Mohit Sharma, Chiya Raj, Sandile Dube.

Abstract:

The climate crisis is one of the most pressing global issues, but its consequences are not equally distributed. While industrialized nations in the Global North have historically been the largest contributors to greenhouse gas emissions, the consequences of climate change are borne primarily by the Global South. This paper investigates the historical relationship between industrialization and climate change, demonstrating how Western nations’ economic growth was based on fossil fuel consumption, resulting in long-term environmental degradation. It delves into the concept of climate debt, which contends that developed countries have an ethical obligation to compensate developing nations for the climate injustices they face. This paper examines international climate agreements while highlighting the persistent gap between global climate commitments and real-life financial and technological assistance provided to vulnerable countries. The study delves deeper into the challenges developing countries face when adapting to climate change due to limited resources, institutional capacity, and systemic inequalities. Finally, it examines developing countries’ efforts to increase climate resilience, evaluating their achievements and shortcomings in adaptation and mitigation efforts. Holding Western countries responsible and guaranteeing fair climate policies are essential to addressing climate injustice.

Thesis Statement:

This paper investigates how historical greenhouse gas emissions from Western countries contribute to the Global South’s current climate vulnerability; tracing the historical roots of emissions, climate debt, and disparities in adaptation efforts. It begins by looking at the Industrial Revolution’s impact on global emissions, highlighting the stark contrast between Western nations’ carbon-intensive development and the Global South’s minimal contributions. It then looks at how historical emissions have resulted in severe environmental, economic, and social vulnerabilities, particularly in South Asia, where climate-related disasters, displacement, and livelihood loss disproportionately affect marginalized communities. Finally, the paper examines unequal access to adaptation resources, the shortcomings of global climate agreements, and Global South countries’ efforts to build resilience despite limited support. The conclusion emphasizes the critical need for accountability, increased climate financing, and greater global cooperation to address these historical injustices

Introduction:

Climate change is not purely an environmental issue, but also a justice one—exposing long-standing disparities between nations. Western countries’ industrialization, which began with the Industrial Revolution, drove economic success by relying on massive amounts of fossil fuel. However, the greenhouse gases generated during this time did not just disappear; they accumulated in the atmosphere, raising global temperatures and affecting weather patterns. This environmental transformation has disproportionately impacted impoverished countries in the Global South, which lack the financial and infrastructure resources to deal with rising sea levels, extreme droughts, and worsening natural disasters.

Notwithstanding the development of international climate agreements such as the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement, there is still a disparity between developed nations’ promises and actual commitments to climate finance and technology transfer. Many developing countries face limited resources, weak institutional frameworks, and economic constraints that impede their capacity to implement climate resilience solutions. Cli

The Global South bears a double burden: it experiences the most severe effects of climate change while contributing the least to the problem. Historical emissions data show that developed nations create more than three times the greenhouse gas emissions of developing countries, even though the latter face the greatest consequences of climate change (United Nations, n.d.). This has resulted in increased calls for climate justice—the demand that wealthier nations acknowledge their role in the situation and accept responsibility by offering financial and technological aid to developing countries to reduce and adapt to climate change.

mate change will exacerbate disparities unless the global community takes substantial action, perpetuating past patterns of exploitation and marginalization.

The Historical Link Between Climate Change and Industrialization:

The history of humanity is deeply intertwined with climate change, as shifts in climate have shaped civilizations over centuries. Among the most transformative historical events was the Industrial Revolution of the 1850s, which set the stage for profound changes that still impact the modern world. Originating in developed Western nations, this revolution led to the widespread exploitation of natural resources, the consequences of which continue to burden poorer and developing countries. Unlike traditional manufacturing, which depended largely on agriculture, the Industrial Revolution introduced large-scale production using heavy industrial machinery to enhance efficiency and output (Anderson, 2024).

