The Pathway to a Climate Change Solution

What is the pathway to a climate change solution? This was the focus of a panel I was on recently hosted by the Edinburgh Centre for Carbon Innovation (ECCI) entitled ‘Climate, Covid and Cop26’ with climate change guru Prof Katharine Hayhoe and other stellar academics Prof Elizabeth Bomberg, Prof Gabi Hergl, and Dr Hannah Ritchie, moderated by the ever inspirational Prof Dave Reay.

You can re-watch the full panel here or read on for a brief summary of my thoughts:

In my view, there are three considerations for how to get onto a pathway to a climate change solution.

1.       A formal versus an informal pathway

First, there isn’t just one pathway. There is a formal pathway, yes. But there is also an informal pathway.

The formal pathway includes the UNFCCC and IPCC attempts to develop a global, centralised, solution using the COP (Conference of Parties) meetings, with the next one due for Glasgow 2021 (delayed from 2020 due to Covid). This requires national government prioritisation and agreement. It is a co-ordinated, legislated approach and response with a legitimacy or mandate for action.

Why is this possible? Because so many institutions and people are pushing for this. It is also the most obvious approach to see real impact. Why do I think – on its own – this is unlikely?  Because many currently elected governments are not interested in a solution, or are interested but hamstrung by their political precariousness. An unelected government is not very powerful.

However, an informal pathway also exists. This is where those with other types of power make decisions which gets us onto the pathway to a solution. There are those with collective power. Businesses who decide what to sell, how to make it, what supply chain they use, but also who to support politically and how to use their position to influence clients, customers, their supply chain, and the general public. Additionally, shareholders hold collective power. They decide what to invest in, and how the businesses they own should run. Increasingly there is also a strong movement towards alternative forms of organising such as social enterprises, collectives, B Corps, and community and neighbourhood groups who are building collective power. However, it is also useful to think about distributed power. As individuals, we all have different types and levels of power to support solutions. We choose what we will buy (or not buy), who we will work for, who we will support or influence, and who we will vote for. While as individuals this may not seem significant, by bringing distributed power together we can demonstrate collective power.

If, or possibly when, the formal pathway gets hamstrung by politics and priorities, we are not hopeless. But we need the leadership of those with collective power to achieve this: businesses and other organisations, shareholders, and people.

2.       The role for social sciences

This is where social sciences becomes key. The physical sciences and scientists have got us to a level of understanding of complex climate and other systems, enabling us to model the future degree pathways and impacts. But we as a society aren’t really acting on this extensive knowledge. Why?

The role of social sciences broadly addresses two simple questions:

-          Why aren’t they….?

-          How can they…?

We need more research into why businesses, organisations, shareholders, consumers, politicians, community members aren’t (or are) acting to ensure we are on a pathway to a solution. And we then need to translate that into ‘how can they?’

That is, we don’t have a climate problem – we have a people problem. And a business problem. A government problem. An institutions problem. I could go on. But the thing that all these groups have in common is that they are made up of people. Social scientist research and understand what drives people and to what ends, and how interventions can impact those drivers or outcomes.

3.       Don’t divorce climate change from other issues

Finally, if we want a sustainable (and by that I mean, ongoing) solution, we need them to address the range of issues people are facing: poverty, inequality, human rights etc.

Give a family a fish, you feed them for a day. Teach them to fish, they feed themselves for a lifetime.

Give a family a solar powered stove, you address some carbon emissions. But help them to build a sustainable, just, dignified, low carbon community, they will continue to strengthen that for their entire lifetime.

This doesn’t mean we shouldn’t explore short term ‘wins’ or isolated projects. But ultimately a solutions pathway that will be successful will integrate and solve a range of issues and so be welcomed by all.

Within the complexity, there is simplicity also

The complexities of many of these points are almost overwhelming, and I spend much of my day job exploring them. But there is simplicity too.

-          Those with the greatest power have the greatest responsibility (and opportunity) to get us onto a pathway to a solution.

-          We all have individual power we can exert in different ways.

-          We have a people problem, so focus on the people as the solution.

-          Solve people’s problems (all of them) and those solutions will ensure.

Dr Sarah Birrell Ivory is a Lecturer in Climate Change and Business Strategy at the University of Edinburgh Business School and is the Director of the Centre for Business, Climate Change, and Sustainability.