The World Bank's Executive Summary points out that the impacts of climate change and global warming are already make an impact on the world and will continue to do irreversible damage if a change is not made now. This has adverse implications for development because the poor and underprivileged are being hit the hardest and will continue to be the most seriously affected. Our discussions in class last week revolved around agriculture, touching on how many of the poorest communities rely on agriculture, particularly subsistence farming. Many of the poorest people in the world are dependent on agriculture for food, which is leads to serious issues within these communities with rising temperatures and sea levels. The World Bank Group notes that there will be "large and severe crop yield losses for warming levels above 2°C." Maize productivity is likely to face a significant decline. Maize, along with other crops, are very important export commodities for many countries. Therefore, if these crops are increasingly hard to produce productively, these important export systems will suffer as well. Countries might have to start relying on importing foods, which makes them vulnerable to agricultural impacts in other countries, as well as vulnerable to increased food prices. In all three of the regions mentioned in the report, rural populations will be extremely vulnerable to these agricultural changes due to increasing environmental strains. Development broadly aims to reduce poverty, which will be impossible if these poor communities struggle even more to need their basic needs, particularly concerning nutrition. The report mentioned that in the Middle East and North Africa child malnutrition is highly plausible with sharp declines in yields and an increase in food prices. Decrease food security will be one of the major consequences for the poor communities in these countries with the increasing strains from climate change. Now is the time to act on these environmental issues before it is too late, not only for the sake of the environment but also for development. Development will be almost impossible in a 4°C world, and very difficult in a 2°C world. Governments and international organizations need to come together, stop ignoring the issues, and start to enact policies and initiatives that address these environmental issues.
I appreciated that the World Bank Executive Summary placed emphasis on the likelihood of poor communities being disproportionally affected by the consequences of global climate change. For example, an increase of extreme events is said to affect both rural and urban communities but will more strongly affect the poor residing in unstable infrastructure in higher risk areas (flood plains, steep slopes). Additionally, all three regions mentioned (LACS, MENA, and ECA) were said to experience a notable decrease in agricultural production as a result of changing climate conditions. This, combined with the resulting rise in food prices, will consequently lead to higher hunger and malnutrition rates among the poor in these areas. The piece also talked a lot about a stronger prevalence of flooding instances on the coastlines from melting glaciers and changes in weather patterns. It also mentioned that extreme heat will pose a significant threat for human health. I would assume that those residing in these more vulnerable areas would have to migrate to an area more suitable to reside in. However, many people would presumably not be able to afford to move to a new area altogether and would be faced with a formidable tradeoff of whether they should do so.
On another note, the summary continuously used a 4 °C increase as one of the thresholds for when major consequences of climate change will become a reality. Though this did not initially sound like a lot to me, I was curious of the temperature change resulting in mass extinctions in the past and discovered that “a temperature increase of 5.2 °C above the pre-industrial level at present rates of increase would likely result in mass extinction comparable to that of the major Phanerozoic events, even without other, non-climatic anthropogenic impacts” (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-25019-2). Although we have reached only a 0.8 °C warming today, I think it is crazy that the piece talked about a 4 °C increase as something that is very much in the realm of possibility, and that this temperature is only 1.2 °C off from the 5.2 °C that is said to have caused mass extinctions.
While reading papers like this one can be demoralizing, they are necessary to emphasize the urgency of the situation we find ourselves in. The wide range of ways in which daily life can be impacted by climate change shows that the economic costs of inaction in the long run far outweigh any temporary costs of action. There is clear evidence for a need for change in economic policy, but I would make the argument that broader, political change is just as necessary as economic change. There is overwhelming data to support the implementation of a carbon tax in the United States, but many politicians oppose such a move. I believe that the reason for this is due to the immediate revulsion that many voters have when they hear the word “tax.” This may largely be an educational problem, as there are many times, including this one, where a tax on bads can alleviate taxes on goods to ultimately save ordinary consumers money. However, “raising taxes” is one of the fastest ways for a politician to lost support of his or her constituency. As long as politicians are constantly striving to appease a voter base rather than make substantive change, we will struggle to implement a carbon tax. My proposed political change would be to have single term limits with longer terms placed on most politicians, as this would alleviate pressures to appease voter bases and wealthy lobbying groups. However, change this drastic is unlikely to occur in the short run. The short run economic solution that I think could be the next best step would be the re-implementation of a cap-and-trade system. This would essentially set a limit on pollution and allow corporations to buy and sell the limited rights to pollute. This kind of policy would likely stand a better chance of passing as it avoids the negative connotation of a “tax”. Such a policy has even been put in place under a conservative, Republican administration (George W. Bush) in the past, so it could serve as a valuable way to bypass the resistance that comes from imposing any form of new tax, even if the new tax is supported by data.
I thought this article was interesting and provided a lot of information about climate change that I had not heard about before. One of the more interesting parts of this information is the huge gap between 2°C and 4°C. When I first was reading the paper, I asked myself if just 2°C is that much and causes so many issues, but after I finished, I more fully understand just how important a small number can be when it comes to the climate. The map that displays amounts of water discharge if we hit 2°C and then if we hit 4°C was one of the charts that made me realize the importance. However, even though most places show a drastic change between the two temperatures, I was a bit surprised as a few places not really changing, such as the Sahara Desert. Besides my realization of the impact two degrees can have while reading this paper, I also found the parts on fisheries interesting, and a little depressing. It seems a bit sad that coral reefs are dying at such an alarming rate, and that many won't even live to two degrees Celsius. But it was also really interesting how it can impact fisheries so much since the fish leave the fishery areas for colder waters. If fishery production lessens over time, it could have huge negative implications as it provides so many countries with protein they may not get otherwise. Overall, the paper did a great job with giving us concrete facts that make the reader think about the future of the earth and how catastrophic many of the statistics mentioned would affect us. There is too much great information in the paper to go over all of it, but I think the fisheries is an important one to focus on since it is the largest source of protein in the world.
While this summary first points out the projected impacts to our ecosystem from ongoing climate change, I found the social vulnerability consequences to be eye-opening and something that I have never previously considered. Urban expansion is a topic I previously studied in urban economics and I found it interesting that expansion into these "hazard-prone" areas leaves room for climate change events to affect a greater margin of people and push more groups into poverty. It makes me wonder that at the same time, if disadvantaged groups are being adversely trapped in extreme climate change areas, then we must focus on preventing catastrophic climate conditions before these areas become inhabitable and unable for development.
Another topic I wanted to talk about was energy production. As discussed in class this week, a move towards sustainable energy production is crucial for our goal of global development. However, the Executive Summary points to how increasing temperatures and droughts will leave us with changes in waterflow temperature, making hydropowered energy production less available. In addition, less available water will hurt agricultural productivity which is one of the biggest industries, especially in poorer regions. In class we talked about how we have the technology to implement these sustainable energy systems, but need the collective policy and will to do so. Well in this case, it seems like the resources necessary for this energy production will not be as available if climate change continues to plague our ecosystem.
