There is a climate and ecological emergency, caused by humans – all of us but some more than others – often without realising our impact. These problems are affecting our planet and our communities already, and are predicted to get much worse unless we rapidly take action. The good news is that we do have all the knowledge and technologies needed to solve these problems – we simply have act, and fast! Click or tap the sections below to learn more.
The solutions – grassroots – the need and opportunity for individual and community action
The climate and ecological emergencies are caused by the sum-total of actions by individuals and organisations.
As an individual we have the power to significantly influence and reduce our own environmental footprint but to also influence many other individuals and even organisations or Governments to do their bit too.
Governments are in theory elected to deliver the general will and intent of the people; therefore, a failure by Government to deliver the necessary regulation and funding to address our climate and ecological emergency does relate back to a lack of a clear message from the people to the Government that this should be prioritised. Everyone who recognises there is a climate and ecological emergency needs to send clear and regular messages to Government that addressing this is a critical priority for us. We can do this in a number of ways, such as by signing petitions, participating in surveys and by changing our behaviours and preferences to support our view. Making or joining protests are powerful opportunities to make your feelings known for those who are comfortable with such approaches; these could be peaceful protests, or non-violent direct action such as that undertaken by Extinction Rebellion (for those personally willing to accept the potential legal and social ramifications). Although we might not all agree on the exact methods used, anyone who risks their liberty to fight to address the climate and ecological emergency is making a significant personal sacrifice and deserves our sympathy and support.
Climate Assembly UK demonstrated that when a representative cross section of the UK population are confronted with climate science, empowered with knowledge about solutions and given the opportunity to suggest policies, they actually do recommend widespread changes, including some to individual behaviour.
This and also various public surveys suggest that many people support taking climate action, however, they are not necessarily telling others that they do. We commonly underestimate how many people actually do care about addressing the climate and ecological emergencies; this unfortunately also tends to discourage us all from taking personal action. Therefore, it is critical that all of us who do care talk about our views more often, share what we’re doing to reduce our impact and help encourage others.
EcoTracker’s Method is designed to support you to achieve these aims within the necessary timescales by minimising your personal environmental impact and maximising your wider positive influence. See our Approach and Actions pages for further details on how EcoTracker can support you.
By reducing our CO2 emissions we are helping to reduce the scale and impact of climate change, and therefore the chance that ourselves and others will be majorly impacted.
By reducing our ecological footprint we are reducing the human pressure on the natural world, allowing nature to flourish and support us; most importantly we are reducing the risk of widespread ongoing species extinctions and ecosystem collapse.
The solutions – high level
By tackling the fundamental causes of many linked crises (including the climate and ecological emergency, water scarcity, health, air quality, the over-use of fertilisers, inequality etc) together, we can maximise our impact. The UN’s 17 Sustainable Development Goals seek to frame the full range of core linked issues so they can be considered holistically when determining solutions.
Governments around the world must play a major role in co-ordinating the climate and ecological emergency response efforts as they have the most opportunity to influence the system. As above it is essential that individuals and communities demand that they do this. Governments have previously come together and agreed to tackle environmental crises, such as the hole in the ozone layer, for which actions were agreed in the Montreal Protocol (1987). They can come together and agree necessary actions once again. Climate justice must be a key consideration for Governments as they progress this – see more on this further below.
Technological solutions such as increased use of energy efficient or renewable energy technology will be required, but technological solutions alone are insufficient; social solutions including the setting of regulations, the development of effective finance to promote solutions, and behavioural changes by individuals will also be critical. Thankfully, as confirmed in IPCC’s AR6 Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change report, in recent years there has been a sustained reduction in the upfront costs of solar energy, wind energy, and lithium-ion batteries, as well as large increases in their deployment. This has made them cost effective to implement compared to fossil fuels. IPCC’s report also suggests that the global economic benefit of limiting warming to 2°C exceeds the cost of mitigation actions, whilst there are similar benefits vs costs when targeting 1.5°C and many mitigation options are available now in all sectors that could offer substantial potential to reduce CO2 emissions by 2030.. Essentially this says that addressing the climate emergency, with all the associated benefits, may have limited impact on or may even improve our economy in the long run. Upfront costs should be seen as attractive investments in our future.
