“Tell me, how large is the population of your country?” the representative from China asked Christiana Figueres, the representative from Costa Rica, during a lunch break at the Kyoto Protocol negotiations in 1997. They had just spent the morning debating the establishment of the Clean Development Mechanism, which would allow developing countries to earn tradable carbon credits by implementing emission-reduction projects.
Costa Rica, one of the smaller countries present with a population of 4.8 million compared to China’s 1.5 billion, was strongly advocating for this market-based implementation scheme. The industry-dependent China, on the other hand, was less interested in this prospect. In an attempt to scare Costa Rica away from accomplishing their intended resolution, China played the size card.
In so doing, China implied, “we are bigger than you, and we are right.”
Figueres was not convinced. She returned to negotiations with renewed zeal, drawing upon her passionate and inspiring voice to persuade more and more countries to support and eventually pass the Clean Development Mechanism.
This episode suggests that smaller countries have power on the world stage — at least in the context of climate change negotiations. Figueres, who went on to serve as the executive secretary of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, told the HPR that far from being weak, they are the powerhouses that drive change: smaller countries, despite their negligible emissions and their correspondingly negligible contributions to emissions reductions, can play an important role in solving the climate problem.
Just as Costa Rica was able to push through the passage of the Clean Development Mechanism during the Kyoto Protocol negotiations, smaller countries can act as political pioneers to pilot solutions that will combat climate change.
Not just up to the big dogs
The world is currently embroiled by the uncertain political legacy of the 2015 Paris Agreement. As natural disasters increase around the world, and concurrent public concern for climate issues builds, large polluting economies like the United States and China have garnered increasing criticism for their relative inaction towards this grave humanitarian threat.
Indeed, the politics of climate change have always leaned towards expecting large countries to carry a greater share of the burden, and for good reason — they are often the biggest polluters. In fact, the United States and China alone are responsible for 45 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions. Clearly, it is important that these two countries play a substantial role in cutting down carbon emissions, but it should not just be up to the big countries to take the lead.
Policy-led transition
“We are not going to solve our environmental problems without significant technological innovation,” stated Andrew Grant, a senior partner at McKinsey and the co-leader of McKinsey’s Sustainability and Resource Productivity Practice, in an interview with the HPR. Figueres agrees, arguing that in order to effect this technological revolution, the transition that needs to be made is inherently policy-led. Thus, small countries, with their political nimbleness, are the ideal starting point for these technologies to develop.
The Industrial and Information revolutions were sparked by technological innovations such as the steam engine and the computer chip; the policies to regulate their consequences followed suit. This time, it is different. The urgency with which we need to address the climate issue does not allow for the slow process of unregulated technological development. Rather, it requires the deliberate support of government subsidies and policies to ensure that the technology develops fast enough to be able to start reducing emissions before it is too late.
In an attempt to trigger exactly this policy revolution, the Paris Agreement was drawn up in 2015. An unprecedented 195 countries committed to targets that will reduce their carbon emissions. In order to achieve these targets and to ensure that technology develops fast enough, the world needs real and tangible political change. But how do we know what policies to put in place, and which ones will be effective? The answer lies in the political pioneering of small countries.
From his vantage point in the small, climate-conscious country of New Zealand, Grant sees that the only way to cut emissions is through technological innovation, sparked by political innovation. Grant offers examples ranging from New Zealand’s policies to invest in new technologies to reduce the amount of methane in cow flatulence — New Zealand is the country with the largest number of cows per capita — to planting 100 million trees every year under the Billion Trees Planting Scheme. In addition, New Zealand has committed to transitioning entirely to renewable energy by 2035, and zero carbon emissions by 2050.
This political support is evident at the highest levels of New Zealand’s government. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has suggested the implementation of an independent commission to aid in this transition, thereby “ensuring supportive regulations and policies are in place.” These examples demonstrate how small countries can harness the power of new technologies through policy.
Small countries as role models
Figueres, who also played a major role in effecting the Paris Agreement, has emphasized the importance of small countries within climate action. In May 2018, while speaking about climate change at the annual Oslo Business for Peace Conference, she pointed out that “even if we put all [the] small economies together, we cannot make a substantial dent in climate change from a numerical perspective, but we can definitely make an important political dent … [We] can demonstrate that this transition is possible, and in small economies it does tend to be easier because we’re more open to innovation.”
Just as former Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis famously described the individual states within the United States as “laboratories of democracy” that can“try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country,” so too did Figueres’ father, the then-President of Costa Rica, refer to Costa Rica as an “experimental farm” capable of testing out different policies and strategies and determining the best ways forward. Costa Rica is “open to innovation [and is] willing to try new things because we know that humanity needs to progress, and we’re willing to take the first step,” Figueres told the HPR. She believes this applies especially to the climate issue: politically nimble small countries can act as experimental farms for innovative climate solutions and act as role models for other countries.