One of the things I found fascinating from a development/growth standpoint was the emphasis on the effects of global warming on health. Most people are familiar with some of the broader implications of climate change like rising water levels, rising temperatures, and lower crop yields, but I appreciated the sections that mentioned the direct implications for human health. Specific to Europe and Central Asia, the report discusses that rising heat can increase temperature-related events and cause higher incidences of disease transmittance. In regard to the Middle East and North Africa, the report mentions the heat-related illnesses and other disease transmittance. However, what I found most interesting about the paragraph here was the mention of undermining labor productivity. In class, we’ve spent a lot of time discussing investments in human capital to increase productivity, and I’ve never considered that climate change could have such a strong impact against the productivity of human capital. From this I wonder if, using a Solow growth model, we would model the decreased productivity from climate change as a shift in the output or more of a rotation. It’s clear that climate change is a pressing issue that will affect everyone on Earth, but I enjoyed how this report called more attention to the less-glaring issues that will arise from climate change.
There is no doubt that this was a heavy article. I feel like people often think of climate change as a "far-off" consequence of our current decisions. This article makes it abundantly clear that climate change is already happening and its effects will become more devastatingly pronounced for the next generations.
One of the connections between our previous class discussions and this paper was how increasing risks for agriculture will not only negatively affect agriculture in regions like Latin America and the Caribbean, but also the other countries dependent on those exports. The paper mentions how soybean production could decline up to 70% in some places in Brazil. This reminded me of the question: what does deforestation in Brazil have to do with pork consumption in China? If Brazil is unable to produce soybeans due to the dramatically changing climate, places like China will not be able to raise their animals. This obviously negatively impacts both markets. All too often, I think people only think about climate change in terms of environmental changes. This paper reinforces the second part to climate change -- how do those environmental changes affect real people?
While this paper demonstrates how undeveloped countries in places like Africa will bear the weight of developed countries' choices, it also shows that in the future, climate change will affect us all. This paper reinforced the idea that climate changes effects are insanely wide-ranging -- from Africa to Europe, to North America and Latin America. There will be droughts and floods, sea level rising, increased risk of disease, and more. Now, I would like to learn more about policy options to help mitigate these issues so that future generations are left with the ability to be as well off as we are (as Solow says).
This reading got me thinking about two things. The first was the issue of coping solutions. Coping solutions to environmental problems is such a complicated idea, in my opinion, because you do not want coping solutions to be the goal or the only means of climate change policy or innovation taking place, but in some instances, they are a very necessary option. The damage that has already been done needs to be repaired, and in some areas has to be repaired to sustain life. However, in other situations, it would be nearly impossible to fully recover from the damage climate change has already caused. I also do not think that focusing solely on technology and policy meant to cope with climate change is the right way to be addressing the problem. Prevention is ideal, but inevitably coping will be required as well. The second thought sparked by this paper, and particularly the discussion around the Middle East and North African region’s import dependency, was how massive the impact of climate change felt globally will be. We discuss climate change as an obviously global problem, as each country’s actions affect everyone else, for example by impacting air quality, leading to rising sea levels, or impacting our oceans. However, one aspect I do not give enough thought to is how rising sea levels, deteriorating air quality, or lack of clean water in a region that, for example, provides agricultural products to the international market will impact their ability to supply these products. The world is interconnected, not only sharing the same environment, but also through widely shared markets and climate change will negatively impact these as well.
One thing that I think this summary reenforces very well is the idea that climate change and environmental problems disproportionately affect the poor. For example, the article briefly touched upon the effects on subsistence farmers, who would be devastated by the negative effects towards crops that result from a two to four degree Celsius increase in global temperature. These families depend on their own crops as a source of food, and any hindrance to the growing of these crops would significantly affect the food consumption and nutrition of the family. Extending even further, this could lead to problems with development for each member of the family, as less nourished children tend to face problems in both mental and physical growth. Additionally, the irregularity of the weather caused by an increase in temperature would cause further problems for subsistence farmers, as an unexpected hurricane or other weather event could destroy their crop yield and thus deplete their source of food. This shows that despite the numerous potential problems already presented in the paper, global warming has as seemingly limitless scope in how it can negatively affect all aspects of the world. I tend to forget just how many global problems can be traced back to global warming, and this summary served as a good reminder that it is way more pressing of an issue than how we treat it.
Although it is largely a product of our creation, this is an extremely eye opening article. Many people hear about the effects of climate change and what is will do to us in the future, but this demonstrates that consequences are already happening and are going to get continuously worse. Something that caught my eye when looking at the different factors is the importance of water and glaciers. For glaciers, it mentions that “in Central Asia hydropower generation has the potential to play a major role in the future energy mix however the predicted changes in runoff distribution will mean that there will be less water available for energy generation” which poses an upsetting dilemma because it demonstrates that we have the means and technology to move towards better energy uses and ways to provide, but we might not be able to because we are too late in shifting energy production. I also want to mention the impacts of developed countries consumption and wastefulness on developing countries. Staying with the importance of water, we see that sea-levels rising is extremely detrimental to all coastal towns around the world, but particularly for the developing ones that have a large industrial community on the coast. These countries are taking steps to try and develop and grow their economy, however the rising sea-levels that are caused from outside countries are inhibiting them to develop. With the rising levels, this leads to increased storms and potential pollutants in freshwater aquifers. It reports that in Haiti 70% of people live in informal settlements in high-risk zones are causing negative effects because when they have to move it weakens the rural and agricultural resources of the country. In closing, I think that this report not only demonstrates the impact of our behavior on society as a whole, but how we are actively hurting others that are far worse off.
The connection between farming and global warming is interesting. The agricultural economy seems to be stuck in a global warming loop where increased temperatures decrease farm productivity, which forces farmers to use new technologies that also contribute to global warming to maintain production. For example, to increase productivity many farmers use fertilizers. This fertilizer runs off into bodies of water and then emits gasses into the air, contributing to climate change and making the situation worse for the farmers in the long run. We also recently talked about slash and burn strategies in tropical rainforests. These techniques release large quantities of carbon into the atmosphere due to the cutting down of trees. If tropical farmers were to abandon these practices, however, they would need fertilizer to ensure the correct amount of nutrients are present in the soil. This would also contribute to global warming, decreasing the productivity of the farmer. This paradox for agriculture poses an interesting issue of whether we can not only produce enough food for the world population if the global temperature increases, but whether the global community can develop techniques and technologies that increase the productivity of farms while avoiding contributing to climate change. I believe that we can overcome this obstacle in agricultural production but may fail to do so in time to avoid the possibly detrimental outcomes to subsistence farmers in developing nations.
My main takeaway from this article is how the many negative effects of climate change pile up and reinforce each other as the climate continues to warm. It also did a good job of pointing out the negative effects of climate change that often are glossed over in the media. Everyone focuses on sea level rise and tropical storms, but not enough attention is given to the myriad of climate factors that lower crop and fishery yields as well as cause adverse health effects.
