When the airport loudspeakers announced that flights were suspended “until further notice,” Maria, a café worker at Entebbe International Airport in Uganda, initially thought this meant a delay of a few hours. It wasn’t until crowds dispersed, doors closed, and silence filled the terminal that she realised something unprecedented was unfolding. Within days, the world slowed in a way no climate policy document had ever predicted.
COVID-19 was a human tragedy—lives lost, jobs wiped out, families separated. However, amidst this turmoil were valuable lessons on how societies can mobilise, coordinate, and change behaviour at extraordinary speed. These lessons are crucial for climate change mitigation, as the climate crisis—though slower, quieter, and less attention-grabbing—demands the same urgency and clarity of action.
Collective action is possible—and can happen quickly when the threat feels immediate
In the early weeks of the pandemic, governments introduced policies that would have been unthinkable just months earlier. Cities built temporary hospitals within days, entire industries shifted production lines, and communities organised food drives and mutual aid networks.
In contrast, climate change is often perceived as a distant threat—even as floods, heatwaves, and droughts reshape daily realities. The COVID-19 response demonstrated that people are willing to act, even make sacrifices, when they believe their actions matter. The key lesson here is to make climate impacts feel as immediate and real as they actually are, through better communication, local storytelling, and visible leadership.
Behaviour change scales when systems make it easy
Maria remembers how hand-washing stations appeared everywhere—outside shops, in taxi parks, and even at all public functions she attended. Behaviour changed not because people suddenly became more hygienic, but because the infrastructure made it simple.
For climate mitigation, this sends a clear message: sustainable choices must be the easiest choices. If clean transport is unavailable, if clean cooking is unaffordable, or if renewable power is unreliable, behavioural appeals will not work. System design—not moral pressure—drives transformation.
Science matters, but trust matters more
During the pandemic, countries that communicated clearly, shared data openly, and centred decisions on science fared better. However, where trust in institutions was low, even accurate guidance struggled to have an impact.
Climate mitigation faces a similar challenge. Emissions data, carbon budgets, and IPCC reports are only as effective as the trust people have in those delivering the message. Building that trust requires engaging communities early, respecting local knowledge, and ensuring that climate policies improve everyday lives—not just fulfil distant global commitments.
Inequality determines vulnerability—and response capacity
Maria lost her job for six months. In contrast, her neighbour, who worked remotely for a tech firm in Entebbe, hardly felt the economic impact. COVID-19 revealed how unequal societies struggle during global crises.
Climate change presents a similar scenario. Emissions reduction pathways that ignore justice will lead to resistance and deepen inequality. The lesson here is that climate mitigation must be people-centred, protecting livelihoods, supporting transitions, and ensuring that no community is left behind.
Crisis-driven innovation can be transformative
The pandemic accelerated digitalisation, reimagined workplaces, and spurred new technologies. If a similar level of ambition were applied to renewable energy storage, low-carbon transport, green buildings, and regenerative agriculture, the world could rapidly bend the emissions curve.
Maria is now back at work, but she still remembers the eerie silence of those early days. “It showed me how connected we all are,” she reflects. Perhaps this is the greatest lesson: our actions, both small and large, shape global outcomes.
The climate crisis demands that we act with the same urgency—before we reach a tipping point. Global emissions must fall by 40–55% by 2035 (relative to 2019 levels) to keep the 1.5 °C limit within reach. In particular, major emitters must heighten their ambitions by establishing stronger 2035 Nationally Determined Contributions that align clearly with the 1.5°C pathway, supported by credible implementation plans.
No comments:
Post a Comment