Others Publications

Envisioning climate change debates and policies through the tension triangle lens

Rukundo, Emmanuel Nshakira
External Publications (2022)

in: PLOS Climate 1 (12), article e0000109

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000109
Open access

Recently, awareness about climate change has increased. Behavioural changes and micro-level and macro-level actions towards low-carbon economies are becoming more widespread, propelled by increasing scientific evidence and climate activism. As individuals continue to become more climate-conscious, climate-mitigation legislation has also gained traction. In 2019, the European Commission agreed on the European Green Deal, which included a recommendation to phase out new financing for fossil fuel projects in third countries. This recommendation was reiterated at the COP26 in Glasgow, by the European Investment Bank, and more recently by the European Commission in preparation for the COP27 in Cairo. Against this background, the European Parliament recently adopted resolution 2022/2826(RSP), broadly condemning alleged human rights violations linked with the planned construction of the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP). Alongside the human rights questions, the European Parliamentarians also argue that the project will both increase emissions and cause ecological damage—and so, in line with European climate policies, they argue that the project should close.
In this essay, I use the example of EU resolution 2022/2826(RSP) and the debates surrounding it to argue that whilst debates following this and similar resolutions supporting blanket bans on fossil fuel investments in low-income countries might be well-intentioned, a more differentiated view of the implications of these resolutions is necessary, especially considering developing countries’ needs and preferences. Blanket application of climate strategies developed in the Global North (such as stopping funding fossil fuel extractions in low-income countries) can be deeply unfair and unjust, and entrench more poverty than they hope to reduce. Moreover, these debates tend to focus on the policy needs of the Global North, with limited regard to Global South contexts and needs. This is especially significant in the context of aiming for just energy transitions, in which low-income countries are not left worse off without fossil fuel extraction.

Further experts

Aleksandrova, Mariya

Climate risk governance 

Baydag, Melis

Political Science 

Bergmann, Julian

Political Science 

Brandi, Clara

Economy and Political Science 

Dang, Vy

Political Science 

Dippel, Beatrice

Comparatist 

Donnelly, Aiveen

Politcal Science 

Ekoh, Susan S.

Environmental Research 

Erforth, Benedikt

Political Science 

Friesen, Ina

Political Science 

Furness, Mark

Political Science 

Goedeking, Nicholas

Comparative Political Economy 

Grimm, Sven

Political Science 

Hackenesch, Christine

Political Science 

Keijzer, Niels

Social Science 

Koch, Svea

Social Science 

Lehmann, Ina

Political Science 

Löpelt, Sarah

International relations and Sustainability policy 

Mathis, Okka Lou

Political Scientist 

Never, Babette

Political Scientist 

Pegels, Anna

Economist 

Srigiri, Srinivasa Reddy

Agricultural Economist 

von Haaren, Paula

Development Economics 

Contact

Cornelia Hornschild
Publication Coordinator

E-mail Cornelia.Hornschild@idos-research.de
Phone +49 (0)228 94927-135
Fax +49 (0)228 94927-130

Alexandra Fante
Librarian/ Open Access Coordinator

E-Mail Alexandra.Fante@idos-research.de
Telefon +49 (0)228 94927-321
Fax +49 (0)228 94927-130