The article really hammered home the urgency of fighting climate change by comparing the effects of two degrees of warming with four degrees. Two degrees is what we can hold the warming to if we act now while four degrees is what will happen if we put off acting on climate change. What struck me was all the positive feedback loops that occur when warming reaches a certain point. Different effects of climate change interact and multiply each other even if all emissions halt.
The article didn't go too in depth about the social and political consequences of a warming planet, but I think there are some serious negative forecasts in these domains. The article mentioned the migration of people but didn't talk about how this would cause extreme social and political tension that would have negative effects of its own. Simply look at the European refugee crisis in 2015 and the reactionary politics it fueled to get an appetizer of what climate migrations would cause. I also think the scarcity of water combined with failing crop yields will produce many internal and international conflicts. Two areas where this can blow up are in Kashmir and the Nile Renaissance Dam in Ethiopia.
While people often talk about how development effects the climate, I rarely read about climate change effecting development. My main takeaway from this article is the duality of development and sustainability. Climate change is already affecting wellbeing in underdeveloped regions that are more vulnerable due to weak government or infrastructure. With projects of dry regions and excessive rains in places where that is not normal, development will obviously be stifled due to degradation of natural resources or even existing infrastructure. Crop yield are expected to decrease, and for countries near the border that rely on exports of their goods, this will be detrimental. In addition, lack of food security will increase as farms are destroyed and fishery catches are decreased. This will lead to a deterioration of the development efforts that have been made to alleviate poverty and hunger in the world.
My first reaction to reading this is how severely just a few degree Celsius of temperature could hurt each region of the world. I feel like I hear a lot about climate change and understand that it is an important issue, however, I admittedly have not read in depth about how severe and specific the consequences are. The way this article and data broke down the gradual effects of climate change by region and temperature increase was alarming but important in order to have a better grasp of the issue of climate change. We have talked a lot about sustainability in class and climate change is a big factor in that, especially at the high rates at which the Earth is being polluted. It was shocking for instance that a specific country could yield losses of up to 50% just from a 2 degree Celsius temperature increase, and that’s just in terms of the food aspect. This reading also discussed other ways that the effects of climate change manifest themselves into our lives, even to the extent of physiological limits and heat stress on workers. After reading this, it is very clear to me that climate change is an issue that is creeping up on us faster than many people know or recognize and that needs to be addressed immediately for the sake of sustainability and everyone on Earth. It affects every region of the world and each region in many various ways, the issue of climate change should be a concern to everyone.
What is interesting to consider are the parallels between climate and productivity. The article says, “Russia’s permafrost regions and boreal forests are sensitive to changes in temperature that could lead to productivity increases”. In cooler climates the rising temperatures would lead to a warmer climate meaning they could work longer. Later in that same section it talks about the increased risk with thawing giving off more emissions which promotes further complications. On the other hand, as stated later in the article, crop productivity will be negatively affected.
Another aspect of productivity to consider is ecosystems. I learned a lot about biodiversity and the roles specimens play in ecosystems and I know that even one small change can throw off the entire balance. When the whole climate system suffers a drastic change as it is now i wonder about the long term implications. The article talks about there are physiological changes to fish with ocean acidification. I wonder about the plants and how they will be affected. Later it says that there will be higher droughts in some areas which would also lead to many problems in ecosystems.
The final aspect about productivity effects that I want to discuss is about migration patterns. Because of the rising rate of climate change certain habitats will become unsuitable. This will lead to large scale migration. This will throw off all past ways of live and will mean that serious changes will have to be made to accommodate for these migrations and productivity will most likely suffer.
One of the biggest questions I have is will these changes be possible to fix in the future; that has been the largest part of any discussion about climate change. In our last class we discussed that sustainability is possible but the question is about whether or not we will do it. I watched a lecture about climate change last semester and learned that the climate changing is natural but it leads to large shifts in the world we now know. I wonder how quickly we will have to adapt to satisfy these changes. I wonder if it is possible and sustainable for us to live this way and just how many variables need to change in order for this to be possible.
This piece gave a lot of interesting insights and examples of how climate change is affecting our world and I really enjoyed learning more about it because this is such an important topic that needs to be talked about more.
The sea level rise is one of the more interesting projected effects of global warming. I have heard people make arguments that it does not “make economic sense” to start addressing climate change due at least in relation to the sea levels rising. The argument basically says that the current cost is higher than the cost will be in the future. The person making this argument has no economic background but holds what I believe is a widespread view in that there are not economic incentives yet to fight back climate change. I would love to retire on the east coast but might not have the option to. Rising sea levels destroy not only passive use value, but the billions of dollars of investment in these cities. Unless we become amphibious, rising sea levels concern me quite a lot. The developing world will feel these effects disproportionately, being the least equipped to deal with these changes and having done the least to contribute to them. I also found the rain patterns changing to be an interesting and I think overlooked consequence of warming. Increased rain will evidently have very negative effects, which I had never thought of. Food shortages because of global warming seem to be one of the main things that will stunt development in the future, as many countries will be forced to import food and be susceptible to price hikes and the like. I also found it interesting that parts of Europe were covered in this paper as most people do not consider anywhere in Europe to still be developing.
I appreciated how the world bank not only identified the potential risks of a 4-degree Celsius temperature increase but also identified the irreversible impacts that have already occurred as a result of the planet heating. It talked about the increased rainfall, drought-prone regions getting dryer, and record-breaking temperatures occurring more frequently. As we talked about in class, these adverse effects of climate change disproportionately impact the poor, underprivileged, children, and elderly the most. Things like higher temperatures hurt poor people in rural communities by harming crop yields and rising food prices in places like Libya, Egypt, and Jordan. Drastic temperature shifts also result in new diseases that adversely affect the poor.
I also liked how they talked about the consequences attatched to development because we usually talk about how countries should get to a development stage. They identified how climate change risks can undermine development and poverty reduction for present and future generations. Risks involving food security and crop yields increase in probability if warming approaches a 2-4 degree rise. However, should countries that are trying to enter the development stage acquire assets that help them grow their economy but might emit GHGs, or start good practices and habits when it comes to industrializing and urbanizing in an environmentally friendly way despite the fact that it might be more expensive?
The turn down the heat report is a sufficient beginning to describe the impact that temperature rises would have on the global economy. It is clear that an increase in global temperature to 2 degrees would make basic needs, like growing food and having access to water, almost impossible for developing nations in the most hard hit areas. A majority of struggling nations would be heavily affected by this climate change and the raise in temperature to 2 degrees is the low estimate. If the global temperature happens to rise to 4 degrees or above, the weather effects on developing nations seems to be completely fatal. Agriculture would be virtually impossible in many of the areas described in the report. With the massive increase in extreme weather events that is already happening, as the global temperature is .8 degrees above pre-industrial times, developing nations would have no time to develop as they would constantly be repairing their nations from weather catastrophes. The effects of a 4 degree increase don’t seem to be comprehended by the people on this globe.
