Procrastination is deadly: it all hangs in the balance of COP26

We either act now or not at all. Procrastination, in any form, is deadly.

Photo by Number 10 on Flickr

Climate change is an inescapable reality – a dark cloud that looms tirelessly over humanity’s future horizon. As of the moment, we are failing in our responsibilities towards future generations. The outcomes of COP26, the UN’s latest climate summit, which concluded in Glasgow earlier this month, are nothing short of a disappointment. 

Whether you live in Paris or Peru, we all have a collective interest in solving the issues of climate change: few problems encapsulate humanity in such an all-encompassing way.

The consequences of such a crisis could be catastrophic; and yet, mass destruction aside, COP26 is simply another example of unimpressive climate cooperation on a global scale.

Such a reality seems illogical. 

How, and why, would such an issue – one in which every nation has a selfish motivation to tackle – face such difficulties in gathering tangible support? Why is collective cooperation so difficult when it comes to climate change?

The answer is much more complicated than one might think.

There are a total of 198 UN member states, each with its own goals, objectives, and self-interests. If we are to tackle the challenge of climate change, there is little doubt that we must all work together. This means cooperation amongst every nation – from the big emitters, like China and the USA, all the way down to the smaller ones, like Burundi and the Faroe Islands.

Cooperation on a scale like this is a complex affair. While it might be in our collective interest to work together and tackle this crisis, the individual interests of some UN member states may differ. 

Conflicts like this – where the collective and the individual are at crossroads – often draw similarities to the prisoner’s dilemma: a case in which two partners in crime have been arrested and can either work together or betray their partner, potentially bagging a reduced  sentence for themselves whilst the other gets serious jail time. Betrayal may seem a safer option on an individual level,  but if both criminals betray each other, both end up with significantly longer sentences than if they had cooperated and said nothing.

But the issue lies far beyond a misalignment of agendas. For Professor Stephen Gardiner, climate change is “the perfect moral storm”.  

The effects of our emissions addictions are very much lagged, and the inter-generational issue of climate change – the fact that we're acting altruistically in the present for the benefit of future generations – can often lead us down the path of procrastination. What duty do we have towards those humans yet to come, and in what possible way can they repay us for the sacrifices we make by cutting our emissions? The complexity of this inter-generational issue runs deeper than many might think. 

Regardless of your personal views, it seems rather selfish to believe that we have no duty to future generations and no interest in their potential prosperity.

Procrastination is deadly. The more time our politicians spend discussing the finer details of who is responsible for what, and who should carry the cost – obsessing over the minor points and losing track of the bigger picture, the less time we have to act. Such “moral corruption” can only harm future generations, as our delayed response disguises the exponential growth of our emissions.

In many ways, COP26 has shown humanity’s true colours. The conference is yet a further extension of such moral corruption, pushing the commitment of emissions targets back on to further discussions next year and failing to commit to any hardcore financial support for climate-vulnerable countries. The consistent reluctance of world leaders to agree on enforceable commitments only delays the inevitable - allowing the damages of carbon emissions to grow exponentially as procrastination rages on.

Don’t get me wrong, the discussions that were had, or perhaps more crucially not had, during COP26 were not a complete failure. The Global partnership between the EU and the USA to curb methane emissions, and the recognition of international failures to financially support climate mitigating strategies are certainly key steps forward. But there are only so many individual steps a man can take before tangible action is required.

As of now, we have been tip-toeing towards inevitable failure, dismissing and under-valuing our duty to future generations under the premise that we were trying.

It’s time that we step back and look forward.

The political soundbites of “build back greener” are, at the end of the day, words without meaning. Until our politicians realise that such vague and idle comments are diluting meaningful discussion, any significant leaps forward in the battle against climate change will be impossible.

Emissions may be harmful, but procrastination is deadly.

Pi Opinion content does not necessarily reflect the views of the editorial team, Pi Media society, Students’ Union UCL or University College London. We aim to publish opinions from across the student body — if you read anything you would like to respond to, get in touch via email.