The Industrial Revolution and its contribution to greenhouse gases:

Scientific research indicates that since the onset of the Industrial Revolution, the Earth’s average surface temperature has risen by approximately 1.1°C. Before this era, atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO₂) levels remained relatively stable. However, as industrialized nations embraced large-scale fossil fuel consumption—especially coal—global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions surged dramatically (Anderson, 2024). Human activities, particularly the production, trade, and consumption of goods, contribute significantly to greenhouse gas emissions. Between 1850 and 2002, industrialized nations produced more than three times the emissions of developing countries (Baumert et al., 2005).

The greenhouse effect, a natural process essential for sustaining life, allows two-thirds of incoming solar radiation to be absorbed by plants, soil, and the atmosphere. Naturally occurring greenhouse gases, including water vapor (H₂O), carbon dioxide (CO₂), methane (CH₄), nitrous oxide (N₂O), and ozone (O₃), help regulate Earth’s temperature. However, industrial activities have introduced additional greenhouse gases, such as fluorinated compounds like chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), tetrafluoromethane (CF₄), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF₆), which significantly contribute to global warming (Bargaoui et al., 2021).

There is a direct and linear correlation between human-generated greenhouse gas emissions and rising global temperatures. It is a stock, rather than a flow pollution problem. So, the question of historical emissions since the Industrial Revolution stands at the core of distributional equity in burden sharing over reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This means that emissions produced centuries ago continue to influence present-day warming, as the cumulative effect of greenhouse gases determines the extent of climate change (Carbon Brief).

Historical overview of emissions from industrialized nations:

Since the Industrial Revolution, industrialized nations—including the United States, the United Kingdom, and Germany—have been primary contributors to global emissions. Developed countries account for nearly 79% of historical carbon emissions, having released more than three times the emissions of developing nations between 1850 and 2002. The United States alone has emitted over 509 gigatonnes (Gt) of CO₂ since 1850, making up roughly 20% of the global total. China follows at a distant second with 11%, while Russia (7%), Brazil (5%), and Indonesia (4%) also contribute significantly. Additionally, former colonial powers such as Germany and the UK are responsible for 4% and 3% of global emissions, respectively, not counting emissions produced during their colonial expansions. Although many of these nations have made strides in reducing emissions in recent decades, they remain major contributors to historical and ongoing climate change (Carbon Brief).

Although China is currently the world’s largest emitter, with emissions exceeding ten billion metric tons, its per capita emissions remain relatively lower at 7.4 metric tons—less than half of the U.S. per capita rate. Similarly, India emits a significant 2.3 billion metric tons annually, yet its per capita emissions stand at just 1.7 metric tons. The one billion people in sub-Saharan Africa collectively emit approximately 823 million metric tons of carbon dioxide annually, resulting in a per capita emission rate of just 0.8 metric tons—about one-twentieth of the U.S. per capita emissions. (Adow, 2020)

These disparities highlight how developed nations advanced at the expense of others. The history of climate change is deeply tied to a legacy of accumulated injustices. Western countries built their wealth by exploiting the natural resources and riches of their colonial empires. The negative impacts of greenhouse gas emissions are disproportionately affecting those who contributed little to the problem. The world’s poor are especially vulnerable to rising sea levels, extreme weather events, water shortages, and other consequences of climate change. (Adow, 2020)

Climate Debt of Developed Countries:

The end of World War II ushered in the period of decolonization, but the dynamics of the imperial age persisted. It is the historical accumulation of harmful emissions that has led the world to the crisis that it is now facing. The billion or so poorest human beings on the planet need sound and sustainable economic development. They need “space” for their increased emissions to the earth’s atmosphere … They need to use the emission absorptive capacity, but no absorptive capacity is left because those of us in affluent economies have taken it all. We are parked in their spaces and no empty spaces exist. (Shue et.al. 2001)

The injustices of the past would persist even if developed nations were now willing to reduce their emissions. A fundamental moral principle holds that those responsible for causing unjust harm have a duty to compensate their victims and that the burden of accountability should fall on the polluters. (Meyer, 2017)

