Advertisement

Environment, Development and Sustainability

, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp 165–179 | Cite as

Decomposing the anthropogenic causes of climate change

  • Alessandro De MatteisEmail author
Article

Abstract

Awareness of the risks imposed by the ongoing process of climate change has led to progressive efforts at coordination at the global level, highlighting the need for shared efforts to achieve common goals. This study provides a contribution to the discussion through an analysis of the human contribution to climate change, highlighting the complexity of policy measures and the long amount of time required to reduce, or at least contain, the ongoing process of climate change. Our results remark the key role played by demographic pressure and the limited contribution that technological progress can provide to contain climate change. Overall, the core socio-economic and political paradigms on which current lifestyle is predominantly based are put under the spotlight. The results of the analysis question the very basis of economic growth and modern lifestyle and raise the prospect of some difficult but necessary behavioural changes.

Keywords

Climate change Anthropogenic causes Demographic pressure Steady state 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The author gratefully acknowledges comments received on an earlier version of this article from two anonymous referees. Usual disclaimer applies.

References

  1. Arrhenius, S. (1896). On the influence of carbonic acid in the air upon the temperature of the ground. Philosophical Magazine Series, 5(41), 237–275.Google Scholar
  2. Bell, D. (2011). Does anthropogenic climate change violate human rights? Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 14(2), 99–124.Google Scholar
  3. Blomsma, F., & Brennan, G. (2017). The emergence of circular economy: A new framing around prolonging resource productivity. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 21(3), 603–614.Google Scholar
  4. Caney, S. (2009). Justice and the distribution of greenhouse gas emissions. Journal of Global Ethics, 5(2), 125–146.Google Scholar
  5. Caney, S. (2010). Climate change and the duties of the advantaged. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 13(1), 203–228.Google Scholar
  6. Chaudry, A. M., & Perelman, M. (2013). Human development with sustainability: Are good intentions enough? Development and Change, 44(3), 813–822.Google Scholar
  7. Cipolla, C. (1967). The economic history of world population (4th ed.). Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  8. Commoner, B. (1990). Making peace with the planet. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
  9. Cook, J., Nuccitelli, D., Green, S. A., Richardson, M., Winkler, B., Painting, R., et al. (2013). Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature. Environmental Research Letters, 8, 1–7.Google Scholar
  10. Cook, J., Oreskes, N., Doran, P. T., Anderegg, W. R. L., Verheggen, B., Maibach, E. W., et al. (2016). Consensus on consensus: A synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming. Environmental Research Letters, 11, 1–7.Google Scholar
  11. Daly, H. E. (1972). In defense of a steady-state economy. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 54(5), 945–954.Google Scholar
  12. Daly, H. E. (1974). The economics of the steady state. American Economics Review, 64(2), 15–21.Google Scholar
  13. Daly, H. E. (1977). Steady-state economics. San Francisco: Freeman.Google Scholar
  14. Daly, H. E. (2008). A steady-state economy. Opinion piece for redefining prosperity. London: Sustainable Development Commission.Google Scholar
  15. Davis, S. J., & Caldeira, K. (2010). Consumption-based accounting of CO2 emissions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107, 5687–5692.Google Scholar
  16. Dyson, T. (2005). On development, demography and climate change: The end of the world as we know it? Population and Environment, 27(2), 117–149.Google Scholar
  17. Erlich, P. R. (1971). The population bomb. New York: Ballantine Books.Google Scholar
  18. Georgescu-Roegen, N. (1971). The entropy law and the economic process. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Ghosh, P., & Brand, W. A. (2003). Stable isotope ratio mass spectrometry in global climate change research. International Journal of Mass Spectrometry, 228, 1–33.Google Scholar
  20. Grist, N. (2008). Positioning climate change in sustainable development discourse. Journal of International Development, 20(6), 783–803.Google Scholar
  21. Hartwick, J. M. (1977). Intergenerational equity and the investing of rents from exhaustible resources. American Economics Review, 67, 972–974.Google Scholar
  22. Hartwick, J. M. (1978). Substitution among exhaustible resources and intergenerational equity. Review of Economic Studies, 45, 347–354.Google Scholar
  23. Hediger, W. (1999). Reconciling “weak” and “strong” sustainability. International Journal of Social Economics, 26, 1120–1143.Google Scholar
  24. Hediger, W. (2006). Weak and strong sustainability, environmental conservation and economic growth. Natural Resource Modeling, 19(3), 359–394.Google Scholar
  25. Hubacek, K., Feng, K., Minx, J. C., Pfister, S., & Zhou, N. (2014). Teleconnecting consumption to environmental impacts at multiple spatial scales. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 18(1), 7–9.Google Scholar
  26. Islam, M., Kanemoto, K., & Managi, S. (2016). Impact of trade openness and sector trade in embodied greenhouse gases emissions and air pollutants. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 20(3), 494–505.Google Scholar
  27. Ivanova, D., Stadler, K., Steen-Olsen, K., Wood, R., Vita, G., Tukker, A., et al. (2015). Environmental impact assessment of household consumption. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 20(3), 526–536.Google Scholar
  28. Kahuthu, A. (2006). Economic growth and environmental degradation in a global context. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 8(1), 55–68.Google Scholar