During the coronavirus pandemic there has been a clear short-term reduction in CO2 emissions as a result of reduced consumption of certain products and activities. Whilst the driver for this reduction is wholly tragic, the changes in behaviour and the observed reduction serve to clearly evidence and illustrate the large impact of our cumulative consumption choices have on CO2 emissions and other environmental factors like air pollution, and the benefits of changing our behaviour.
The Centre for Alternative Technology‘s Zero Carbon Britain: Rising to the Climate Emergency report assesses how net zero carbon could be achieved in the UK whilst also restoring our ecosystems. They conclude that “we already have the tools and technology needed to efficiently power the UK with 100% renewable energy, to feed ourselves sustainably and so to play our part in leaving a safe and habitable climate for our children and future generations.”
This will require rapid changes including widespread improvements in energy efficiency, increases in renewable energy generation, changes in land use and land management techniques, and some changes to individual behaviour including some reduction in travel and a level of dietary change (which will bring health benefits).
Offsetting involves paying an organisation to reduce CO2 emissions on your behalf by making a change or removing CO2 from the atmosphere elsewhere in the world.
A level of offsetting may be critical to addressing the Climate and ecological emergency, but the highest priority is to all take Action to reduce our environmental impact. The offsetting mechanisms available to us fall well short of the capacity to absorb all of the CO2 emitted globally. We can’t simply rely on the reductions that others make as they themselves will also need to get to net zero carbon.
Nature-based approaches to offsetting (e.g. rewilding) are often the most cost effective, have the most potential for a self-sustaining legacy and can have positive impacts to address linked crises including (but not limited to):
- Removing CO2 from the atmosphere as plants grow
- Providing a habitat for a wide variety of species
- Supporting a wide variety of pollinators that can help improve yields on nearby farms.
- Capturing rainwater, slowing run-off, and reducing the flood risk downstream
- Improving the water quality that enters rivers
- Reducing soil erosion
- Improving our air quality
- Providing opportunities for recreation and improved health and wellbeing
Nature-based approaches can contribute towards addressing many of the environmental-focused UN SDGs e.g. Climate Change and Life on Land. However, social factors are critical to ensure long term success. Local communities must be engaged and have a key stake in projects. When this is achieved effectively it can also contribute to many of the social-focused UN SDGs, including:
- No poverty
- Zero hunger
- Decent work and economic growth
- Sustainable cities and communities
Nature-based approaches may need relatively little management, although active management can be particularly valuable when we need to create specific habitats to support specific species in danger of extinction. With active management we should also ensure that the right feature goes in the right place, fit for the local context and minimising the risk of human and natural disturbance (which can reverse the carbon storage and nature benefits). Tree planting can be damaging if done without considering the context and some areas may not be suitable.
Action to address climate change must include both mitigation and adaption, as we have already set climate change in motion. Mitigation (i.e. reducing our CO2 emissions) is most commonly focused on because this addresses the root cause of climate change. Considering adaption will ensure that the resources that we invest now (e.g. the infrastructure or buildings that we build) will be suitable for use in a warming world, with a long lifespan and will not require a costly redesign later on. Nature-based approaches often help with adaption.
For further detail on the issues above, see the Climate and ecological emergency high level solutions page.
The Problems
Climate change is being caused by the emission of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases (such as methane (CH4)) by humans at a much faster rate than they are naturally emitted, largely through the use of fossil fuels, but also through land use choices. The IPCC‘s Global Warming of 1.5°C report demonstrates that we need to limit global warming to 1.5°C to avoid the worst effects of climate change. In August 2021, the IPCC press release to their AR6 Climate Change 2021:The Physical Science Basis report outlined how “unless there are immediate, rapid and large-scale reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, limiting warming to close to 1.5°C or even 2°C will be beyond reach” i.e. immediate and transformative global action is required. IPCC’s AR6 Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability report (February 2022) stated that “Human-induced climate change, including more frequent and intense extreme events, has caused widespread adverse impacts and related losses and damages to nature and people, beyond natural climate variability” and “The rise in weather and climate extremes has led to some irreversible impacts as natural and human systems are pushed beyond their ability to adapt.” It also reports that “Approximately 3.3 to 3.6 billion people live in contexts that are highly vulnerable to climate change.” The sooner we act, the smaller climate impacts will be.