Developing and poor nations face a difficult challenge: they must expand their economies, increase income levels, and enhance living standards while being urged to avoid the fossil fuel-dependent path that developed countries once followed to achieve prosperity. Shifting to renewable energy demands substantial investment in infrastructure and technology, that many developing nations lack. As a result, fossil fuels continue to be the most practical option for economic growth in the short term. The most direct way for developed countries to address this imbalance is by providing financial aid and technological support to developing nations as it is the ‘debt’ that they owe to these countries. (Anderson, 2024)

Historical Responsibility and Arguments: –

Although there is a widespread consensus that developed countries should take the responsibility of there past actions and provide suitable resources to the developing nations, there are arguments against this phenomenon. One such argument is the problem of ignorance. Agents responsible for emissions in the nineteenth century and most of the twentieth century did not know that they were using up a global resource or that they were contributing to a problem that would have severe effects on people in other countries. The second issue concerns the allocation of reparative responsibility. While individuals in developed countries are accountable for the harm caused by their own emissions, they are not directly responsible for the emissions of previous generations. Since they were not the historical polluters, the question arises: on what grounds can they be held responsible for repairing the damage caused by past individuals and governments (Baatz, 2013)?

Others contend that the justification for compensation for historical emissions is not based on the harm caused by past emitters but rather on the benefits that current generations have gained from those emissions. The notion that those who benefit from injustice or an unfair system should compensate those who suffer from it is widely accepted. However, it is challenging to justify demands for compensation from individuals who did not willingly receive these benefits and, in many cases, had no real opportunity to decline them (Meyer et. al, 2010).

Nevertheless, the argument that nonculpable agents should accept some reparative responsibility for causing harm to others is, according to some philosophers, a matter of common sense. “All over the world parents teach their children to clean up their own mess” (Shue, 1999). She cannot change the past. However, if she sincerely regrets that she has acted wrongly, she should not want to have benefited from her wrongful act. Therefore, she should be willing to accept that she should not retain the benefits derived from her wrongful acts. Instead, these benefits may be transferred to the victims of her wrongful acts to rectify (or partially rectify) the wrong that she has done (Bell, 2011). Bell’s argument that a non-culpable agent can still bear moral responsibility for reparations becomes more convincing when considering that the wrongdoing stems not merely from any external factors but from the agent themselves.

Climate Injustice and Vulnerability in the Global South:

Climate injustice is the idea of injustice in the distribution of effects of climate change and is based upon the notions of social, economic and environmental justice. At its core, it links the historical emissions of a region to its responsibility towards others. It displays stark differences in the way in which different regions are impacted by climate change while also giving due consideration to the historical emissions of these regions. By this, it seeks to highlight the way in which the Global South and especially its vulnerable communities have to suffer the consequences of climate change induced by the historical emissions of the Wealthier North and its big corporations. Climate injustice is the very essence of vulnerability of the Global South. It is on account of this injustice that the Global South, today, stands most affected with a problem, they had the least contribution to.

This problem is even more amplified when the low-income, marginalized and the historically oppressed groups of the South come into picture. Dados and Connell (2012) term Global South as referring to regions (Latin America, Asia, Africa, and Oceania) who are in the “Third World”, “Periphery”, low income, politically or culturally marginalized, primitive, and formerly colonized. Hence, the South, being home to the most vulnerable groups globally, which includes the indigenous people, people of colour and the socio-economically weaker sections of the developing and under-developed countries is severely impacted by climate change.

