Climate change and the poor
气候变化和穷国
Adapt or die
适应还是死亡
Sep 11th 2008
From The Economist print edition
Environmentalists have long said the world should concentrate on preventing climate change, not adapting to it. That is changing
环保人士长久以来一直声称，世界应该致力于阻制气候变化，而不是适应这一趋势。现在，情况正在改变。
“I USED to think adaptation subtracted from our efforts on prevention. But I’ve changed my mind,” says Al Gore, a former American vice-president and Nobel prize-winner. “Poor countries are vulnerable and need our help.” His words reflect a shift in the priorities of environmentalists and economists.
“我曾认为用于适应上的精力越多，能用于阻止上的精力就越少。现在，我的看法改变了，”美国前副总统、诺贝尔奖得主Al Gore说道。”穷国容易受到（气候变化）的冲击，他们需要我们的帮助。”他的话反映了环保人士和经济学家在（气候变化）工作重心上的转变。
For years, greens said adaptation-coping with climate change, rather than stopping it-was a bit like putting out a fire on the Titanic: desirable, no doubt, but the main thing was to change course. In July, however, a committee of America’s Senate set aside $20m for international adaptation efforts. That was peanuts; and nothing will come of it anyway because there is no comparable legislation in the House of Representatives. But it was the first time American legislators had showed willingness to put money into global efforts at coping. In June, the United Nations hammered out the details of how to control spending of the first carbon tax earmarked for international adaptation.
多年来，绿色意识人士曾声称，适应—-应对气候变化，而不是改变它—有点像扑灭泰坦尼克号上的火：毫无疑问，人人都想把火灭了，但关键还是要改变航线。然而，7月，美国一家隶属参议院的委员会拨款2000万美元用于国际适应性活动。此举犹如隔靴搔痒；众议院没有出台相应立法，无论如何都不会有太大进展。但是，这是美国立法者首次显示出愿意出资支持应对气候变化的全球性活动。6月，联合国出台了一项细则，规定了用于国际适应性活动的第一批碳税使用管理方案。
Two things have changed attitudes. One is evidence that global warming is happening faster than expected. Manish Bapna of the World Resources Institute, a think-tank in Washington, DC, believes “it is already too late to avert dangerous consequences, so we must learn to adapt.”
两个问题导致了这种态度转变。其一，有证据显示，全球变暖的速度比人们预计的更快。位于华盛顿的智囊机构—世界资源研究所的Manish Bapna认为”想要避免可怕的后果为时已晚，我们必须学会适应。”
Second, evidence is growing that climate change hits two specific groups of people disproportionately and unfairly. They are the poorest of the poor and those living in island states: 1 billion people in 100 countries. Tony Nyong, a climate-change scientist in Nairobi, argues that people in poor countries used to see global warming as a Western matter: the rich had caused it and would with luck solve it. But the first impact of global warming has been on the very things the poorest depend on most: dry-land agriculture; tropical forests; subsistence fishing. In a recent paper* for the Brookings Institution, a think-tank in Washington DC, Robert Mendelsohn of Yale University estimates that African farmers on rain-fed land will lose $28 per hectare per year for each 1°C rise in global temperatures. Global warming erodes coastlines, spreads pests and water-borne diseases and produces more erratic weather patterns.
其二，有证据显示，两个特定群体不是问题的制造者，却不公平的承受了大部分冲击。他们是最为贫困的穷人和岛国居民：分布在100国家的10亿人口。奈落比气候变化问题科学家Tony Nyong表示，穷国的居民曾经认为气候变化是西方人的事儿：富人制造了这些麻烦，手气不错的话，也就解决了。但是首先受到全球变暖冲击的正是特困群体赖以生存的资产：旱区农业；热带雨林；生存渔业。位于华盛顿的一家智囊机构布鲁金斯研究所最近发表了一份报告，耶鲁大学的Robert Mendelsohn预计，全球气温每升高1°C，在雨养地耕种的非洲农民每公顷就要损失28美元。全球变暖侵蚀海岸线，使虫灾泛滥、水性传染病扩散，气候变化更加无常。
The victims share two characteristics. They are too poor to defend themselves by expensive flood controls or sophisticated public-health programmes. And (unlike China or Brazil) their own carbon footprints are tiny. Kirk Smith, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley, calls climate change the world’s biggest regressive tax: the poorest pay for the behaviour of the rich (see map).
受害者有两个共同点。他们过于贫穷，无法负担昂贵的防洪设施和完备的公共医疗体系，因而无法避开冲击。他们（不像中国和巴西）碳足迹并不浓重。位于伯克利的加利福尼亚大学的教授Kirk Smith称，气候变化是世界上最厉害的递减税：最穷的国家为富国买单。（见地图）
The new focus on adaptation shows itself in a slew of private- and public-sector projects. A private Australian company called New Forests cleans up degraded land in South-East Asia, creates “biodiversity conservation certificates” and sells them to big firms which want to be greener. Swiss Re is designing new kinds of subsidised insurance to help poor farmers in a dozen African countries guard against some of the impacts of climate change, creating innovative climate-risk indices and weather derivative contracts. Dozens of small firms advise big ones on cutting their carbon footprints; although most aim at reducing emissions, a few invest in reforestation, soil protection and the like.
