Projetc Syndicate's Pisani-Fery: Will the Climate Agenda Unravel?
01 March 2022
Despite widespread worries about global warming, more immediate economic concerns risk relegating climate policy to the fringes of political debate. This situation raises three fundamental questions for governments.
In a recent survey,
52% of French citizens cited their purchasing power as a major concern.
Only 29% mentioned the environment, putting this issue roughly on a par
with the health system (30%) and immigration (28%). Given this
background, it is no surprise that the transition to a climate-neutral
economy does not feature prominently in the current French presidential election campaign.
With the start of the
war in Ukraine,
the French may – for once – discuss foreign affairs and security in the
run-up to the vote. But, despite widespread worries about climate
change, more immediate economic concerns risk relegating climate policy
to the fringes of the political debate. That is unfortunate, because France, along with the rest of the European Union, has
committed
to nearly halving its greenhouse-gas emissions by 2030 – a threefold
increase in the speed of emissions reduction compared to the last
decade. Whether France meets this extraordinarily demanding target will
depend on actions taken on the winning presidential candidate’s watch.
Even approaching the goal will require an accelerated transformation
affecting all sectors and every aspect of economic and social life. In
a properly functioning democracy, therefore, immediate climate action
would be at the top of the campaign agenda. But the presidential
candidates on the left, who emphasize the need to oaddress climate
change, trail in the polls by a wide margin, while those on the right
prefer to shun the issue, or even
advocate halting the installation of wind turbines on the grounds that they blight the landscape. The only significant discussion
focuses
on the relative shares of nuclear and renewables in 2050 – an important
choice, but not one that will determine if France meets its 2030
target. Not every EU member state is so indifferent. For example, climate action featured
prominently in the campaign preceding Germany’s September 2021 general election, and the resulting
coalition agreement devotes 40 pages to it.
But in most countries, the surge in energy prices since last autumn and
the resulting rise in inflation have elicited public anger and have
diverted policymakers’ attention from longer-term concerns. Governments
everywhere have rushed to introduce various patches in the hope of
stemming the rise in the price level. According to a
survey
by Bruegel, many in the EU have reduced energy taxes or levies, thus de
facto lowering the price of carbon at a time when they should be
contemplating how to increase it.
This situation raises three questions. First, what explains the current shortsightedness on climate? Second, how should governments react? Third, is there a way to keep democratic debates focused on choices that will define the future?
Today’s shortsightedness may appear puzzling, if only because the best
protection against high energy prices would be to reduce reliance on
fossil fuels. It is tempting to attribute the prevailing myopia to the
growing dominance of social media and the erosion of established
political institutions such as political parties....
more at Project Syndicate
© Project Syndicate
