroit in 2010.We’ve already seen the West Coast climate action

against Chevron link the local impacts of fossil fuelsin Richmond, Calif. to the global impacts of climatechange. The Mobilization for Climate Justice(www.actforclimatejustice.org) is a national coalitionthat has anchored several actions in recent months,including ones at the launch of the United Nationsmeeting in New York and the G-20 meeting in Pitts-burgh in September. It has actions planned to markthe 10th anniversary of the Seattle WTO.Even as the United States Congress is poised to

pass a climate bill that will commodify atmosphericspace and give the worst industries the right topollute, an explosion of local solutions are emergingacross the country. The time to act is now, while we still have room

to breathe. n

Gopal Dayaneni is on the planning committee of Movement Generation: Justice and Ecology Project and is a climate justice researcher

for the Funders Network on Trade and Globalization. Active in movement organizing since the 1980s, he has worked with the Silicon

Valley Toxics Coalition, the Design Action Collective, and Project Underground.

Editor EmeritusCarl Anthony

PublisherJuliet Ellis

EditorB. Jesse Clarke

Design and LayoutB. Jesse Clarke

Editorial AssistanceMerula Furtado

Publishing AssistantChristine Joy Ferrer

Copyediting and ProofreadingMerula Furtado, Marcy ReinChristine Joy Ferrer

Subscribe to RP&E Annual subscriptions are $20 for groups andindividuals; $40 for institutions. (Free forgrassroots groups upon request.)

Send subscription checks to: RP&E,436 14th Street, #1205, Oakland, CA 94612. Subscribe online at www.urbanhabitat.org

© 2009 by the individual creators and UrbanHabitat. For specific reprint information,queries or submissions, please [email protected].

ISSN#1532-2874

RP&E was first published in 1990 by UrbanHabitat Program and the California RuralLegal Assistance Foundation’s Center onRace, Poverty & the Environment. In theinterest of dialogue, RP&E publishes diverseviews. Opinions expressed are not necessari-ly those of the editors, Urban Habitat, or itsfunders.

Photos: (Above) Montage from the Luke Cole memorial booklet published October 25, 2009. Courtesy of Nancy Shelby.(Front cover) San Francisco Financial District, Sept 21, 2009. ©2009 West Coast Mobilization for Climate Justice / Rainforest Action Network. (Inside Front) Richmond refinery. ©2008 Scott Braley. (Inside Back) Urban garden in Havana Cuba. © John and Faith Morgan / www.powerofcommunity.com.

Urban Habitat Board of Directors

Joe Brooks (Chair)PolicyLink

Romel Pascual (Vice-Chair)Mayor's Office, City of Los Angeles

Tamar Dorfman (Treasurer)San Francisco Mayor's Office of Community Development

Carl AnthonyCofounder, Urban Habitat

Malo Andre HutsonDepartment of City and Regional PlanningUniversity of California, Berkeley

Felicia MarcusNatural Resources Defense Council

Arnold PerkinsAlameda Public Health Department (retired)

Deborah JohnsonSan Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency

Wade CrowfootEnvironmental Defense Fund

Organizations are listedfor identification purposes only.

Race,PovertyEnvironment

& the

Vol. 16 No. 2 | Fall 2009 Printed on processed chlorine-free paper 50% post-consumer fiber, 100% recycled

a journal for social and environmental justice

This issue is dedicated to Luke W. Cole (1962-2009) Founding co-editor of the journal Race Poverty & the Environment and founder of the Center for Race, Poverty and the Environment.

Race,Poverty Environmentthe&

a journal for social and environmental justice www.urbanhabitat.org

First published as a joint project of the Urban Habitat Program and the California Rural LegalAssistance Foundation, RP&E is now published twice annually by Urban Habitat and is dedicated toexploring the intersection of race, class, and environmental and social justice.Don’t miss any of our passionate, in-depth discussions of important social topics!

Spring 1990 4 Earth DaySummer 1990 4 Cultural DiversityWinter 1991 4 Women of ColorSpring 1991 4 Pesticides

Summer 1991 4 EnergyWinter 1992 4 The SummitSpring 1992 4 Asian/Pacific Islanders

Summer 1992 4 Water Fall 1992 4 Native Nations in 1992

Spring 1993 4 Urban Problems Summer 1993 4 Population and Immigration

Fall 1993 4 Latinos and the Environment Spring 1994 4 Military Base Conversion Winter 1995 4 Environmental Justice and the Law

Summer 1995 4 Nuclear Technology & Communities of ColorFall 1995 4 Social Justice and Transportation

Spring 1996 4 Multicultural Environmental Education Fall 1996 4 The Border

Winter 2000 4 A Place at the Table:Food & Environmental Justice

Winter 2001 4 Reclaiming Land and Community: Brownfields & Environmental Justice

Summer 2002 4 Fixin’ to Stay: Anti-Displacement Policy Options & Community Response

Summer 2003 4 Where Do We Go from Here? A Look atthe Long Road to Environmental Justice

Fall 2003 4 Governing from the Grassroots: EJ and Electoral Activism

Summer 2004 4 Reclaiming our Resources: Imperialism and EJWinter 2005 4 Burden of Proof: Using Research for EJWinter 2006 4 Moving the Movement:

Transportation Justice Summer 2006 4 Getting Ready for Change:

Green Economics and Climate Justice Spring 2007 4 Just Jobs: Organizing for Economic Justice

Fall 2007 4 Educating for EquitySpring 2008 4 Who Owns Our Cities?

Fall 2008 4 Race and Regionalism

Use the form below or order online:www.urbanhabitat.org/subscribe

A Project ofUrbanHabitat

Support RP&E:subscribe today!

Yes! I want an annual subscription to Race, Poverty & the Environment.Sent free of charge to grassroots groups upon request.

$20 (Individuals) $40 (Institutions)

Yes! I want to support the advancement of social, economic,and environmental justice in the Bay Area and beyond.

I want to support Urban Habitat with a tax-deductible donation of:$25 $50 $100 $500 $1,000 Other $_______

Name: ________________________________________________Organization: ___________________________________________Address: _______________________________________________State: ____ Zip: ________ Email: ____________________________

A check is enclosed Please charge my Visa/MasterCardVisa/MC Number: _________________________ Exp. Date: _____(Please include the 3-4 digit card verification number found on the back of most credit cards.)

Signature: ____________________________________________

Please make checks payable to Urban Habitat. Mail this form to 436 14th St., #1205, Oakland, CA 94612 (510) 839-9609 Fax: (510) 839-9610

j2502_uh_guts:Blank RPE template 5/21/09 9:54 AM Page 80

carbon fundamentalism vs. climate justice

Documents