Climate change is predicted to impact all areas globally, to a greater or lesser extent. We are already observing many impacts. These include (but are not limited to):
- Increased average temperatures of land, air and oceans – causing increased risk of heat waves, droughts and fires
- Increased frequency and intensity of extreme weather events such as storms – with resulting disruption and damage
- Melting of ice and sea level rise – causing increasing flood risk to coastal settlements with resulting disruption and damage
- Increased habitat changes and species extinctions (see the ecological crisis section below for further impacts)
For further information on these and other climate change impacts along with the current scientific basis for climate change and the required climate action, read the IPCC’s AR6 Climate Change 2021:The Physical Science Basis and AR6 Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability reports.
There are already many deaths are caused by climate change. As reported by Grist, a study suggested that around 100,000 people per year are currently killed by heat who would not have died if climate change was not happening. In 2018, the World Health Organisation estimated that between 2030 and 2050, climate change is expected to cause approximately 250,000 additional human deaths per year (i.e. 5 million over 20 years). We consider this may actually be many times higher over the short term and human extinction in the longer term (see the Ecological crisis section).
The worst affected areas are expected to be those that have contributed least to climate change and that are less able to cope with the impacts, with inequality increasing as a result. Therefore, climate justice and social equity are key themes to consider. See the Climate justice section below for further detail on this.
Current climate action is targeted at limiting global warming to 2°C and is insufficient even to achieve that aim. IPCC’s AR6 Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change report confirms that:
- without a strengthening of policies beyond those that are implemented by the end of 2020, greenhouse gas emissions are projected to rise beyond 2025, leading to a warming of 3.2°C.
- to limit warming to 1.5°C or even 2°C, rapid, deep and in most cases immediate greenhouse gas emission reductions are required in all sectors.
Many hope that the series of annual COP summits will generate the high level global commitments and agreements required to promote action to limit global warming to 1.5°C and avoid the worst effects of climate change. Despite minor progress over time, politicians and nation states currently categorically fail to propose actions at anywhere near the scale or speed needed to address the Climate and ecological emergency. None of the large nations with significant impact and influence have yet even proposed to ‘do their bit’ at home sufficiently, so it is no surprise that the overall agreement to date is disappointingly weak. However, by supporting and progressing grassroots community and individual action (see above), together we can go a long way towards making up for the failings of our politicians.
Watch this video from Climate Adam which outlines some of the principles behind climate targets and considers whether achieving net zero carbon by 2050 is enough to limit global warming to 1.5°C.
The IPCC have outlined the global decarbonisation pathways that are required to limit global warming to 1.5°C:
These pathways are based on the concept of a remaining CO2 budget that we are able to emit and the graph represents several scenarios and approaches that could be taken to achieve the aim; these demonstrate we need to take significant action to reduce our CO2 emissions before 2030. The different pathway lines cross over in the middle and then spread out, demonstrating that the quicker we start acting, the less we need to do overall and that even small delays now will make it much more challenging to succeed.
Furthermore, there are uncertainties over the size of the remaining carbon budget and the likelihood of actions resulting in the modelled outcomes. See Carbon Brief article for further detail and commentary on this. We would be wise to adopt the precautionary principle and limit the risk of bad consequences by acting faster than the modelling assumes.
For further detail on the issues above, see the Climate emergency page.
The ecological emergency is caused by a variety of pressures placed on the natural world by the collective action of humans. With an increasing population and consumption our impacts increase. Nature is declining globally at rates unprecedented in human history and the rate of species extinctions is accelerating.
The IPBES comprise a large group of leading scientists who in 2019 collectively demonstrated this in their 2019 Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. However, they do confirm that nature can be conserved and restored whilst meeting other human goals, if there is urgent and transformative change.
Human impacts on nature include (but are not limited to):
- degrading and fragmenting habitats leaving insufficient space for nature e.g. by building urban areas or through unsustainable farming practices.
- climate change, which changes the conditions in an area such that organisms are no longer adapted to live there.
- pollution, which can weaken or directly kill organisms.