There seems to be an increasing sense of urgency for this problem, but it is nowhere near the level of urgency that is needed. I hoped that this paper would be more intense in its delivery. I don’t think it does a good enough job at describing the desperate situation that we are living in. Within the next 8- years they are saying that we could be at 4 degrees above pre-industrial times and that would mean that a tremendous amount of humans on the planet would not be able to meet there normal health needs to survive. It seems that without major policy changes and significant reduction of carbon emissions, there will be no need to plan for economic development because it will be so out of reach.
One thing important aspect of the issue of climate change that I thought this piece nicley elucidates, is that the ones who are to be most effected by the negative impacts of climate change are the ones who are least equipped to fight it. The poor and underdeveloped regions of the world are those that are directly in the crosshairs of things like sea level rise, reduced crop/ fishery yields, and increasingly adverse weather events. Not only are these detrimental to the region, they also further reduce those peoples' ability to combat future events. This has played out in regions like the Aral Sea, which has been almost entirely been reduced by Climate-Chane and other human activities. Now the the people who inhabit this region are even more impoverished, since they can no longer utilize the Aral Sea, and now have no ability to further combat the destruction of their livelihoods.
While I knew global poverty and climate change were two of the most pressing issues for humanity - I had not really thought of how they connected before. My first thought was to think about the SDG’s - which try to tackle these problems together but I had always thought of the different goals as relatively separate. It is clear to me now that global warming makes the mission of combating global poverty all the more difficult. My next thought was to think about something we’ve discussed in my environmental studies classes - which was alluded to but not discussed at length in the article, the loss of stability of the AMOC (better known as the gulf stream). The AMOC regulates global temperature and is powered by downwelling of cold water and upwelling of warm water in certain areas of the global. If we lose the AMOC, we lose almost all climate stability in the northern hemisphere - which would likely make the task of combating poverty an even greater one, and further, would likely send millions more into poverty due to the impacts of water and food scarcity, loss of ecosystems, social vulnerability, and a rise in the prevalence of disease. While I had always thought of these issues as relatively separate - I now think of them as a more interconnected issue.
Previous to this article, I did not have a good understanding of climate change. It was made very apparent that if the temperature changed 2 degrees Celsius, there would be many negative impacts on Earth such as crop yields decline, water resources change, diseases move into new ranges, and sea levels rise. If the temperature rose 4 degrees, this would be fatal for developing nations as a majority of them live off the environment and climate (agriculture). This would wipe out most of Africa, South America, and Asia. This issue is becoming larger and larger everyday as climate change continues to increase. The current global temperature is around 0.8 degrees Celsius higher that it was in the pre-industrial era. If this rate continues, in the next 150-200 years our planet will be facing a real issue unless we cut back and begin to strategize around this problem of climate change.
I believe that many countries especially those who are undeveloped are not as worried about this problem as they should be. These countries are not necessarily looking into the future; they are looking at the present. Sustainability is key for these nations to continue to develop into the future. To reach their ultimate goals of development in the future, everyone must cut down on carbon emissions to prevent further climate change.
One thing this report drew my attention to is the importance of water, in that I didn’t realize how severe the consequences of rising sea levels and reduced rainfall due to climate change will be. The paper talks about how precipitation is projected to decline in all three areas mentioned and how this will likely cause a decrease in crop yields and increase the flood risk along many rivers. The reduction in crop yields could cause food insecurity, with some regions depending too heavily on imports, which would leave them more vulnerable to any adverse conditions in other parts of the world that would make it difficult to get food. This might include natural events like bad weather or things like export bans. For example, the Middle East currently imports around 50% of their wheat and barley consumption, 40% of rice consumption, and 70% of maize consumption. As climate change continues to decrease precipitation, crop yields will also fall and will destabilize the food system in both the local region and the places that import those crops. Also, the lack of precipitation may cause hydropower to be a less viable alternative energy source for those who depend on it. The decrease in precipitation would likely further push marginalized groups into poverty. Another thing that I thought was interesting was the social vulnerability impacts of climate change. This paper mentions that one of the effects of climate change turning places uninhabitable might be large-scale migration, which would, in addition to being bad for family relations, health, and security as mentioned in the paper, also likely cause political tensions, which would contribute to regional instability.
Reading about the current effects of climate change, I think about what mechanisms international organizations have to incentivize national governments to act. Currently, governments are forced to respond to climate-change fueled events, from wildfires of increasing intensities to hurricanes inflicting increasing damages. Though governments already spend enormous sums on repairing infrastructure following extreme weather events, it would ultimately be more cost effective to invest in extreme weather prevention. At the very least, investments in resilient infrastructure would save countries money in the long run.
I believe that, by highlighting the long-term costs of climate change, framing investments as potential win-win scenarios, international bodies could better incentivize individual nations to act. Rather than focusing on the costs associated with investments against climate change, the focus ought to be placed on the savings generated by such investments.
I find the World Bank’s report's emphasis on the effect that climate change has on marine ecosystem's most interesting. I think many people are aware to some extent that climate change is affecting our oceans for the worst, but this report puts into perspective how this will affect mankind, primarily the poor in these 3 regions. For example, not only will we lose a substantial amount of marine animals, those living on the coasts who rely on the ocean for food security, as well as commercial income from selling fish, will specifically be put at risk. The main reason that the author gives for the decrease in fish is the coral bleaching caused by climate change, but I also wonder how overfishing plays a role into this. The ocean acidification threatening coral reefs will also negatively affect tourism, which is a major source of income for these coastal areas. Unfortunately, these trends are only expected to worsen if we continue on the same path. Climate change is often looked at as a far-off problem, but the world, specifically those in developed nations, need to realize the impact that it has on all of mankind, specifically those most disadvantaged. The ideas in this paper surrounding the impacts of climate change on the ocean follow a pattern that we have discussed in class before- the earth cannot keep up with mankind’s quick development. I think it would be interesting for this paper to comment on how much of the CO2 emissions and other factors causing climate change are from developed nations versus the nations facing the most severe consequences.
I find it interesting how development and poverty reduction could be at risk due to pollution and climate change since almost all of the developed countries today developed by industrializing and burning fossil fuels that cause climate change and pollution
The World Bank's Executive Summary points out that the impacts of climate change and global warming are already make an impact on the world and will continue to do irreversible damage if a change is not made now. This has adverse implications for development because the poor and underprivileged are being hit the hardest and will continue to be the most seriously affected. Our discussions in class last week revolved around agriculture, touching on how many of the poorest communities rely on agriculture, particularly subsistence farming. Many of the poorest people in the world are dependent on agriculture for food, which is leads to serious issues within these communities with rising temperatures and sea levels. The World Bank Group notes that there will be "large and severe crop yield losses for warming levels above 2°C." Maize productivity is likely to face a significant decline. Maize, along with other crops, are very important export commodities for many countries. Therefore, if these crops are increasingly hard to produce productively, these important export systems will suffer as well. Countries might have to start relying on importing foods, which makes them vulnerable to agricultural impacts in other countries, as well as vulnerable to increased food prices. In all three of the regions mentioned in the report, rural populations will be extremely vulnerable to these agricultural changes due to increasing environmental strains. Development broadly aims to reduce poverty, which will be impossible if these poor communities struggle even more to need their basic needs, particularly concerning nutrition. The report mentioned that in the Middle East and North Africa child malnutrition is highly plausible with sharp declines in yields and an increase in food prices. Decrease food security will be one of the major consequences for the poor communities in these countries with the increasing strains from climate change. Now is the time to act on these environmental issues before it is too late, not only for the sake of the environment but also for development. Development will be almost impossible in a 4°C world, and very difficult in a 2°C world. Governments and international organizations need to come together, stop ignoring the issues, and start to enact policies and initiatives that address these environmental issues.