The regions of Global South often consist of complex socio-economic dynamics, limited resources, and fragile ecosystems, ate disproportionately impacted by the consequences of a warming planet. (Hijioka et al., 2014) This is exacerbated by the low economic capacity of these countries in dealing with the impacts of climate change independently. (Abidin et al., 2022)

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has expressed high confidence that the impacts of a 1.5°C or greater increase in global temperatures will disproportionately affect vulnerable populations in Least Developed Countries, small island developing states, indigenous communities, and other local communities dependent on agricultural and coastal livelihoods. (Harvey et al., 2022). Climate change has the potential to reduce food crop production in the Southeast Asian region by up to 7.8 percent, further compounding the challenges of attaining food security in developing countries. (Amanullah & Khalid, 2020)

The developing countries of the global South not only face the direct physical manifestations of climate change, such as rising temperatures, shifting rainfall patterns, and the increasing frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, but they are also particularly sensitive to the resulting disruptions to their economies and livelihoods. Economic damages from climate change have been detected in climate-exposed sectors, such as agriculture, forestry, fishery, energy, and tourism. Individual livelihoods have been affected through, for example, destruction of homes and infrastructure, and loss of property and income, human health and food security, with adverse effects on gender and social equity. (De et al., 2014)

Climate change is a global phenomenon with far-reaching consequences, but its impact is not equally distributed across the world. The populations of the Global South, which includes many developing and underdeveloped countries, often face the brunt of the detrimental effects of climate change, exacerbating existing social inequalities and human rights challenges. (Robinson, 2009) Climate change is a human rights issue. All people should have the agency to live life with dignity. However, the climate crisis is causing loss of lives, livelihoods, language, and culture, putting many at risk of food and water shortages, and triggering displacement and conflict.

Climate change can hold back economic progress and even reverse the gains made in development, further entrenching social and economic problems in these regions. (Mitike et al., 2016) One of the primary reasons for this disproportionate impact is the low adaptive capacity of these countries, where poverty and lack of resources hinder effective mitigation and adaptation strategies.  (Xu et al., 2020) In fact, studies have shown that residents in the least developed countries have ten times more chances of being affected by climate disasters than those in wealthy countries. (Akanwa & Joe‐Ikechebelu, 2019)

The impact of climate change on the Global South extends beyond economic consequences, with significant implications for human health, livelihoods, food security, and water supply. Climate change-induced environmental degradation can negatively affect the social determinants of health, such as clean air, safe drinking water, and food security, ultimately jeopardizing the well-being and human rights of the vulnerable populations in these regions. (Mitike et al., 2016)

Disparity in Adaptation and Mitigation Efforts:

Countries are beginning to recognize the urgency of the climate crisis, holding frequent summits and declaring a “climate emergency.” However, these efforts have yet to lead to meaningful action, as greenhouse gas emissions, global temperatures, and sea levels continue to rise. Furthermore, wealthy nations have struggled to confront the fundamental injustice of climate change—the reality that those who contributed the least to the crisis are now suffering its worst effects. (Adow, 2020)

Global Climate Policies and the Support Gap:

The 1992 UNFCCC introduced the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities,” recognizing that while all nations must take responsibility for climate change, developed countries bore immediate accountability because they had benefited from industrialization, which was the primary driver of excessive carbon dioxide emissions leading to global temperature increases (Vogler,2017).  However, it is noteworthy that mitigation efforts remain voluntary and not binding.

Under the Kyoto Protocol the 37 industrialized countries and the EU, were required to reduce their emissions by a certain percentage below 1990 levels within a specific timeframe. However, by 2004 it was clear that an effective post-2012 regime would have to involve the fast-growing economies of the Global South because their ‘respective capabilities’ had changed. (Vogler,2017)

At the 2011 climate summit in Durban, South Africa, wealthy nations introduced a new approach requiring all countries—not only historical polluters but also poorer nations with minimal contribution to the crisis—to submit emission reduction plans. This shift enabled wealthy nations to avoid the binding rules of the previous framework established by the Kyoto Protocol in 1997, which had sought to build an effective multilateral, rules-based emission reduction system. (Adow, 2020)

