Printer-friendly VersionEmail to a Friend

Climate Change: The Fight for Asia's Future

The skeptics are diminishing but the challenges are mounting, says Rajendra Pachauri, Chair of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

Rajendra Pachauri, Chair of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Photo by AFP

The data are in and there is little doubt that human activity influences climate change. Now, development institutions must take the lead in finding ways to address the problem, says Rajendra Pachauri, Chair of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The panel issues regular reports to provide decision makers and others interested in climate change with an objective source of information about the subject. In December, the panel, chaired by Pachauri since 2002, shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with former US Vice President Al Gore. Development Asia interviewed Pachauri about the impact of climate change on Asia, the effect that the popularity of the issue is having on his work, and the role of development institutions in addressing the problem.

What is your reaction to the IPCC receiving the Nobel Prize?

It is an honor that goes to all the scientists and authors who have contributed to the work of the IPCC. It has resulted in enormous prestige for this organization. The IPCC’s strength lies in the processes and procedures that it follows and, most importantly, its ability to carry out rigorous scientific assessment, which receives the scrutiny of government representatives. This makes its results acceptable to governments. There is no other body in the world that is able to meet these twin objectives simultaneously.

What do you think of the explosion of public interest in climate change?

In some sense it has been mind-boggling because one never expected this kind of response. But it also indicates that there are underlying concerns and people are making observations related to climate change. I think this level of awareness on a subject like this is something unprecedented.

Is there a possibility of overreaction by the public to climate change?

We need to provide people the right information, the right data, so that their interest in the subject is kept alive and doesn’t lead to those who are ill-informed influencing their thinking in the wrong direction. There is a definite danger of over-reaction. Often when there is an extreme weather event, the immediate response is: “Oh, this must be connected to climate change.” That clearly is not the right approach. There are variations in the weather for natural reasons. That has been the case throughout the history of this planet. To immediately jump to that conclusion, and make those connections, is not helpful.

But many devastating natural disasters have appeared in recent years. Are you saying these are not linked to climate change?

We have projected that there is likely to be an increase in extreme events. That means heat waves, droughts, floods, and large quantities of rainfall in short periods of time. This poses a challenge that will perhaps increase over time. That doesn’t mean there is a direct connection between every extreme weather event that we experience now and climate change.

Is it possible that climate change is not being caused by human activity?

There is no longer any doubt about the human signature on climate change. The case is much stronger. We have much greater confidence in stating that human influence is impacting on climate change, and we now say that it is very likely, as against likely, which was the case with the previous [IPCC] report.

Will the debate on climate change rage on or will it come to a close, based on the IPCC’s comprehensive reports?

The consensus has grown very rapidly. There are, of course, still skeptics who question the validity of our findings. I think their numbers are dwindling. It’s not just the scientific community but also the public at large that I think has become convinced about the reality of climate change and the fact that humans are influencing it. The number of skeptics is reducing rapidly.

Illustration by Mervin Malonzo

What will be the impact of climate change on Asia?

Of great concern is water scarcity, which is likely to increase. There are also expected impacts on agriculture, which we need to be concerned about because this has implications for food security. The melting of the glaciers is also something that is of great concern to this region, particularly the Himalayan glaciers. So many countries and communities depend on a stable supply of water coming from these glaciers. Overall, water is going to be an extremely critical sector that climate change is going to impact upon.

There is also the problem of sea level rise, given the fact that we have a number of low-lying coastal areas in Asia. The most extreme case perhaps is Bangladesh, but there are many small island states that we have to worry about. This has implications not only in terms of the threat of submergence but also, even well before that, in terms of greater intrusion of saline water into the groundwater systems in these countries. This obviously will make it difficult for people to meet their needs for drinking water and very basic requirements.

Why should development organizations be involved in this issue?

Climate change is an important issue from the point of view of development and equity because the poorest people in the world are going to be most affected by climate change. Poor people, not only in developing countries but also the poor in developed countries, will be the hardest-hit victims.

How should international financial institutions deal with the issue of climate change?

The problem of climate change has occurred because we have deviated from the path of sustainable development. I think it is essential that we integrate the elements of climate change explicitly in all development activities.

We also need to ensure that we adapt to climate change. If we don’t, then the impacts will erode economic activity to a significant extent and will therefore result in a loss of human welfare. Since development institutions are in the business of creating solutions that will ensure an increase in economic welfare, then I think integrating climate change into projects and programs across the board becomes imperative.

How this has to be done is not all that simple, but first we need to understand the manner in which climate change is going to affect different sectors and different regions. Then adaptation measures that anticipate these impacts can be devised.

Can you give an example of how that might work in actual practice?

We need to be conscious of the fact that the emissions of greenhouse gases need to be limited in projects. All things being equal, if there is an approach by which one could reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases while being able to obtain the objectives of a particular project, then clearly the choice needs to be made in favor of the low-carbon option.

Projects also need to take into account the impacts of climate change that are already taking place. If one is investing in a hydroelectric power station, for instance, one has to take into account the changes in precipitation regimes that are likely to occur in the future as a result of climate change. That might require the altering of the very design of the dam structure. If project officers don’t take into account the impacts of climate change, their institutions could be making unsuccessful investments.

How do you balance the huge energy needs of developing countries with the requirements of cutting the emissions of greenhouse gases?

I think we have to bring about a shift toward a much more efficient use of energy. If one does that, then to the extent that it is feasible we can reduce the demand for energy. Secondly, we need to shift toward a more efficient use of coal technology. If you can do that, you produce the same amount of electricity with a lower quantity of coal. Both on the supply and consumption end, we need to look for efficient technology solutions.

Should international financial institutions stop supporting coal projects?

I don’t think so. I think that will be a shortsighted move. It might be politically popular to do that, but if one is in the business of trying to promote development, and given the fact that a number of countries are trying to address the problems of poverty, then merely turning away from coal projects is not the solution. What is far more effective is to think in terms of “good coal-based projects”—those that use the best technology, even if the costs are higher.

I think that one has to take a pragmatic and realistic view of this issue. Those countries that have large coal resources really can’t forego options that are dependent on the utilization of coal. How do these countries use these coal resources in the most efficient manner with the least impact on climate change? That is where development organizations play an important role in helping find these solutions and strategies. •