Posted by: Claire Jenkins | 10/20/2021 at 02:09 PM
I appreciated that the World Bank Executive Summary placed emphasis on the likelihood of poor communities being disproportionally affected by the consequences of global climate change. For example, an increase of extreme events is said to affect both rural and urban communities but will more strongly affect the poor residing in unstable infrastructure in higher risk areas (flood plains, steep slopes). Additionally, all three regions mentioned (LACS, MENA, and ECA) were said to experience a notable decrease in agricultural production as a result of changing climate conditions. This, combined with the resulting rise in food prices, will consequently lead to higher hunger and malnutrition rates among the poor in these areas. The piece also talked a lot about a stronger prevalence of flooding instances on the coastlines from melting glaciers and changes in weather patterns. It also mentioned that extreme heat will pose a significant threat for human health. I would assume that those residing in these more vulnerable areas would have to migrate to an area more suitable to reside in. However, many people would presumably not be able to afford to move to a new area altogether and would be faced with a formidable tradeoff of whether they should do so.
On another note, the summary continuously used a 4 °C increase as one of the thresholds for when major consequences of climate change will become a reality. Though this did not initially sound like a lot to me, I was curious of the temperature change resulting in mass extinctions in the past and discovered that “a temperature increase of 5.2 °C above the pre-industrial level at present rates of increase would likely result in mass extinction comparable to that of the major Phanerozoic events, even without other, non-climatic anthropogenic impacts” (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-25019-2). Although we have reached only a 0.8 °C warming today, I think it is crazy that the piece talked about a 4 °C increase as something that is very much in the realm of possibility, and that this temperature is only 1.2 °C off from the 5.2 °C that is said to have caused mass extinctions.
Posted by: alliengfer | 10/20/2021 at 02:42 PM
While reading papers like this one can be demoralizing, they are necessary to emphasize the urgency of the situation we find ourselves in. The wide range of ways in which daily life can be impacted by climate change shows that the economic costs of inaction in the long run far outweigh any temporary costs of action. There is clear evidence for a need for change in economic policy, but I would make the argument that broader, political change is just as necessary as economic change. There is overwhelming data to support the implementation of a carbon tax in the United States, but many politicians oppose such a move. I believe that the reason for this is due to the immediate revulsion that many voters have when they hear the word “tax.” This may largely be an educational problem, as there are many times, including this one, where a tax on bads can alleviate taxes on goods to ultimately save ordinary consumers money. However, “raising taxes” is one of the fastest ways for a politician to lost support of his or her constituency. As long as politicians are constantly striving to appease a voter base rather than make substantive change, we will struggle to implement a carbon tax. My proposed political change would be to have single term limits with longer terms placed on most politicians, as this would alleviate pressures to appease voter bases and wealthy lobbying groups. However, change this drastic is unlikely to occur in the short run. The short run economic solution that I think could be the next best step would be the re-implementation of a cap-and-trade system. This would essentially set a limit on pollution and allow corporations to buy and sell the limited rights to pollute. This kind of policy would likely stand a better chance of passing as it avoids the negative connotation of a “tax”. Such a policy has even been put in place under a conservative, Republican administration (George W. Bush) in the past, so it could serve as a valuable way to bypass the resistance that comes from imposing any form of new tax, even if the new tax is supported by data.
Posted by: Matt Condon | 10/20/2021 at 07:53 PM
I thought this article was interesting and provided a lot of information about climate change that I had not heard about before. One of the more interesting parts of this information is the huge gap between 2°C and 4°C. When I first was reading the paper, I asked myself if just 2°C is that much and causes so many issues, but after I finished, I more fully understand just how important a small number can be when it comes to the climate. The map that displays amounts of water discharge if we hit 2°C and then if we hit 4°C was one of the charts that made me realize the importance. However, even though most places show a drastic change between the two temperatures, I was a bit surprised as a few places not really changing, such as the Sahara Desert. Besides my realization of the impact two degrees can have while reading this paper, I also found the parts on fisheries interesting, and a little depressing. It seems a bit sad that coral reefs are dying at such an alarming rate, and that many won't even live to two degrees Celsius. But it was also really interesting how it can impact fisheries so much since the fish leave the fishery areas for colder waters. If fishery production lessens over time, it could have huge negative implications as it provides so many countries with protein they may not get otherwise. Overall, the paper did a great job with giving us concrete facts that make the reader think about the future of the earth and how catastrophic many of the statistics mentioned would affect us. There is too much great information in the paper to go over all of it, but I think the fisheries is an important one to focus on since it is the largest source of protein in the world.
Posted by: Ben Barbour | 10/21/2021 at 01:46 PM
While this summary first points out the projected impacts to our ecosystem from ongoing climate change, I found the social vulnerability consequences to be eye-opening and something that I have never previously considered. Urban expansion is a topic I previously studied in urban economics and I found it interesting that expansion into these "hazard-prone" areas leaves room for climate change events to affect a greater margin of people and push more groups into poverty. It makes me wonder that at the same time, if disadvantaged groups are being adversely trapped in extreme climate change areas, then we must focus on preventing catastrophic climate conditions before these areas become inhabitable and unable for development.
Another topic I wanted to talk about was energy production. As discussed in class this week, a move towards sustainable energy production is crucial for our goal of global development. However, the Executive Summary points to how increasing temperatures and droughts will leave us with changes in waterflow temperature, making hydropowered energy production less available. In addition, less available water will hurt agricultural productivity which is one of the biggest industries, especially in poorer regions. In class we talked about how we have the technology to implement these sustainable energy systems, but need the collective policy and will to do so. Well in this case, it seems like the resources necessary for this energy production will not be as available if climate change continues to plague our ecosystem.
Posted by: Chaz Cunningham | 10/21/2021 at 03:27 PM
One of the things I found fascinating from a development/growth standpoint was the emphasis on the effects of global warming on health. Most people are familiar with some of the broader implications of climate change like rising water levels, rising temperatures, and lower crop yields, but I appreciated the sections that mentioned the direct implications for human health. Specific to Europe and Central Asia, the report discusses that rising heat can increase temperature-related events and cause higher incidences of disease transmittance. In regard to the Middle East and North Africa, the report mentions the heat-related illnesses and other disease transmittance. However, what I found most interesting about the paragraph here was the mention of undermining labor productivity. In class, we’ve spent a lot of time discussing investments in human capital to increase productivity, and I’ve never considered that climate change could have such a strong impact against the productivity of human capital. From this I wonder if, using a Solow growth model, we would model the decreased productivity from climate change as a shift in the output or more of a rotation. It’s clear that climate change is a pressing issue that will affect everyone on Earth, but I enjoyed how this report called more attention to the less-glaring issues that will arise from climate change.