私营和公共部门方案的一系列转变也体现了对适应活动的全新关注。一家名为New Forests的澳大利亚私营公司整顿了东南亚地区土质退化的土地，设立了”保护生物多样性许可证”并将其出售给追求绿色形象的大公司。Swiss Re正在构思几种新的有补助的保险项目、设置全新气候问题险情指数和气候衍生问题的相关合同，以帮助十多个非洲国家的贫穷农民防御气候变化的冲击。许多小企业就减少碳足迹问题向大企业们提供建议；大部分的企业致力于减少碳排放，但也有一些企业投资于森林重建，水土保护这类活动。
On the public-sector side, rich-country governments are levying new taxes and using the revenues for global poverty-reduction and adaptation. France, for example, imposes a tax on international flights of between euro1 and euro40 per seat, using the money for HIV/AIDS in Africa. Some environmentalists want a similar tax on all international flights to help adaptation. Countries are creating adaptation funds by auctioning rights to pollute under cap-and-trade arrangements. A fifth of the money raised by the European Union’s emissions-trading scheme-forecast at over $2 billion a year by 2020-is supposed to go on climate-change efforts including, as the scheme says, “developing countries’ adaptation”. A bill proposed this year in America’s Senate would have generated $10 billion-20 billion a year after 2025. The bill failed but similar steps have the backing of both Barack Obama and John McCain.
对于私营部门，富国政府征收新税种，所得税收用于全球减贫和适应性活动。例如，法国对国际航班每位次征收1欧到40欧不等的税，用于解决非洲地区艾滋病问题。一些环保人士希望对所有国际航班都征收这类税种，用于适应性活动。世界各国正通过拍卖限额交易制度下的污染权建立适应性活动基金会。预计，欧盟碳排放交易计划集资的五分之一—-据估计到2020年将超过每年20亿美元—-将被用于继续应对气候变化活动，包括—据该计划规定—“发展中国家的适应性活动”。今年美国参议院提出了一份法案，规定2025年后每年集资100-200美元。该法案虽然没有通过，但Barack Obama和John McCain都支持类似的应对措施。
Most important, a United Nations conference in Bali last December set up what is essentially a global tax on carbon, with the money to be spent by an international body. Under the Kyoto protocol, companies in rich countries that have signed the climate accords can finance reductions in emissions by private firms in developing nations. In return, rich-country companies can offset a portion of their own (capped) emissions. These company-to-company deals produce “carbon credits” which have a value and can be traded. In June, it was agreed that 2% of that value (forecast at up to $950m by 2012) will go into an adaptation fund controlled by donors and recipients. About $100m-worth of these credits are already in the bank.
最重要的是，去年12月，巴厘岛联合国会议设立了针对全球碳排放的税种，所得税收将由国际组织支配。按照《京都议定书》的规定，已经签署气候协议的富国的公司可以资助发展中国家的私营企业减少碳排量。做为回报，富国公司可以抵消一部分受限的碳排放。这种公司对公司的交易孕育了”碳借贷”，这种借贷有价值并可交易。6月达成协议，该借贷的2%（预计到2012年将达到9500万美元）归适应性活动基金会所有，该基金会由赞助者和被赞助者共同执管。价值大约1000万美元的借贷收款已存入银行。
So adaptation is becoming a proper business. As it does so, however, it encounters a host of problems.
这样，适应性活动业务正逐步成型。但是，在此过程中，也遇到了许多问题。
To begin with, the money involved is just a puff of smoke. Back-of-the-envelope calculations suggest the cost of coping with climate change is in the tens of billions a year for poor countries (see table). The total pledged to date (cumulatively, not per year) is $300m, of which just 10% has actually been spent. China says rich countries should allocate 0.5% of their national incomes in official aid to help developing countries adapt. But most rich countries are failing to fulfil earlier promises to increase aid for other reasons, so that looks like a non-starter.
首先，用于活动的款额九牛一毛。初略计算（1）穷国一年用于应对气候变化的成本达几百亿（如图所示）。目前承诺的金额（累计数目而不是一年的数目）为3000万美元，其中只有10%真正得到利用。中国表示，富国应该拿出国民收入的0.5%，官方援助发展中国家的适应活动。但是大部分的富国出于其他种种原因并没有兑现早先增加援助的承诺，被视为临时退赛选手。
The discrepancy means poor countries will end up bearing most of the burden themselves. China has a national climate-change programme with an elaborate series of targets and exhortations to cope. Bangladesh this year put $50m into a national adaptation fund and invited rich countries to add of their plenty. But this sort of thing is much easier for giants like China or large countries like Bangladesh, than it is for poorer Mali or tiny Maldives.