The 2015 Paris Agreement also did not fully resolve these questions and failed in compelling the industrialised countries to follow the its commitments, which were: Accelerated climate action with deeper, faster emissions cuts and the need to undertake massively scaled-up investments in adaptation and resilience, particularly for the most vulnerable countries and communities who have done the least to cause the crisis. At the summit, developed countries agreed to the new global climate framework in exchange for a promised $100 billion annually from 2020 to help the global south adapt to climate impacts and transition to low-carbon economies. The agreement does include commitments to increase levels of funding every five years although this does not seem plausible as the amount is already minimal compared to the financial resources available to wealthy nations, it’s not clear if wealthy countries will meet those additional targets. Moreover, the $100 billion annual pledge falls far short of the estimated $180 billion needed for adaptation alone, with costs expected to rise further (Adow, 2020). Without increased funding, global temperatures could rise by 2.7–3.5°C by 2100, far exceeding the Paris Agreement’s 1.5–2°C target, which would have severe consequences, including mass displacement.

Apart from the above-mentioned practicalities, the Paris Agreement further added a very controversial phrase: ‘in the light of different national circumstances’ which indicated that the previous rigid distinction between so called developed countries and the rest was breaking down. The obligations placed on developed, developing, and least developed and small island states are subtly differentiated in the text of the agreement. This raises the question: who should bear the responsibility? (Vogler,2017)

This Suggests that, for many years, wealthy countries refused to fully admit to the scale of the problem, dragging their feet on agreeing to legally binding treaties. (Adow, 2020)

Global South’s Efforts at Mitigation and Adaptation:

The arguments given by the impacted countries in this scenario are also worth telling. Since greenhouse gases (GHGs) have long and varying atmospheric lifetimes, ranging from 30 to over 100 years, historical emissions must be considered, apart from that, Developing countries argue that much of the available “carbon space” has already been occupied by the past emissions of industrialized nations, meaning these nations should continue to lead in reducing emissions and that the Per capita emissions still differ significantly between the Global North and South, making equal treatment neither just nor politically feasible. (Vogler,2017)

Although nearly all the Global South countries are taking direct or indirect part in climate change summits and are its signatories and also working for the cause, they seriously lack in their fighting capacity as far as the climate change is concerned due to a lack of both economic and technological advancements, and although the industrial countries are also suffering from the climate disasters, they have better adaptive capacity and are investing billions in enhancing their adaptive capacity, which the developing lacks. (Meyer,2017)

At domestic levels developing countries are making a great impact, but climate change being an issue without any borders demands greater global resilience measures in which the technological advanced developed countries must need to take a major part.

Conclusion:

Through a multidimensional approach, the research paper has tried to highlight the reality of climate injustice in the present scenario by capturing the way in which it affects the Global South socially and economically. It also recaps the disparity between the North and the South in historical emissions and shows how the Global South is bearing the consequences of the past emissions of the North. The paper has also tried to summarize the various challenges faced by the Global South owing to its geographical and socioeconomic vulnerability, which is amplified by the environmental impacts of climate change. The situation is further exacerbated when social and human rights issues like climate displacement, migration, and loss of livelihood come into the picture. The disparity in adaptation and mitigation efforts sheds light upon the financial, technical, and institutional limitations of the South in contrast to the affluence and the surplus resources of the North. An examination of the global climate policies shows the huge difference between promises made and the support delivered to the developing and underdeveloped regions. The paper has directly tried to answer the research question by emphasizing various facets related to it and showing how the current frameworks are failing to provide equitable solutions. Hence, there is a growing need to hold the historically responsible nations accountable and for introducing policy changes that prioritize the needs of vulnerable populations. Financial and technological support from the North to the South should be increased to help in its adaptation and mitigation process. The situation also calls for a fundamental shift in global climate governance towards equity and justice.

