The recent Cyclone Ditwah struck South and Southeast Asia in an unprecedented way, causing floods, landslides, deaths, displacement of thousands, and severe soil degradation. For many in Sri Lanka, the disaster is seen as a natural event that the government should have anticipated. Yet, the reality is that small countries like ours have little power to prevent disasters of this scale. Despite contributing minimally to global carbon emissions, we are forced to bear the consequences of ecological harm caused largely by wealthier nations. Excessive consumption and profit-driven production in capitalist economies fuel climate change, while the Global South suffers the resulting losses in lives, homes, and livelihoods. The dead, the disappeared, and the displaced from Cyclone Ditwah demand climate justice—a justice that addresses structural inequality, exploitation of nature for profit, and the failure of global powers to take responsibility.
The Role of Excessive Consumption
The environmental crisis is driven by excessive consumption, particularly in developed countries. Cars, electronics, clothing, and other consumer goods require immense energy to produce, much of it from fossil fuels such as coal, gas, and oil. The transportation of raw materials and finished products adds further emissions, while waste from overconsumption ends up in landfills, releasing methane, a potent greenhouse gas. This cycle of consumption, production, and waste underscores a systemic problem: climate change is not merely an environmental issue, but a symptom of an economic system built on profit, not sustainability.
Market-Based “Solutions” and Greenwashing
Neoliberal economies are not silent in the face of climate change—they perform “sustainability” while offering superficial solutions. Many corporations engage in green branding to appear environmentally responsible, even as their practices remain unchanged. Carbon trading, for example, allows companies to buy and sell the right to emit CO₂ under a capped system. While intended to reduce emissions, it often commodifies pollution rather than eliminating it, enabling wealthy actors to continue environmentally harmful practices. Since many developing countries do not strictly enforce carbon caps, wealthy corporations often relocate their factories to these regions. Meanwhile, the burden of “reductions” is shifted to marginalised communities, turning these areas into pollution havens that endure the worst effects of climate disasters despite contributing the least to the problem. Market-based solutions, therefore, frequently reinforce existing inequalities rather than addressing the structural causes of climate change.
International Agreements and Structural Limitations
The global community has reached multiple climate agreements, including the UNFCCC (1992), the Kyoto Protocol (1997), and the Paris Agreement (2015). Yet these agreements remain constrained by capitalist agendas and weak enforcement mechanisms. Most rely on voluntary national commitments, peer pressure, and reporting transparency rather than legally binding obligations. Countries can submit inadequate Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and remain technically compliant, rendering the agreements more symbolic than transformative. While not entirely ineffective, international agreements often prioritise narrative performance over real structural change, allowing wealthy nations to avoid meaningful responsibility for emissions and ecological harm.
Climate Justice and Social Inequalities
Climate change is inseparable from social injustice. Marginalised communities—those affected by poverty, colonial histories, racial discrimination, or gender inequality—face the greatest risks from environmental disasters. These populations generally lack safe housing, and even when warned to evacuate, they have few resources or means to recover from disasters. General climate policies, which have been influcned by capitalist agendas, that focus solely on emissions reduction or “green” initiatives fail to address these deeper inequalities. True climate action must empower communities, redistribute wealth, and integrate social justice with environmental sustainability. Only by tackling the structural drivers of both inequality and ecological harm can we move toward genuine climate justice.
Conclusion
Cyclone Ditwah and other climate disasters are reminders that the effects of environmental degradation are unevenly distributed. The Global South pays a heavy price for the consumption patterns and industrial practices of the Global North. Market-based solutions, superficial sustainability initiatives, and weak international agreements are insufficient to address the systemic roots of climate change. Achieving climate justice requires a fundamental rethinking of economic priorities, social structures, and global responsibility—placing people and the planet above profit.
The author is a postdoctoral fellow at Harvard Divinity School.
by Anushka Kahandagamage 
from The Island https://ift.tt/sU7iaDL
No comments:
Post a Comment