这种言行不一意味着最终穷国将自己担起大部分重担。中国建立了国家应对气候变化项目，制定了一系列详细指标和鼓励政策，应对气候变化问题。今年孟加拉国向一个国家适应性基金会投入500万美元，并引入富国资金。相比中国和像孟加拉这样大国，更为贫穷的马里和小国马尔代夫做这方面的筹备就不是那么容易了。
With more problems than money, there will-as always-be a fight over the spoils. Rich countries may concede the poor are harder hit and need help, but once there is a pot of money, they too will want a share. For an American administration, rebuilding the levees of New Orleans (an adaptation programme) will take precedence over projects in Africa or the Caribbean.
问题远不止筹资。还有—-当然也是总有—-分割战略品之战。富国或许承认穷国受到更大的冲击、需要帮助，但是一旦有空余资金，他们也想分食一羹。对于美国政府来说，新奥尔良的堤坝重建工作（一个适应性项目）要先行于非洲和加勒比海的工程项目。
Even if poor countries do get help, there are bound to be fights over how to use it. In general, says Saleemul Huq of the International Institute for Environment and Development in London, most adaptation spending should go on what countries are doing anyway-irrigation, drought-resistant seeds and so forth. But that leaves plenty of room for disputes.
即使穷国获得了帮助，怎样使用也必然存在分歧。位于伦敦的国际环境与发展学会的Saleemul Huq称，总体看来，无论怎样使用资金，大部分的适应性消费行为—实行灌溉，研发抗旱种子等等—-都应继续下去。但争执仍会存在。
If sea levels go up, do you build sea walls or rehouse people? If infectious diseases are rising, do you spend money trying to eradicate the worst ones, like malaria, or on health and nutrition in general? The latter makes sense but most donors concentrate on single-disease efforts. George Soros, a financier who runs a chain of philanthropic organisations, says that in their experience, few people in poor countries have a clear idea about climate change and how to cope with it.
如果海平面上升，是修建海堤还是重新安置居民？如果传染病泛滥，是把钱花在力图根除像疟疾这类的最厉害的疾病上，还是花在公众健康和营养上？后者更合理些，但是大部分的资助者只致力于遏制单种疾病的活动。经营慈善连锁机构的金融家George Soros表示，他们的工作经历表明，穷国没有几个人明白气候变化及应对方法问题。
Lastly, the international arrangements that might help sort out some of these disputes are a shambles. Among developing countries, most negotiations on climate change (as on everything else) are led by the big three: China, India and Brazil. But they are large polluters themselves and their interests differ from very poor states and islands. Angus Friday, Grenada’s ambassador to the UN who speaks for island states there, says the states most vulnerable to climate change are least able to participate effectively in climate-change talks.
最后，对理清争端或许有所帮助的国际协约现在是一团乱麻。发展中国家间，关于环境问题（和其他所有问题一样）的大部分洽谈由三大巨头掌控：中国，印度和巴西。但是他们本身就是污染大户，因而利益与穷国和岛国的有所不同。格林纳达驻联合国大使Angus Friday在联合国内为岛国辩言，他说，最易遭受气候变化冲击的国家，在应对气候变化的会议上却最没有发言权。
The poorest lose out in another way. When industrial polluters in emerging markets cut emissions, they are rewarded through Kyoto. But the poorest are not rewarded for the big contribution they could make towards reducing emissions, which is the better management of tropical forests. That is because forests were excluded from Kyoto, to the chagrin of the poor.
最贫困的国家还以另一种方式输局。新兴市场的工业污染制造者一旦减排，根据《议定书》，会得到回报。但是最贫困的国家很好地管理热带雨林，为减排作出巨大贡献，却没有得到回报。因为，让穷国懊悔的是—–《议定书》没有涉及对保护雨林作出贡献的回报问题。
Mary Robinson, a former president of Ireland and UN high commissioner for human rights, says that there should be a “rights-based” approach to climate change, meaning poor countries should have some redress under international law for the environmental costs they suffer. This seems like a recipe for alienating rich countries. But it reflects a growing impatience. As the costs of climate change bear down on the poor, so their demands grow that rich countries, which caused most of the problems, should help them cope.
爱尔兰前总统、联合国人权问题高级专员Mary Robinson表示，应该有一个建立在权利基础上的气候变化应对策略，即根据国际法，穷国应该因他们承担环保成本而得到补偿。这似乎是离间富国不错的法子。但是也反映了某种日益增长的急躁情绪。穷国承担气候变化的成本，另一边要求大多数问题的始作俑者—富国帮助他们应对的需求也在增加。
（1）Back-of-the-envelope calculation
在信封背面打草稿完成的计算，引申意思是不正式，不精确的计算，但可以被用作对某个观点的支持或论据。
译者：mxrruler http://www.ecocn.org/forum/viewthread.php?tid=14000&extra=page%3D1
carbon tax应译成烟尘排放税