Posted by: Valerie Sokolow | 10/21/2021 at 03:51 PM
There is no doubt that this was a heavy article. I feel like people often think of climate change as a "far-off" consequence of our current decisions. This article makes it abundantly clear that climate change is already happening and its effects will become more devastatingly pronounced for the next generations.
One of the connections between our previous class discussions and this paper was how increasing risks for agriculture will not only negatively affect agriculture in regions like Latin America and the Caribbean, but also the other countries dependent on those exports. The paper mentions how soybean production could decline up to 70% in some places in Brazil. This reminded me of the question: what does deforestation in Brazil have to do with pork consumption in China? If Brazil is unable to produce soybeans due to the dramatically changing climate, places like China will not be able to raise their animals. This obviously negatively impacts both markets. All too often, I think people only think about climate change in terms of environmental changes. This paper reinforces the second part to climate change -- how do those environmental changes affect real people?
While this paper demonstrates how undeveloped countries in places like Africa will bear the weight of developed countries' choices, it also shows that in the future, climate change will affect us all. This paper reinforced the idea that climate changes effects are insanely wide-ranging -- from Africa to Europe, to North America and Latin America. There will be droughts and floods, sea level rising, increased risk of disease, and more. Now, I would like to learn more about policy options to help mitigate these issues so that future generations are left with the ability to be as well off as we are (as Solow says).
Posted by: Sarah Beaube | 10/21/2021 at 04:00 PM
This reading got me thinking about two things. The first was the issue of coping solutions. Coping solutions to environmental problems is such a complicated idea, in my opinion, because you do not want coping solutions to be the goal or the only means of climate change policy or innovation taking place, but in some instances, they are a very necessary option. The damage that has already been done needs to be repaired, and in some areas has to be repaired to sustain life. However, in other situations, it would be nearly impossible to fully recover from the damage climate change has already caused. I also do not think that focusing solely on technology and policy meant to cope with climate change is the right way to be addressing the problem. Prevention is ideal, but inevitably coping will be required as well. The second thought sparked by this paper, and particularly the discussion around the Middle East and North African region’s import dependency, was how massive the impact of climate change felt globally will be. We discuss climate change as an obviously global problem, as each country’s actions affect everyone else, for example by impacting air quality, leading to rising sea levels, or impacting our oceans. However, one aspect I do not give enough thought to is how rising sea levels, deteriorating air quality, or lack of clean water in a region that, for example, provides agricultural products to the international market will impact their ability to supply these products. The world is interconnected, not only sharing the same environment, but also through widely shared markets and climate change will negatively impact these as well.
Posted by: Ella Hall | 10/21/2021 at 04:03 PM
One thing that I think this summary reenforces very well is the idea that climate change and environmental problems disproportionately affect the poor. For example, the article briefly touched upon the effects on subsistence farmers, who would be devastated by the negative effects towards crops that result from a two to four degree Celsius increase in global temperature. These families depend on their own crops as a source of food, and any hindrance to the growing of these crops would significantly affect the food consumption and nutrition of the family. Extending even further, this could lead to problems with development for each member of the family, as less nourished children tend to face problems in both mental and physical growth. Additionally, the irregularity of the weather caused by an increase in temperature would cause further problems for subsistence farmers, as an unexpected hurricane or other weather event could destroy their crop yield and thus deplete their source of food. This shows that despite the numerous potential problems already presented in the paper, global warming has as seemingly limitless scope in how it can negatively affect all aspects of the world. I tend to forget just how many global problems can be traced back to global warming, and this summary served as a good reminder that it is way more pressing of an issue than how we treat it.
Posted by: Jacob Thompson | 10/21/2021 at 04:10 PM
Although it is largely a product of our creation, this is an extremely eye opening article. Many people hear about the effects of climate change and what is will do to us in the future, but this demonstrates that consequences are already happening and are going to get continuously worse. Something that caught my eye when looking at the different factors is the importance of water and glaciers. For glaciers, it mentions that “in Central Asia hydropower generation has the potential to play a major role in the future energy mix however the predicted changes in runoff distribution will mean that there will be less water available for energy generation” which poses an upsetting dilemma because it demonstrates that we have the means and technology to move towards better energy uses and ways to provide, but we might not be able to because we are too late in shifting energy production. I also want to mention the impacts of developed countries consumption and wastefulness on developing countries. Staying with the importance of water, we see that sea-levels rising is extremely detrimental to all coastal towns around the world, but particularly for the developing ones that have a large industrial community on the coast. These countries are taking steps to try and develop and grow their economy, however the rising sea-levels that are caused from outside countries are inhibiting them to develop. With the rising levels, this leads to increased storms and potential pollutants in freshwater aquifers. It reports that in Haiti 70% of people live in informal settlements in high-risk zones are causing negative effects because when they have to move it weakens the rural and agricultural resources of the country. In closing, I think that this report not only demonstrates the impact of our behavior on society as a whole, but how we are actively hurting others that are far worse off.
Posted by: Sally Ennis | 10/21/2021 at 04:26 PM
The connection between farming and global warming is interesting. The agricultural economy seems to be stuck in a global warming loop where increased temperatures decrease farm productivity, which forces farmers to use new technologies that also contribute to global warming to maintain production. For example, to increase productivity many farmers use fertilizers. This fertilizer runs off into bodies of water and then emits gasses into the air, contributing to climate change and making the situation worse for the farmers in the long run. We also recently talked about slash and burn strategies in tropical rainforests. These techniques release large quantities of carbon into the atmosphere due to the cutting down of trees. If tropical farmers were to abandon these practices, however, they would need fertilizer to ensure the correct amount of nutrients are present in the soil. This would also contribute to global warming, decreasing the productivity of the farmer. This paradox for agriculture poses an interesting issue of whether we can not only produce enough food for the world population if the global temperature increases, but whether the global community can develop techniques and technologies that increase the productivity of farms while avoiding contributing to climate change. I believe that we can overcome this obstacle in agricultural production but may fail to do so in time to avoid the possibly detrimental outcomes to subsistence farmers in developing nations.
Here is a link to the effects of fertilizer on the air in California:
https://www.ehn.org/california-fertilizer-nitrogen-air-pollution-2530258544.html
Posted by: Brad Stephenson | 10/21/2021 at 04:27 PM
My main takeaway from this article is how the many negative effects of climate change pile up and reinforce each other as the climate continues to warm. It also did a good job of pointing out the negative effects of climate change that often are glossed over in the media. Everyone focuses on sea level rise and tropical storms, but not enough attention is given to the myriad of climate factors that lower crop and fishery yields as well as cause adverse health effects.
