The current state of climate change has progressed past its initial classification as an environmental and scientific issue. The situation has developed into a complete human rights emergency which threatens both human survival, national stability, and economic stability, according to leading climate experts and high-ranking UN officials.
The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk delivered these statements at the Human Rights Council meeting in Geneva during the previous year when he discussed the inadequate global response to climate disasters which endangers both present and future generations.
It also violates human rights and environmental standards in resource management. A UN report states that worldwide initiatives have not yet reached an adequate level of progress.
Professor Joyeeta Gupta serves as the Earth Commission co-chair while representing the United Nations at the highest level for science and technology innovation toward Sustainable Development Goals. The scientist has shown the requirement to treat climate change as both a human rights violation and an urgent environmental crisis.
Who suffers most from rising temperatures and why
According to Professor Gupta, human harm was not quantified in the 1992 climate convention. The Paris Agreement entered into force during 2015 when nations pledged to stop climate change from exceeding 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. Scientists, through their research, discovered that limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius provides better protection for the planet.
The scientist explained that this basic threshold represents the best achievable solution. This emerged from power struggles that protect small island nations from dangerous warming above 1.5 degrees.
The entire population of island states faces complete extinction because of rising ocean waters, saltwater intrusion, and increased storm intensity. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change conducted further scientific assessments which demonstrated that although dangerous levels would persist. Keeping temperature rise below 1.5 degrees Celsius would result in less harm than a 2-degree Celsius increase.
According to Professor Gupta’s research, which was published in Nature, the just boundary should be one degree Celsius. The first paragraph states that climate change effects lead to rights violations for more than 1% of the global population, which equals about 100 million people.
The speaker explained that the world surpassed the 1.5 degrees Celsius mark back in 2017 and scientists predict temperatures will continue to rise above this threshold until 2030.
She warned that plans to reduce global warming in the future century do not solve the permanent damage, which includes melting glaciers, dying ecosystems, and resulting deaths. The speaker explained that the Himalayan glaciers will never return after they disappear. This will create permanent problems for human survival and water supply.
Climate justice, development, and inequality
Development and climate justice are closely related. Energy is essential to all fundamental human rights, including access to food, water, housing, transportation, and electricity. Professor Gupta noted that without altering the consumption habits of affluent populations, achieving the Sustainable Development Goals is neither morally nor mathematically feasible.
According to her research, providing for basic human needs results in a significant emissions footprint. Rich societies need to drastically cut emissions because the planet has already surpassed safe climate limits.
In addition to preserving the environment, this is required to free up carbon space so that underdeveloped areas can fulfill their basic rights. She emphasized that if this isn’t done, inequality becomes injustice.
Climate-driven displacement and the absence of legal protection
Despite the fact that displacement is one of the most obvious examples of climate injustice, climate refugees are still not recognized by international law. Professor Gupta explained how the effects of climate change develop gradually. Communities’ initial attempts at adaptation, like switching from crops that require a lot of water to ones that can withstand drought.
People suffer losses in land, livelihoods, and security when adaptation is unsuccessful. Displacement occurs when survival is no longer feasible.
Currently, the majority of displacement caused by climate change takes place within nations or regions rather than across continents. Moving is expensive, risky, and frequently unwelcome. Since poor governance or economic pressures can also be connected to displacement, establishing causation is one of the primary legal challenges.
This gap is starting to be filled by developments in attribution science. In order to show how climate change affects rainfall patterns, heat exposure, health outcomes, and extreme weather events, new studies compare data spanning decades. As this research advances, it might make it possible for international refugee law to acknowledge climate displacement.
The role of courts in linking climate harm to human rights
The fragmented structure of international legal frameworks has made it challenging to address climate harm through human rights law. States are able to compartmentalize responsibility because environmental treaties, human rights conventions, trade agreements, and investment regimes frequently function independently. Countries may protect investors while ignoring environmental degradation or commit to climate agreements without being constrained by human rights obligations.
Until recently, the human impact of climate change was mainly discussed in technical terms, such as carbon dioxide concentrations, temperature targets, and emission pathways. After the International Court of Justice issued a historic advisory opinion, this has begun to change.
The court made it clear that governments must take climate obligations into account in addition to human rights and environmental agreements, and that climate change cannot be evaluated in a vacuum. According to Professor Gupta, this change finally demonstrates that climate policy and its effects on people are inextricably linked.
Climate stability as a collective human right
Professor Gupta promotes acknowledging climate stability as a collective human right rather than framing climate protection as an individual entitlement. Daily life, supply chains, agriculture, and water availability are all supported by stable climate systems. Societies cannot exist without them.
Even though climate change is not yet officially recognized as a separate human right, courts in a number of nations are already acknowledging that climate instability threatens existing rights. At the highest levels of the UN, this viewpoint is becoming more and more prevalent.
What a rights-based climate response requires going forward
Speaking once more to the Geneva Human Rights Council, Volker Türk cautioned that fundamental rights are already being undermined by climate change, especially for the most vulnerable groups. He did, however, also characterize climate action as a chance to propel advancement through a fair shift away from systems that harm the environment.
Professor Gupta pointed out that while a small number of wealthy nations are largely responsible for the expansion of new fossil fuels, the United States’ repeated withdrawals from the Paris Agreement have eroded international confidence. She maintained that a collective crisis cannot be resolved by market-driven, deregulated methods. According to her, climate change is a public good issue that calls for collaboration, robust institutions, and efficient regulation.