Who Pays the Price for Climate Change? Rockefeller Foundation’s New Report Offers Some Insights

Between 2016 and 2019, I attended a series of convenings on Ethics in Action for Sustainable and Integral Development. During a lunch break at one of these summits, focusing on the ethical responsibility of protecting our environment in Alpach, I asked a renowned scientist a pressing question: “What would happen in the worst-case scenario?” His response was eye-opening. He explained that while those with resources might manage to cope, the most vulnerable communities in our world would bear the brunt. This includes people living along coastal lines, those susceptible to floods, and individuals most vulnerable to natural disasters – groups Paul Collier calls the “bottom billion.”

The latest report “Vulnerable Populations in a Warming World: Four Futures Explored” by The Rockefeller Foundation, with inputs from Rhodium Group and Catalyst Advisors, sheds further light on this question and the impact of climate change on vulnerable populations through four distinct climate scenarios. These scenarios are based on different emissions pathways for developed, emerging, and energy-poor countries. The focus is on how these scenarios affect humanity, with particular emphasis on agriculture and food, health and mortality, and energy consumption.

The report’s call is clear: current efforts to mitigate and adapt to climate change are insufficient. The “business as usual” scenario leads to at least 2.8°C of planetary warming by 2090, disproportionately affecting the world’s poorest and most vulnerable countries.

The scenarios presented by the Rockefeller Foundation include:

• Global Collaboration: Developed and emerging economies decarbonize rapidly and support decarbonization in energy-poor countries, leading to 1.9°C warming by 2090.

• Fossil Fuels for the Poor: Developed and emerging economies decarbonize, but energy-poor countries rely on fossil fuels, leading to 2.4°C warming.

• Business as Usual: Continuation of current trends resulting in 2.8°C warming.

• Climate Catastrophe: Global climate action halts, and all economies rely on fossil fuels, leading to 4.5°C warming.

The report highlights the need for global cooperation and swift action to prevent temperatures from rising beyond 2°C this century. It emphasizes the need to focus on energy equity and economic opportunity for the least developed countries, advocating for the diffusion of low-carbon technologies to support clean development in energy-poor countries. Even under the best scenario, the planet will experience significant impacts on key life metrics like crop yields and electricity demand.

What would happen if we passed beyond the global collaboration scenario?

Economic Disparity and Impacts

The report underscores that climate change will exacerbate economic disparities, with energy-poor countries bearing disproportionate negative impacts. However, global action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions can significantly reduce these impacts.

Impacts on Agriculture and Nutrition

A rise in global average temperature correlates with decreased crop yields. In the worst-case scenario, the impact on agriculture is almost two-and-a-half times more severe than the Global Collaboration Scenario. This disparity is particularly acute in food-insecure countries.

Health and Mortality

In scenarios where the temperature rises by more than 2.8°C, there is a reversal in the historical pattern of mortality, with more deaths attributed to warm weather than cold. Energy-poor countries experience a net increase in mortality, while developed countries see a net decrease.

Electricity Demand and Impact on Power Generation

In energy-poor countries, even the most benign warming scenario leads to increased electricity demand for cooling, requiring significant new power generation capacity.

In conclusion, it is clear from the report that we urgently need global collaboration on addressing climate change, as inaction comes with severe consequences. In contrast, collaboration can significantly mitigate the impact of changing climate.