The article really hammered home the urgency of fighting climate change by comparing the effects of two degrees of warming with four degrees. Two degrees is what we can hold the warming to if we act now while four degrees is what will happen if we put off acting on climate change. What struck me was all the positive feedback loops that occur when warming reaches a certain point. Different effects of climate change interact and multiply each other even if all emissions halt.
The article didn't go too in depth about the social and political consequences of a warming planet, but I think there are some serious negative forecasts in these domains. The article mentioned the migration of people but didn't talk about how this would cause extreme social and political tension that would have negative effects of its own. Simply look at the European refugee crisis in 2015 and the reactionary politics it fueled to get an appetizer of what climate migrations would cause. I also think the scarcity of water combined with failing crop yields will produce many internal and international conflicts. Two areas where this can blow up are in Kashmir and the Nile Renaissance Dam in Ethiopia.
Posted by: Kevin Thole | 10/21/2021 at 04:55 PM
While people often talk about how development effects the climate, I rarely read about climate change effecting development. My main takeaway from this article is the duality of development and sustainability. Climate change is already affecting wellbeing in underdeveloped regions that are more vulnerable due to weak government or infrastructure. With projects of dry regions and excessive rains in places where that is not normal, development will obviously be stifled due to degradation of natural resources or even existing infrastructure. Crop yield are expected to decrease, and for countries near the border that rely on exports of their goods, this will be detrimental. In addition, lack of food security will increase as farms are destroyed and fishery catches are decreased. This will lead to a deterioration of the development efforts that have been made to alleviate poverty and hunger in the world.
Posted by: Mary Wilson Grist | 10/21/2021 at 05:03 PM
My first reaction to reading this is how severely just a few degree Celsius of temperature could hurt each region of the world. I feel like I hear a lot about climate change and understand that it is an important issue, however, I admittedly have not read in depth about how severe and specific the consequences are. The way this article and data broke down the gradual effects of climate change by region and temperature increase was alarming but important in order to have a better grasp of the issue of climate change. We have talked a lot about sustainability in class and climate change is a big factor in that, especially at the high rates at which the Earth is being polluted. It was shocking for instance that a specific country could yield losses of up to 50% just from a 2 degree Celsius temperature increase, and that’s just in terms of the food aspect. This reading also discussed other ways that the effects of climate change manifest themselves into our lives, even to the extent of physiological limits and heat stress on workers. After reading this, it is very clear to me that climate change is an issue that is creeping up on us faster than many people know or recognize and that needs to be addressed immediately for the sake of sustainability and everyone on Earth. It affects every region of the world and each region in many various ways, the issue of climate change should be a concern to everyone.
Posted by: Grace Owens | 10/21/2021 at 05:31 PM
What is interesting to consider are the parallels between climate and productivity. The article says, “Russia’s permafrost regions and boreal forests are sensitive to changes in temperature that could lead to productivity increases”. In cooler climates the rising temperatures would lead to a warmer climate meaning they could work longer. Later in that same section it talks about the increased risk with thawing giving off more emissions which promotes further complications. On the other hand, as stated later in the article, crop productivity will be negatively affected.
Another aspect of productivity to consider is ecosystems. I learned a lot about biodiversity and the roles specimens play in ecosystems and I know that even one small change can throw off the entire balance. When the whole climate system suffers a drastic change as it is now i wonder about the long term implications. The article talks about there are physiological changes to fish with ocean acidification. I wonder about the plants and how they will be affected. Later it says that there will be higher droughts in some areas which would also lead to many problems in ecosystems.
The final aspect about productivity effects that I want to discuss is about migration patterns. Because of the rising rate of climate change certain habitats will become unsuitable. This will lead to large scale migration. This will throw off all past ways of live and will mean that serious changes will have to be made to accommodate for these migrations and productivity will most likely suffer.
One of the biggest questions I have is will these changes be possible to fix in the future; that has been the largest part of any discussion about climate change. In our last class we discussed that sustainability is possible but the question is about whether or not we will do it. I watched a lecture about climate change last semester and learned that the climate changing is natural but it leads to large shifts in the world we now know. I wonder how quickly we will have to adapt to satisfy these changes. I wonder if it is possible and sustainable for us to live this way and just how many variables need to change in order for this to be possible.
This piece gave a lot of interesting insights and examples of how climate change is affecting our world and I really enjoyed learning more about it because this is such an important topic that needs to be talked about more.
Posted by: Claire Kallen | 10/21/2021 at 05:48 PM
The sea level rise is one of the more interesting projected effects of global warming. I have heard people make arguments that it does not “make economic sense” to start addressing climate change due at least in relation to the sea levels rising. The argument basically says that the current cost is higher than the cost will be in the future. The person making this argument has no economic background but holds what I believe is a widespread view in that there are not economic incentives yet to fight back climate change. I would love to retire on the east coast but might not have the option to. Rising sea levels destroy not only passive use value, but the billions of dollars of investment in these cities. Unless we become amphibious, rising sea levels concern me quite a lot. The developing world will feel these effects disproportionately, being the least equipped to deal with these changes and having done the least to contribute to them. I also found the rain patterns changing to be an interesting and I think overlooked consequence of warming. Increased rain will evidently have very negative effects, which I had never thought of. Food shortages because of global warming seem to be one of the main things that will stunt development in the future, as many countries will be forced to import food and be susceptible to price hikes and the like. I also found it interesting that parts of Europe were covered in this paper as most people do not consider anywhere in Europe to still be developing.
Posted by: andrewharris | 10/21/2021 at 06:18 PM
I appreciated how the world bank not only identified the potential risks of a 4-degree Celsius temperature increase but also identified the irreversible impacts that have already occurred as a result of the planet heating. It talked about the increased rainfall, drought-prone regions getting dryer, and record-breaking temperatures occurring more frequently. As we talked about in class, these adverse effects of climate change disproportionately impact the poor, underprivileged, children, and elderly the most. Things like higher temperatures hurt poor people in rural communities by harming crop yields and rising food prices in places like Libya, Egypt, and Jordan. Drastic temperature shifts also result in new diseases that adversely affect the poor.
I also liked how they talked about the consequences attatched to development because we usually talk about how countries should get to a development stage. They identified how climate change risks can undermine development and poverty reduction for present and future generations. Risks involving food security and crop yields increase in probability if warming approaches a 2-4 degree rise. However, should countries that are trying to enter the development stage acquire assets that help them grow their economy but might emit GHGs, or start good practices and habits when it comes to industrializing and urbanizing in an environmentally friendly way despite the fact that it might be more expensive?
Posted by: Mark Natiello | 10/21/2021 at 06:35 PM
The turn down the heat report is a sufficient beginning to describe the impact that temperature rises would have on the global economy. It is clear that an increase in global temperature to 2 degrees would make basic needs, like growing food and having access to water, almost impossible for developing nations in the most hard hit areas. A majority of struggling nations would be heavily affected by this climate change and the raise in temperature to 2 degrees is the low estimate. If the global temperature happens to rise to 4 degrees or above, the weather effects on developing nations seems to be completely fatal. Agriculture would be virtually impossible in many of the areas described in the report. With the massive increase in extreme weather events that is already happening, as the global temperature is .8 degrees above pre-industrial times, developing nations would have no time to develop as they would constantly be repairing their nations from weather catastrophes. The effects of a 4 degree increase don’t seem to be comprehended by the people on this globe.