  29. Kallis, G. (2011). In defence of degrowth. Ecological Economics, 70(5), 873–880.Google Scholar
  30. Kerschner, C. (2010). Economic de-growth vs. steady-state economy. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(6), 544–551.Google Scholar
  31. Latouche, S. (2009). Farewell to growth. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  32. Leiserowitz, A., Maibach E., Roser-Renouf, C., Feinberg, G. & Howe, P. (2012) Climate change in the American mind: Americans’ global warming beliefs and attitudes. In September 2012 Yale Project on Climate Change Communication. Yale University and George Mason University: New Haven, CT. (http://environment.yale.edu/climate/files/Climate-Beliefs-September-2012.pdf).
  33. Leisinger, K. M., Schmitt, K. M., & Pandya-Lorch, R. (2002). Six billion and counting: Population and food security in the 21st century. Washington, DC: IFPRI.Google Scholar
  34. Liu, J., Mooney, H., Hull, V., Davis, S. J., Gaskell, J., Hertel, T., et al. (2015). Systems integration for global sustainability. Science, 347, 1258832.Google Scholar
  35. Malthus, T. R. (1798). An essay on the principle of population. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
  36. Martìnez-Alier, J. (2009). Socially sustainable economic de-growth. Development and Change, 40(6), 1099–1119.Google Scholar
  37. Meadows, D. H., Meadows, D. L., Randers, J., & Behrens, W. (1972). The limits to growth. London: Pan Books.Google Scholar
  38. Meyer, L. H., & Roser, D. (2010). Climate justice and historical emissions. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 13(1), 229–253.Google Scholar
  39. Mill, J. S. (1848). Principles of political economy. London: John W. Parker.Google Scholar
  40. Miller, R. L., Schmidt, G. A., Nazarenko, L. S., Tausnev, N., Bauer, S. E., Del Genio, A. D., et al. (2014). CMIP5 historical simulations (1850–2012) with GISS model E2. Journal of Advances in Modeling the Earth System, 6, 441–477.Google Scholar
  41. Narayan, P. K. (2005). The saving and investment nexus for China: Evidence from cointegration tests. Applied Economics, 37(17), 1979–1990.Google Scholar
  42. National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Forcings in GISS climate model. http://data.giss.nasa.gov/modelforce/ghgases/ consulted in July 2016.
  43. Neumayer, E. (1999). Weak versus strong sustainability: Exploring the limits of two opposing paradigms. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  44. O’Neill, D. (2015). What should be held steady in a steady-state economy? Interpreting Daly’s Definition at the National Level, Journal of Industrial Ecology, 19(4), 552–563.Google Scholar
  45. Ostrom, E. (2010). Polycentric systems for coping with collective action and global environmental change. Global Environmental Change, 20(4), 550–557.Google Scholar
  46. Page, E. A. (2008). Distributing the burdens of climate change. Environmental Politics, 17(4), 556–575.Google Scholar
  47. Pearce, D. W., Atkinson, G. D., & Dubourg, W. R. (1994). The economics of sustainable development. Annual Review of Energy and the Environment, 19, 457–474.Google Scholar
  48. Pesaran, M. H., Shin, Y., & Smith, R. J. (2001). Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 16(3), 289–326.Google Scholar
  49. Peters, G. P., Davis, S. J., & Andrew, R. (2012). A synthesis of carbon in international trade. Biogeosciences, 9, 3247–3276.Google Scholar
  50. Peters, G. P., Minx, J. C., Weber, C. L., & Edenhofer, O. (2011). Growth in emission transfers via international trade from 1990 to 2008. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108, 8903–8908.Google Scholar
  51. Pew (2012) More say there is solid evidence of global warming. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. (http://www.people-press.org/2012/10/15/more-say-there-is-solid-evidence-of-global-warming/).
  52. Schneider, F., Kallis, G., & Martìnez-Alier, J. (2010). Crisis or opportunity? Economic degrowth for social equity and ecological sustainability. Introduction to this special issue. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(6), 511–518.Google Scholar
  53. Solomon, S., Daniel, J., Sanford, T., Murphy, D., Plattner, G., Knutti, R., et al. (2010). Persistence of climate changes due to a range of greenhouse gases. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(43), 18354–18359.Google Scholar
  54. Solow, R. M. (1974). Intergenerational equity and exhaustible resources. Review of Economic Studies, 41(5), 29–45.Google Scholar
  55. Solow, R. M. (1986). On the intergenerational allocation of natural resources. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 88(1), 141–149.Google Scholar
  56. Steen-Olsen, K., Wood, R., & Hertwich, E. G. (2016). The carbon footprint of Norwegian household consumption 1999–2012. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 20(3), 582–592.Google Scholar
  57. Stocker, T., Qin, D., Plattner, G. K., Tignor, M. Allen, S. K., Boschung, J., Nauels, A., Xia, Y., Bex, V. & Midgley, P. M. (2014) Climate change 2013: The physical science basis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Turner, R. K., Doktor, P., & Adger, N. (1994). Sea-level rise and coastal wetlands in the U.K.: Mitigation strategies for sustainable management. In A. M. Jansson, M. Hammer, C. Folke, & R. Costanza (Eds.), Investing in natural capital: The ecological economics approach to sustainability (pp. 267–290). Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  59. United Nations Development Program (2012) Human Development Report 2011. Sustainability and equity: A better future for all. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  60. Weber, C. L., Peters, G. P., Guan, D., & Hubacek, K. (2008). The contribution of Chinese exports to climate change. Energy Policy, 36(9), 3572–3577.Google Scholar
  61. Zhang, Q., Jiang, X., Tong, D., Davis, S. J., Zhao, H., Geng, G., et al. (2017). Transboundary health impacts of transported global air pollution and international trade. Nature, 543, 705–709.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of International DevelopmentUniversity of East AngliaNorwichUK

Personalised recommendations