Климатическая справедливость должна начинаться со справедливости в развитии

Climate justice begins with development justiceComments AA Text Size Small Medium Large Climate justice must begin with development justice for the Global South. (AI-generated image) The Global South cannot be asked to choose between preserving the planet for future generations and fulfilling its responsibilities to those living today. The real challenge is to make development itself cleaner, more resilient and more inclusive.Climate change is no longer a distant warning about an uncertain future. It is already reshaping economies, societies and livelihoods. Extreme heat, floods, droughts, wildfires and changing rainfall patterns are imposing real economic costs, while the transition to a low-carbon world is beginning to transform investment, technology, trade and geopolitics. There is, therefore, no serious argument against climate action. The more difficult question is how that action should be designed in a world of profoundly unequal starting points.For much of the Global South, climate action does not take place in a vacuum. It has to happen alongside the continuing struggle to provide reliable electricity, decent housing, roads and transport, jobs, industrialisation, food security and higher standards of living. Millions of people who are being asked to embrace a cleaner future are still waiting for the benefits of the development that much of the developed world achieved over the past two centuries.This is why the climate debate needs a stronger development lens. The Indian dilemma: 2047 and 2070 India perhaps illustrates this tension better than any other major economy. India has simultaneously embraced two extraordinary objectives: becoming a developed country by 2047 and reaching net-zero emissions by 2070. Neither objective can be sacrificed for the other.The first is a developmental imperative. The second is a planetary responsibility.But becoming a developed economy will require enormous additions to energy consumption. India will need more electricity, more steel, cement, aluminium, transport, housing and industrial capacity. NITI Aayog's recent scenarios underline precisely this challenge: demand for steel, cement and aluminium could increase four- to six-fold by 2070, even as India pursues deep decarbonisation. Its modelling also recognises that coal consumption could continue rising until 2047 even as the country moves towards net zero.This is not an argument for postponing the energy transition. It is an argument for acknowledging its complexity. India has already demonstrated that economic growth and emissions reduction can move together. Its emissions intensity has fallen substantially, and the country crossed 50% of cumulative installed electricity capacity from non-fossil sources in 2025, five years ahead of its original 2030 target.But installed capacity is not the same as energy actually consumed. Solar and wind cannot, by themselves, guarantee round-the-clock power for a rapidly industrialising economy. Storage, transmission, hydro, nuclear power, gas, bioenergy and, for some time, coal will all have roles to play.The objective should therefore be not fossil fuels at any cost, but progressively cleaner, more secure and more affordable energy. Indeed, India's current discussion around expanding nuclear power is an example of why the transition must be pragmatic. The country is considering a massive expansion of nuclear capacity to meet rising electricity demand while reducing carbon intensity. The present generation cannot be sacrificed for the next There is an uncomfortable moral question at the heart of the climate debate. We rightly speak about our responsibility to future generations. But governments also have an equally compelling responsibility to the generation alive today.A government in a developing country cannot tell a family without reliable electricity that its development aspirations must wait until the global energy system has been completely decarbonised. Nor can it tell a young person without a job that economic growth is an environmental luxury.Preserving the planet for the next generation cannot mean abandoning the developmental responsibilities owed to the present generation..The answer is not to choose development over climate - or climate over development. It is to make development itself increasingly climate-compatible.That means building cities differently, investing in resilient infrastructure, improving energy efficiency, electrifying transport, developing green hydrogen, expanding renewable energy, strengthening grids and storage, and using technologies such as carbon capture where they are economically and technically justified.It also means recognising that the Global South is not merely a beneficiary of climate action. It can be an important source of solutions. India's experience with affordable solar deployment, digital public infrastructure, energy efficiency, biofuels, public transport and climate-resilient development offers lessons that are potentially relevant far beyond India. Finance is the missing bridge The transition, however, will not happen through technology alone. It requires capital - on a scale that developing countries cannot provide entirely from their own balance sheets.At COP29, countries agreed on a goal of at least $300 billion a year in climate finance for developing countries by 2035, alongside a broader effort to scale financing from all sources to $1.3 trillion annually. The direction is welcome. But the question is whether the money will arrive in forms and at costs that developing countries can actually use.For countries with competing demands on public expenditure, expensive capital can make a theoretically attractive climate solution economically impossible. Climate finance must therefore move beyond announcements to affordable finance, risk-sharing, guarantees, technology transfer and investment in bankable projects. The real test will be the journey from the first mile of financing to the last mile of delivery. Climate policy is becoming trade policy There is another dimension that the Global South can no longer ignore: the intersection between climate and trade. The European Union's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism entered its definitive regime on January 1, 2026, covering sectors including steel, aluminium, cement, fertilisers, electricity and hydrogen.The EU describes CBAM as a mechanism to prevent carbon leakage and establish a carbon price on embedded emissions in imported goods. But for developing countries, the issue goes beyond environmental policy. It touches competitiveness, market access, industrialisation and the ability to participate in global value chains. This is why the climate conversation must be connected to the trade conversation.Climate measures cannot become a new generation of barriers that effectively penalise countries because they are at different stages of development. At the same time, developing countries must recognise that carbon intensity will increasingly influence global competitiveness. The answer lies in cooperation rather than confrontation: common standards where possible, technology partnerships, credible measurement systems, adequate transition periods and financial support for decarbonising industry. A different way of thinking about climate justice There is also a deeper intellectual dimension to this debate. In the Indic tradition, Prakriti and Prakrit - nature and human beings - are not seen as separate worlds. The idea of Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam, that the world is one family, similarly emphasises interdependence. Across the Global South, traditions such as Ubuntu express a related idea: human well-being is inseparable from our relationship with others and with the world around us. These are not substitutes for economics or science. But they remind us that climate policy is ultimately about people.A successful transition must therefore be judged not merely by tonnes of carbon avoided, but also by whether it creates jobs, expands opportunity, improves resilience and leaves societies more prosperous and secure. That is the real meaning of a just transition.The climate challenge demands ambition. But ambition without realism can become inequitable; realism without ambition can become an excuse for inaction. The Global South is asking for neither. It is asking for the right to develop, while developing differently.For India, the road from 2026 to 2047 and then to 2070 will require precisely this balance: rapid economic transformation, massive energy expansion, technological innovation and progressively deeper decarbonisation. The ultimate objective should not be to choose between the planet and prosperity. It should be to build a prosperity that protects the planet. And that is why climate justice must begin with development justice. Disclaimer: Views expressed above are the author's own. End of Article Follow Us On Social Media