What is the UK’s responsibility for climate action?

The complexity of conversation surrounding who is responsible for various aspects of climate change risks paralysing debate on urgently needed climate policy. Without a broadly accepted agreement on the UK’s historical responsibility for global heating and climate change, and the policy proposals an agreement would produce, we risk delaying action through speaking past one another and potentially misdiagnosing our responsibilities if the currently dominant narrative is accepted. Discourse on responsibility in most press outlets, particularly tabloids, does not get surpass the assertion that ‘Extinction Rebellion should go and protest in China,’ an allusion to China’s current total annual emissions outpacing the UK by 28:1. The climate justice and broader environmentalist movement in the UK would benefit from a greater literacy in the UK and Global North’s historical responsibility for climate change and what this is implies. Whilst research in this field is often dense and impenetrable, it is easily distilled into a clear and palatable argument. 

The logic of the dominant argument is clear. China currently emits 28 times more greenhouse gases than the UK, its emissions are rising and ours are declining, why should I and my compatriots give up prized aspects of our lifestyles when the impact of doing so is totally insignificant vis-à-vis China? The communication of this issue by reformist environmentalists, mass media and tory politicians is perniciously optimistic, it produces broad apathy in many, leaving people feeling overwhelmed and powerless both as an individual and as a collective to meaningfully contribute to global emissions reductions. The apathy produced serves the interests of reformist environmentalists and proponents of ‘green growth’ (“business-as-usual) as individuals are uncompelled to radically alter their behaviour, continuing to consume high quantities of resources as a result of this paradigmatic collective action problem. This logic, however, does not hold up well to scrutiny when faced with challenges from ecological economics and the climate justice movement.  

In a climate activists’ toolkit, the most immediate rebuttal against the previously made argument regards considering emissions on both a per capita basis and cumulatively over time. The argument that Extinction Rebellion should go and protest in China holds less water when per capita CO2 emissions (tonnes) in 2019 were at a ratio of 1.4:1, with China producing 7.1 tonnes/cap as opposed to UK producing 5.1 (China:UK). Perhaps Extinction Rebellion should go and protest more in the USA, who produced 14.4 tonnes/cap in 2019, or even Qatar who produced 30.7 tonnes/cap. ...