There seems to be an increasing sense of urgency for this problem, but it is nowhere near the level of urgency that is needed. I hoped that this paper would be more intense in its delivery. I don’t think it does a good enough job at describing the desperate situation that we are living in. Within the next 8- years they are saying that we could be at 4 degrees above pre-industrial times and that would mean that a tremendous amount of humans on the planet would not be able to meet there normal health needs to survive. It seems that without major policy changes and significant reduction of carbon emissions, there will be no need to plan for economic development because it will be so out of reach.
Posted by: Teddy Bentley | 10/21/2021 at 06:44 PM
One thing important aspect of the issue of climate change that I thought this piece nicley elucidates, is that the ones who are to be most effected by the negative impacts of climate change are the ones who are least equipped to fight it. The poor and underdeveloped regions of the world are those that are directly in the crosshairs of things like sea level rise, reduced crop/ fishery yields, and increasingly adverse weather events. Not only are these detrimental to the region, they also further reduce those peoples' ability to combat future events. This has played out in regions like the Aral Sea, which has been almost entirely been reduced by Climate-Chane and other human activities. Now the the people who inhabit this region are even more impoverished, since they can no longer utilize the Aral Sea, and now have no ability to further combat the destruction of their livelihoods.
Posted by: Matt DiTondo | 10/21/2021 at 06:52 PM
While I knew global poverty and climate change were two of the most pressing issues for humanity - I had not really thought of how they connected before. My first thought was to think about the SDG’s - which try to tackle these problems together but I had always thought of the different goals as relatively separate. It is clear to me now that global warming makes the mission of combating global poverty all the more difficult. My next thought was to think about something we’ve discussed in my environmental studies classes - which was alluded to but not discussed at length in the article, the loss of stability of the AMOC (better known as the gulf stream). The AMOC regulates global temperature and is powered by downwelling of cold water and upwelling of warm water in certain areas of the global. If we lose the AMOC, we lose almost all climate stability in the northern hemisphere - which would likely make the task of combating poverty an even greater one, and further, would likely send millions more into poverty due to the impacts of water and food scarcity, loss of ecosystems, social vulnerability, and a rise in the prevalence of disease. While I had always thought of these issues as relatively separate - I now think of them as a more interconnected issue.
Posted by: Jack Denious | 10/21/2021 at 07:20 PM
Previous to this article, I did not have a good understanding of climate change. It was made very apparent that if the temperature changed 2 degrees Celsius, there would be many negative impacts on Earth such as crop yields decline, water resources change, diseases move into new ranges, and sea levels rise. If the temperature rose 4 degrees, this would be fatal for developing nations as a majority of them live off the environment and climate (agriculture). This would wipe out most of Africa, South America, and Asia. This issue is becoming larger and larger everyday as climate change continues to increase. The current global temperature is around 0.8 degrees Celsius higher that it was in the pre-industrial era. If this rate continues, in the next 150-200 years our planet will be facing a real issue unless we cut back and begin to strategize around this problem of climate change.
I believe that many countries especially those who are undeveloped are not as worried about this problem as they should be. These countries are not necessarily looking into the future; they are looking at the present. Sustainability is key for these nations to continue to develop into the future. To reach their ultimate goals of development in the future, everyone must cut down on carbon emissions to prevent further climate change.
Posted by: Mcgallagher01 | 10/21/2021 at 07:30 PM
One thing this report drew my attention to is the importance of water, in that I didn’t realize how severe the consequences of rising sea levels and reduced rainfall due to climate change will be. The paper talks about how precipitation is projected to decline in all three areas mentioned and how this will likely cause a decrease in crop yields and increase the flood risk along many rivers. The reduction in crop yields could cause food insecurity, with some regions depending too heavily on imports, which would leave them more vulnerable to any adverse conditions in other parts of the world that would make it difficult to get food. This might include natural events like bad weather or things like export bans. For example, the Middle East currently imports around 50% of their wheat and barley consumption, 40% of rice consumption, and 70% of maize consumption. As climate change continues to decrease precipitation, crop yields will also fall and will destabilize the food system in both the local region and the places that import those crops. Also, the lack of precipitation may cause hydropower to be a less viable alternative energy source for those who depend on it. The decrease in precipitation would likely further push marginalized groups into poverty. Another thing that I thought was interesting was the social vulnerability impacts of climate change. This paper mentions that one of the effects of climate change turning places uninhabitable might be large-scale migration, which would, in addition to being bad for family relations, health, and security as mentioned in the paper, also likely cause political tensions, which would contribute to regional instability.
Posted by: Kaylann Adler | 10/21/2021 at 07:47 PM
Reading about the current effects of climate change, I think about what mechanisms international organizations have to incentivize national governments to act. Currently, governments are forced to respond to climate-change fueled events, from wildfires of increasing intensities to hurricanes inflicting increasing damages. Though governments already spend enormous sums on repairing infrastructure following extreme weather events, it would ultimately be more cost effective to invest in extreme weather prevention. At the very least, investments in resilient infrastructure would save countries money in the long run.
I believe that, by highlighting the long-term costs of climate change, framing investments as potential win-win scenarios, international bodies could better incentivize individual nations to act. Rather than focusing on the costs associated with investments against climate change, the focus ought to be placed on the savings generated by such investments.
Posted by: Max Thomas | 10/21/2021 at 08:04 PM
I find the World Bank’s report's emphasis on the effect that climate change has on marine ecosystem's most interesting. I think many people are aware to some extent that climate change is affecting our oceans for the worst, but this report puts into perspective how this will affect mankind, primarily the poor in these 3 regions. For example, not only will we lose a substantial amount of marine animals, those living on the coasts who rely on the ocean for food security, as well as commercial income from selling fish, will specifically be put at risk. The main reason that the author gives for the decrease in fish is the coral bleaching caused by climate change, but I also wonder how overfishing plays a role into this. The ocean acidification threatening coral reefs will also negatively affect tourism, which is a major source of income for these coastal areas. Unfortunately, these trends are only expected to worsen if we continue on the same path. Climate change is often looked at as a far-off problem, but the world, specifically those in developed nations, need to realize the impact that it has on all of mankind, specifically those most disadvantaged. The ideas in this paper surrounding the impacts of climate change on the ocean follow a pattern that we have discussed in class before- the earth cannot keep up with mankind’s quick development. I think it would be interesting for this paper to comment on how much of the CO2 emissions and other factors causing climate change are from developed nations versus the nations facing the most severe consequences.
Posted by: Alexandra Lindsay | 10/21/2021 at 09:30 PM
I find it interesting how development and poverty reduction could be at risk due to pollution and climate change since almost all of the developed countries today developed by industrializing and burning fossil fuels that cause climate change and pollution
Posted by: A Facebook User | 10/21/2021 at 10:46 PM