Historical Responsibility

Many argue that industrialized nations, which have historically contributed the most to greenhouse gas emissions, bear a greater responsibility for the impacts of climate change. This perspective suggests that they should provide financial and technical support to poorer countries that are more vulnerable to its effects.

There's a moral argument for compensation based on equity and justice. Countries that have contributed least to climate change often suffer the most severe consequences, such as extreme weather events and rising sea levels.

Equity and Justice

Financial support could be more directed toward adaptation efforts than e.g. trading markets, helping vulnerable countries build resilience against climate impacts, and to build mitigation strategies to reduce emissions

Adaptation and Mitigation

Addressing climate change effectively requires global cooperation. Compensating poorer nations can foster collaboration and trust, which are essential for achieving international climate goals.

Global Cooperation

Economic Considerations

Some argue that compensation could stimulate green technologies and sustainable development in poorer nations, benefiting the global economy as a whole.

Ultimately, while compensation is a debated solution, many agree that rich countries should play a significant role in supporting developing nations in their climate efforts.

China 2030

Green Transition Leader or Carbon Reduction Spoiler?

China’s official goal of peak CO2 emissions by 2030 (versus the EU’s 55% reductions) and complete carbon neutrality by 2060 (versus the EU’s 2050) is seen by some as unattainable if current growth targets and industrial modalities are to be maintained. Indeed, the very design of a key national implementation mechanism, the national Carbon Exchange Trading System (ETS) has already been accused of being designed to circumvent declared benchmarks allowing targets to be missed if growth rates return to previous higher levels. This it is alleged, could be achieved through a system based on ‘carbon intensity’ rather than a true carbon cap, such that the higher the achieved growth rate, the greater the absolute pollution level allowed.

Despite this notable departure from accepted norms the Chinese ETS is nevertheless ambitious in its scope and potentially comprehensive in its coverage, if all the key sectors earmarked for inclusion do finally get brought into the system. FIn the early phases, only electric generation plants and ‘captive’ industrial power generation facilities serving dedicated industrial sites were included, with other generation sites e.g. natural gas, as well as aviation, ground transport, construction and petrochemicals slated for later entry dates. Moreover, the entire power generation sector only represents an estimate 30% of all carbon emissions in China.