“Are we taking the steps necessary to protect people from climate chaos, secure their future and manage natural resources in a way that respects human rights and the environment?”
His answer was very simple: we are not doing nearly enough.
In this regard, the impacts of climate change should be seen not only as a climate emergency but also as a violation of human rights, said Professor Joyeeta Gupta. UN news recently
She is co-chair of the international scientific advisory body Earth Commission and one of the United Nations High Representatives for Science, Technology and Innovation for the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
Who is most affected by it?
Professor Gupta said that the 1992 climate treaty never quantified the human damage.
She noted that when the Paris Agreement In 2015, the global consensus was reached on limiting warming to 2° Celsius, with 1.5° Celsius later recognized as a safer target.
But for small island states, even that was a compromise forced by a power imbalance, and “for them, two degrees was not survivable,” said Professor Gupta.
“Rising seas, saltwater intrusion and extreme storms threaten to wipe out entire nations. When rich countries demanded scientific evidence, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was assigned to study the difference between 1.5° Celsius and 2° Celsius,” she continued.
She said the results were clear that 1.5 degrees Celsius is significantly less destructive, but still dangerous.
In her own research published in NatureShe argues that one degree Celsius is the fair limit, because beyond that point the effects of climate change violate the rights of more than one percent of the world’s population, about 100 million people.
The tragedy, she noted, is that the world crossed the one degree mark in 2017, and temperatures are likely to cross the 1.5° Celsius mark by 2030.
She underscored that promises of cooling later in the century ignore irreversible damage, including melting glaciers, collapsing ecosystems and lost lives.
“If the glaciers in the Himalayas melt,” she said, “they won’t come back. We will have to live with the consequences forever.”
© WMO/Teguh Prihatna
A man helps a woman after her car is stranded in waist-deep water. Rains are becoming more extreme worldwide due to the effects of climate change.
A matter of responsibility
Climate justice and development go hand in hand. Every basic right – from water and food to housing, mobility and electricity – requires energy.
“There is a belief that we can meet the requirements Sustainable Development Goals without changing how rich people live. That doesn’t work mathematically or ethically,” Professor Gupta explained.
Her research shows that meeting basic human needs comes with a significant carbon footprint.
The research also highlights that since the planet has already exceeded safe limits, wealthy societies must cut emissions much more aggressively, not only to protect the climate, but to create carbon space for others to realize their rights.
“If you don’t do that, inequality turns into injustice.” she underlined.
Climate change and displacement
Displacement is one of the most obvious consequences of climate injustice. Yet international law still does not recognize ‘climate refugees’.
Professor Gupta explains the progress clearly.
“For example, climate change first forces adaptation, shifting from water-intensive rice to drought-resistant crops. When adaptation fails, people absorb losses: land, livelihoods, security. When survival itself becomes impossible, displacement begins,” she said.
“When the land becomes too dry to grow crops and there is no drinking water,” she said, “people are forced to leave.”
She added that most climate change today is happening within countries or regions, not across continents.
“Relocating is expensive, dangerous and often undesirable. The legal challenge lies in proving causation: did people move because of climate change, or because of other factors such as poor governance or market failure?
“This is where attribution science becomes crucial. New studies are now comparing decades of data to show when and how climate change is altering rainfall, heat, health outcomes and extreme events. As this science advances, it may become possible to integrate climate displacement into international refugee law,” she noted.
“That,” she said, “will be the next step.”
© UNICEF/Raphaël Pouget
Children in Africa are among the highest risk groups for the consequences of climate change.
A broken legal framework
Professor Gupta said climate damage is quite difficult to address through human rights law due to the fragmented architecture of international law.
“This fragmentation allows states to compartmentalize responsibility… They can say, ‘I agreed to this, but not that,’” she said.
“Environmental treaties, human rights conventions, trade agreements and investment regimes operate in parallel worlds. Countries can sign climate agreements without being bound by human rights treaties, or protect investors while ignoring environmental destruction,” she added.
She claimed that this is why it is so difficult to invoke climate change as a human rights violation on a global level. Until recently, climate damage was discussed in technical terms – parts per million of carbon dioxide, temperature targets, emissions pathways – without explicitly asking: what does this do to people?
Only recently has this started to change.
In a groundbreaking piece of advice, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) clarified that climate change cannot be assessed in isolation. Courts and governments, the ICJ said, climate commitments should be considered along with human rights and other environmental agreements.
For Professor Gupta, this legal shift is long overdue, but critically important.
“It finally tells governments: you can’t talk about climate without talking about people.”
Climate change is transboundary
Attributing responsibility for climate change is exceptionally complex because its impacts are transboundary, she said.
“For example, a Peruvian farmer sued a German company in a German court for damage caused by climate change. The court recognized that foreign plaintiffs can bring such cases, but proving the link between emissions and damage remains a major challenge. This case highlights the difficulties of holding states or companies responsible for cross-border climate-related human rights violations,” she added.
Professor Gupta said attribution science makes it possible to link emissions to specific harms.
The International Court of Justice has now confirmed that the continued use of fossil fuels may constitute an internationally wrongful act. States are responsible not only for their emissions, but also for regulating companies within their borders.
“Several legal strategies are emerging, from misrepresentation lawsuits in the US to France’s corporate vigilance law,” she added.
© UNICEF/Bindra
Vehicle emissions, diesel generators, biomass burning and waste have all contributed to the poor air quality in Nigeria’s Lagos Lagoon. (file 2016)
Climate stability as a collective human right
Instead of viewing the climate as an individual right, Professor Gupta advocates the recognition of a collective right to a stable climate.
She explained that climate stability sustains agriculture, water systems, supply chains and day-to-day predictability, and without this stability society cannot function.
“Climate works through water,” she said. “And water is central to everything.”
Courts around the world are increasingly recognizing that climate instability undermines existing human rights, even if the climate itself has not yet been codified as such.
This thinking is now being echoed at the highest levels of the UN.
Erosion of fundamental rights
Speaking before the Human Rights Council in Geneva in June this year, UN High Commissioner Volker Türk warned that climate change is already eroding fundamental rights, especially for the most vulnerable.
But he also saw climate action as an opportunity.
“Climate change can be a powerful lever for progress,” he said, if the world commits to a just transition away from environmentally destructive systems.
“What we need now,” he emphasized, “is a roadmap to rethink our societies, economies and politics in a way that is just and sustainable.”
Political will, power and responsibility
“The erosion of multilateralism, symbolized by repeated US withdrawals from… Paris Agreement has weakened global confidence. Meanwhile, 70 percent of the expansion of new fossil fuels is driven by four rich countries: the US, Canada, Norway and Australia,” said Professor Gupta.
She argues that the neoliberal ideology focused on markets, deregulation and individual freedom cannot solve a collective crisis.
“Climate change is an issue of public interest,” she said. “It requires rules, cooperation and strong states.”
Developing countries face a dilemma: wait for climate finance while emissions rise, or act independently and seek justice later. Waiting, she warns, is suicide.
As the UN High Commissioner concluded in Geneva: no one should be left behind in a just transition.
“If we fail to protect lives, health, jobs and futures,” Volker Türk warned, “we will reproduce the very injustices we claim to be fighting.”
#climate #change #threatens #human #rights