- noise, which can make it more challenging for wildlife to communicate.
Our lifestyles contribute to all of these factors and in the modern globalised economy we have a significant impact elsewhere in the world in unexpected ways. Our ecological footprint is measured in global hectares, and represents the land area needed to support our lifestyle, including the extraction of raw materials, processing, growing of food etc. In many rich and densely populated countries such as the UK, the land required to support the population’s ecological footprint is significantly larger than the country’s land area.
We are fundamentally a part of the natural world and we depend on its ongoing health for our prosperity and ultimately for our survival. For free, nature provides us with the air that we breath, the food we eat, the water we drink and many of the materials we use. Supporting nature one of the most powerful ways to reduce global CO2 emissions. It helps reduce flood risk, gives us space for recreation, and also improves our health and wellbeing!
The IPBES 2019 report suggests that land/sea-use change is the biggest driver of the declines in nature, as shown in their summary diagram (see the size of the dark blue bars in the chart below relative to the other factors):
Therefore, it follows that, restoring natural habitats and giving nature back its home is the most powerful thing that we can do to stop the decline in nature.
The diagram also lists some powerful measures of the decline in nature: for instance, the global biomass of wild mammals has fallen by an estimated 82% since pre-history, which suggests a huge fall in the number of individuals of such species.
Also IPBES confirms that “the global rate of species extinction is already at least tens to hundreds of times higher than the average rate over the past 10 million years and is accelerating.” See below diagram which illustrates the high extinction risk that many species currently face:
Some scientists suggest that we are now living through the early stages of earth’s 6th great mass extinction event. When ecosystems collapse, they do so in an unpredictable manner. We have greater ingenuity than past species, however, we remain reliant on many other species in the ecosystem, and so we ourselves are vulnerable to becoming extinct during a mass extinction event.
The greater the diversity of species and healthy habitats available, the more resilient the ecosystem will be.
Species and habitats can be lost extremely quickly to human pressure, but mature habitats may take hundreds of years to develop while new species usually take tens of thousands to millions of years to evolve. Therefore if we lose critical species and habitats, we cannot expect to replace them.
A Global Deal for Nature targets that by 2030, 30% of Earth should be formally protected and an additional 20% designated as climate stabilisation areas as a critical part of limiting global warming to 1.5°C.
For further detail on the issues above, see the Ecological emergency page.
There are a variety of other linked crises. To best address the Climate and Ecological Emergencies and other linked crises, we can consider planetary ceilings and social foundations and we can prioritise measures that address multiple linked crises, such as nature-based approaches (e.g. rewilding)
Stockholm Resilience Centre (Rockström et al., 2009) developed the idea of a safe operating space for humanity in which key planetary boundaries are defined that we must not exceed, including climate change, biosphere (global ecosystem) integrity, freshwater use, ocean acidification, and others. To maintain a healthy and prosperous planet for humans – our one and only planet – we must reduce our impact and stay within these boundaries. The model continues to be refined and developed, with ongoing efforts to better define the boundaries and interlinks between the boundaries.
Kate Raworth’s Doughnut model has expanded upon this concept to add a social foundation to the planetary (ecological) ceiling. The social foundation represents the essential minimum social standards that allow humans to live a good life, which we must aim to provide for all humans, whilst not exceeding the ecological ceiling. See below the The Doughnut of social and planetary boundaries (2017)):
If you view the above on Kate Raworth’s website and hover your cursor over parts of the image, the ecological ceiling and social foundation elements are quantified.
Evidently there are many other linked crises as well as the climate and ecological emergency, including water scarcity in many places, health and the over-use of fertilisers. All of these factors can add additional stress to our natural systems as well as our social systems. A recent scientific study (Vohra et al, 2021 and with further commentary from The Guardian) estimated that 8.7 million global human premature deaths in 2018 were caused by air pollution, related to the burning of fossil fuels. So, not only does the widespread burning of fossil fuels cause climate change, but it directly causes millions of human deaths per year.