References:

United Nations (n.d.) Causes and effects of climate change. Available at: https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/science/causes-effects-climate-change

What was the Industrial Revolution’s Environmental Impact? https://greenly.earth/en-gb/blog/ecology-news/what-was-the-industrial-revolutions-environmental-impact

Baumert, K., Herzog, T., and Pershing, J. (2005). Navigating the Numbers: Greenhouse Gas Data and International Climate Policy. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.

History of the Human and Nature Relationship, Discovery of Greenhouse Effect and Awareness of the Environmental Problem Saoussen Aguir Bargaoui1* Fethi Zouheir Nouri2.

Historical responsibility for climate change is at the heart of debates over climate justice https://www.carbonbrief.org/in-depth-qa-what-is-climate-justice

The Climate Debt: What the West Owes the Rest, Mohamed Adow 2020,60-66.

Meyer, Lukas & Sanklecha, Pranay. (2017). Climate Justice and Historical Emissions. 10.1017/9781107706835.

Baatz, C. (2013). Responsibility for the Past? Some Thoughts on Compensating Those Vulnerable to Climate Change in Developing Countries. Ethics, Policy & Environment, 16(1), 94–110.

Meyer, L. H., and Roser, D. (2010). Climate Justice and Historical Emissions. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 13(1), 229–53.

Bell, D. (2011). Global Climate Justice, Historic Emissions, and Excusable Ignorance. The Monist, 94(3), 391–411.

Shue, H. (1999). Global Environment and International Inequality. International Affairs, 75(3), 531–45.

Shue, H. (2001). Climate. In A Companion to Environmental Philosophy, ed. D. Jamieson. Oxford: Blackwell, 449–59

The Globalization of World Politics JOHN BAYLIS STEVE SMITH PATRICIA OWENS Environmental issues: john Vogler, 397.

Climate change is a matter of justice – here’s why. (2023, June 26). UNDP Climate Promise. https://climatepromise.undp.org/news-and-stories/climate-change-matter-justice-heres-why/

Dados, N., & Connell, R. (2012). The Global South. Contexts, 11(1), 12–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536504212436479

Hijioka, Y., Lin, E., Pereira, J. J., Corlett, R. T., Cui, X., Insarov, G., Lasco, R., Lindgren, E., & Surjan, A. (2014b). Asia. In R. Perez & K. Takeuchi (Eds.), Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part B: Regional Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (pp. 1327–1370). Cambridge University Press.

Harvey, B., Huang, Y., Araujo, J., Vincent, K., & Sabiiti, G. (2022). Breaking vicious cycles? A systems perspective on Southern leadership in climate and development research programmes. Climate and Development, 14(10), 884–895. https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2021.2020614

Abidin, Z., Nikmatullah, D., Nugraha, A., & Saleh, Y. (2022). Analysis of food expenditures of rice farmers in flooding prone region in South Lampung District, Lampung Province. IOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science, 1027(1), 012022. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1027/1/012022

Amanullah, N., & Khalid, S. (2020). Agronomy-Food Security-Climate change and the sustainable development goals. In IntechOpen eBooks. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.92690

De, F., Programa, N., De, A., De, A., -Dog, P. P., Garden, S., De Investigación, T., Laura, A., Quispe, A., Vizcarra, C., Fernando, D., Acuña, M., Pedro, F., Morales, A., Barrón, G., & Nicolas, A. (2014). Summary for policymakers. In Cambridge University Press eBooks (pp. 1–30). https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781107415324.004

Robinson, M. (2009). Human rights and climate change. In Cambridge University Press eBooks. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511770722

Occupational Health and Safety in Ethiopia: A review of Situational Analysis and Needs Assessment. (2016). PubMed. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28867918/

Xu, C., Kohler, T. A., Lenton, T. M., Svenning, J., & Scheffer, M. (2020). Future of the human climate niche. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(21), 11350–11355. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1910114117

Akanwa, A. O., & Joe-Ikechebelu, N. (2019). The developing world’s contribution to global warming and the resulting consequences of climate change in these regions: a Nigerian case study. In IntechOpen eBooks. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.85052