Another small country leading the way in implementing ambitious policy changes is Norway. Its abundance of fast-flowing rivers generate renewable hydropower, contributing to 98 percent of its electricity production. Norway can therefore sustainably rely on the immediate electrification of its transportation systems to reduce its carbon emissions. According to the New York Times, in order to guide its five million-strong population towards electric cars, the Norwegian government has enacted substantive incentives including tax exemptions and free use of fast lanes otherwise reserved for taxis and buses. These changes make the Tesla Model X luxury cars infinitely more feasible than they once were. As of June 2017, the Model X was the country’s second most popular car. With the pioneering efforts of Oslo, “The Electric Vehicle Capital of the World,” Norway is well on its way to reaching its goal for all new cars to have zero emissions by 2025, compared with the United Kingdom’s 2040 target. As the New York Times further noted, this success has made Norway a “global model of how to get the public to embrace electric vehicles, an experiment that is attracting researchers and policy makers from around the world.”
Punching above their weight
Small countries are not only role models, but also have “huge political sway,” according to Figueres. Indeed, the Paris Agreement was so successful largely because of the pioneering effort of the “High Ambition Coalition.” This coalition initially consisted of only Pacific and Caribbean small-island states who are most vulnerable to the effects of climate change, but who were successful in “punch[ing] above their own weight [because] they punch[ed] together.” They triggered a domino effect of countries joining the coalition that snowballed into much larger political action, eventually reaching 100 member countries.
Just as small countries can make a disproportionate political dent by modelling technological innovations that combat climate change due to their political agility, smaller entities within countries can also achieve a disproportionate impact by banding together and achieving action. Despite President Trump pulling the United States out of the Paris Agreement, American political and business leaders are stepping up to the plate backed by organizations like the bipartisan We Are Still In Coalition. In an attempt to reassure the international community, more than 2,700 U.S. mayors, county executives, governors, tribal leaders, university leaders, businesses, faith groups, and investors from every state have pledged their continued commitment to the Paris Agreement.
Elan Strait, the director for U.S. Climate Campaigns at the World Wildlife Fund who plays a key coordinating role in maintaining the “We Are Still In” Coalition, told the HPR that a main precept of the group is that climate action is most impactful at the state level, particularly when it is collective. Strait described the coalition as a “network of networks” that works to build local networks on the smaller state-level. It is easier for groups to commit to climate action when they can be assured that the collective efforts of the whole group will achieve real results, and if they can follow the lead of others. In fact, California has already succeeded in reducing its emissions to 1990 levels, providing much inspiration for other government entities below the federal level.
Nor is there a shortage of pioneers to follow in the corporate world. Strait points out that some groups in the Coalition are out ahead: Walmart’s unprecedented Project Gigaton made it the first retailer to have a verified Science Based Target emissions-reduction plan. After recognising that over 90 percent of its emissions comes from primary production in its supply chain, Walmart has, with the support of NGOs such as the World Wildlife Fund, launched a project to directly involve its extensive supply chain in its emissions-reductions strategy. As the world’s largest retailer with over 200 million customers, this will substantially contribute to global emissions reductions. In fact, if successful, Walmart and its suppliers will have contributed to eliminating one gigaton of emissions by 2030. Furthermore, Walmart is saving both the environment and money — the project has proven to be a sound business strategy, making Walmart one of America’s leading commercial solar and on-site renewable energy users and saving the company nearly $1 billion compared to its 2005 baseline by doubling the efficiency of its U.S. fleet.
In March 2018, McDonalds followed suit, becoming the world’s first restaurant company to commit to a science-based target for emissions reductions. We Are Still In is valuable because it provides a platform for smaller non-state groups to work together, each providing inspiration to each other, producing infinitely many chain reactions of climate innovation. McDonalds and Walmart are amongst many large and small member businesses that are now committing to more ambitious targets as a result of support from the coalition.
A Chain Reaction
Strait highlighted that the coalition is growing as more political leaders and members of the public are getting on board. The movement is all about achieving a critical mass — a critical mass of countries, cities, leaders, and individuals all united under a common goal to create a better future for the next generation. Thus, the We Are Still In Coalition forms a powerful example of what can be achieved on a global scale.
Climate change is a difficult, multilateral issue; that is why it has taken decades for political leaders to wake up to the urgency it demands and start to take action. But there is “power that comes with being on the right side of history,” said Figueres. If small entities band together to tap into this power and pioneer change for the future, we can start to make a real dent in climate change.
Image Credit: UNclimatechange/Flickr