As referenced above in the high-level solutions section, nature-based approaches (e.g. rewilding) are often the most cost effective, have the most potential for a self-sustaining legacy and can have positive impacts in many ways (and tackle associated linked crises) including (but not limited to):
- Removing CO2 from the atmosphere as plants grow
- Providing a habitat for a wide variety of species
- Supporting a wide variety of pollinators that can help improve yields on nearby farms.
- Capturing rainwater, slowing run-off, and reducing the flood risk downstream
- Improving the water quality that enters rivers
- Reducing soil erosion
- Improving our air quality
- Giving us opportunities for recreation and improved health and wellbeing
When local communities are engaged and have a key stake in projects, linked social crises and climate justice can also be tackled, such as:
- Poverty
- Hunger
- Poor work opportunities
- Unsustainable cities and communities
It is critical to consider climate justice and social equity when addressing the climate and ecological emergency. Essentially climate justice relates to creating a fairer world when tackling climate change, which includes addressing the unequalness and unfairness of the impacts of climate change. Many people around the world are struggling with climate injustices right now and need our support. Often those who are struggling the most have done little to cause climate change. We must seek to ensure that no-one is left behind and that the benefits of taking climate action are shared.
Watch these videos. The BBC outline key climate justice issues and the UNHCR remind us that the climate emergency is a human crisis.
Climate impacts are felt globally but responsibility is not equal. For instance, the IPCC’s AR6 Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change report outlines how the 10% of households with the highest per capita greenhouse gas emissions contribute 34-45% of global emissions, while the middle 40% contribute 40-53%, and the bottom 50% contribute only 13-15%. For climate justice to occur, those who are the bigger contributors to climate change should bear the most responsibility for addressing climate change.
Climate impacts affect people differently and amplifies any existing inequalities. The areas predicted to be affected worst by climate change are expected to be those that have contributed least and that are less able to cope with the impacts. A Carbon Brief article on climate justice points out that small island developing states contribute less than 1% of emissions but are already suffering significant climate impacts and face existential risks (being lost to sea level rise) as global temperatures increase. Climate change disproportionately impacts the poor, including those in relatively richer countries, but particularly those relatively poorer countries. Climate change is expected to increase existing inequalities, making the poor even poorer, while poorer countries are less able to deal with the impacts of climate change. Climate change also amplifies all other types of existing inequalities including race, gender, disabilities, sexual orientation etc. Those who are poor and/or marginalised have less resilience to climate change impacts and also less opportunity to influence the response of their community to mitigate and adapt to climate change. Indigenous communities are particularly vulnerable to injustices, such as land grabs, and inequality.
Climate change is severely affecting people around the world right now. There are already significant losses to livelihoods around the world and far more predicted in future. There are already climate refugees, forced to move from their homes due to the changing climate. There are already many health issues caused by climate change and children are particularly affected. There are already many deaths are caused by climate change. As reported by Grist, a study by Vicedo-Cabrera et al. (2021) suggested that around 100,000 people per year are currently killed by heat who would not have died if climate change was not happening. There are also many further impacts and deaths linked to our unsustainable lifestyles which would be avoided if we addressed the climate emergency. For instance, a study by Vohra et al (2021), described in the Guardian, attribute a huge 8.7million global excess deaths in 2018 to air pollution from the burning of fossil fuels, one in five of the people who died that year. The use of fossil fuels can also, in some cases, help to fund wars and social injustices, on top of the social issues climate change can cause to promote social unrest directly.
Historic responsibility for climate change should be accounted for and differs from our current emissions. As well as providing the majority of current emissions, wealthier countries are also historically responsible for the vast majority of historic emissions.
Climate finance and loss and damage are critical to solve the climate emergency and ensure climate justice. Relatively wealthy countries need to support relatively less wealthy countries with climate finance and compensation for climate change damage such that they can both mitigate and adapt to climate change.
By addressing the climate emergency, we can create a fairer world and improve social justice and equity.
Intergenerational justice is another critical consideration. The youth and future generations (i.e. our children, grandchildren etc) have not caused the climate and ecological emergency, but it is they who will be forced to experience it at its worst. It is the duty of all of us to protect their future.
Justice for nature and rights for the natural world are also worth fighting for. True climate justice would encompass and protect nature, which includes other organisms who experience many of the same sensations and emotions that we do.
For further detail on the issues above, see the Climate justice page.