IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cgd/wpaper/134.html

Another Inconvenient Truth: A Carbon-Intensive South Faces Environmental Disaster, No Matter What the North Does

Author

Listed:
  • David Wheeler
  • Kevin Ummel

Abstract

As a major source of greenhouse gas emissions, developed countries (the North) have an indisputable responsibility to address global warming. But many developing countries (the South) and their advocates embrace an additional principle: As ostensibly blameless victims of climate change, poorer countries should be unfettered by emissions regulations and left alone to develop along a carbon-fueled path for decades into the future. In this CGD working paper, senior fellow David Wheeler and research assistant Kevin Ummel empirically test that assertion and come to a startling conclusion: The South would soon face a climate crisis even if the North and all its emissions had never existed. With the best available data on historical carbon emissions in hand, Wheeler and Ummel use a carbon cycle model to translate cumulative emissions from the North and South into their respective concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide. Using scenarios from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to project Southern emissions into the future, they find that a carbon-intensive, isolated South would witness unequivocal global warming, widespread glacial and polar melting, and a rising sea level by 2040 at the latest. And by 2060, atmospheric carbon dioxide would pass critical thresholds that the IPCC associates with large, irreversible impacts on developing countries. Even in the world spared the historical and future emissions of the North, a carbon-intensive South would undermine its own development long before reaching prosperity. Wheeler and Ummel conclude that the conventional wisdom is dangerously misguided. For its own sake, the South and its advocates must recognize this hard truth, accept the necessity of serious, immediate mitigation, and embark on a low-carbon development path with the assistance of the North.

Suggested Citation

  • David Wheeler & Kevin Ummel, 2007. "Another Inconvenient Truth: A Carbon-Intensive South Faces Environmental Disaster, No Matter What the North Does," Working Papers 134, Center for Global Development.
  • Handle: RePEc:cgd:wpaper:134
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cgdev.org/publication/another-inconvenient-truth-carbon-intensive-south-faces-environmental-disaster-no-matter?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.cgdev.org/sites/default/files/14947_file_Another_Inconvenient_Truth.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Blog mentions

    As found by EconAcademics.org, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
    1. Should aid focus on economic development? (part 2)
      by Terence Wood in Development Policy Blog on 2011-05-25 11:11:26

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Thomas H. W. Ziesemer, 2011. "From Growth Regressions To Systems Of Equations," Journal of International Commerce, Economics and Policy (JICEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 2(01), pages 121-137.
    2. Axel Dreher & Stephan Klasen & James Raymond Vreeland & Eric Werker, 2013. "The Costs of Favoritism: Is Politically Driven Aid Less Effective?," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 62(1), pages 157-191.
    3. Anke Hoeffler & Syeda Shahbano Ijaz & Sarah von Billerbeck, 2011. "Post-Conflict Recovery and Peacebuilding," World Bank Publications - Reports 9184, The World Bank Group.
    4. de Haan, A., 2009. "Aid: the drama, the fiction, and does it work?," ISS Working Papers - General Series 18705, International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam (ISS), The Hague.
    5. Patrick GUILLAUMONT, 2009. "Aid effectiveness for poverty reduction: macroeconomic overview and emerging issues," Working Papers P05, FERDI.
    6. Léonce Ndikumana, 2013. "Applying Evaluation to Development and Aid: Can Evaluation Bridge the Micro-macro Gaps in Aid Effectiveness?," Published Studies article-leonce-ndikumana-, Political Economy Research Institute, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
    7. Patrick Guillaumont, 2011. "Aid effectiveness for poverty reduction:macroeconomic overview and emerging issues," CERDI Working papers halshs-00554285, HAL.
    8. Thomas Ziesemer, 2011. "Growth with endogenous migration hump and the multiple, dynamically interacting effects of aid in poor developing countries," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(30), pages 4865-4878.
    9. Temple, Jonathan & Van de Sijpe, Nicolas, 2017. "Foreign aid and domestic absorption," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 431-443.
    10. Lisa Chauvet & Flore Gubert & Sandrine Mesplé-Somps, 2009. "Are Remittances More Effective Than Aid To Reduce Child Mortality? An Empirical Assessment using Inter and Intra-Country Data," Working Papers DT/2009/11, DIAL (Développement, Institutions et Mondialisation).
    11. Robert H. Bates & Ghada Fayad & Anke Hoeffler, 2012. "The state of democracy in Sub-Saharan Africa," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 15(4), pages 323-338, December.
    12. Szent-Ivanyi, Balazs, 2010. "Aid Allocation of the Emerging Central and Eastern European Donors," MPRA Paper 30234, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Beáta Udvari & Gábor Dávid Kiss & Julianna Pontet, 2016. "Challenges of Missing Data in Analyses of Aid Activity: The Case of US Aid Activity," Bangladesh Development Studies, Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS), vol. 39(1-2), pages 1-25.
    14. Six, Clemens, 2008. "Was bedeutet Wirksamkeit von Entwicklung? Ein begriffsorientiertes Diskussionspapier," Working Papers 21, Austrian Foundation for Development Research (ÖFSE).
    15. Okullo, Samuel J. & Reynès, Frédéric, 2011. "Can reserve additions in mature crude oil provinces attenuate peak oil?," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 5755-5764.
    16. repec:got:cegedp:97 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Esser, Daniel E. & Janus, Heiner, 2025. "Everything, everywhere, all at once? Donor bureaucrats struggle with four dimensions of development effectiveness," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    18. Sanyal, Prabuddha & Babu, Suresh Chandra, 2008. "Aid effectiveness and capacity development: Implications for economic growth in developing countries," IFPRI discussion papers 838, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    19. Bah, El-hadj M. & Ward, Jeremy, 2011. "Effectiveness of foreign aid in Small Island Developing States," MPRA Paper 32062, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Felicitas Nowak-Lehmann & Axel Dreher & Dierk Herzer & Stephan Klasen & Inmaculada Martínez-Zarzoso, 2012. "Does foreign aid really raise per capita income? A time series perspective," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 45(1), pages 288-313, February.
    21. Lodewijk Smets & Stephen Knack, 2016. "World Bank Lending and the Quality of Economic Policy," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(1), pages 72-91, January.
    22. Felicitas Nowak-Lehmann D. & Inmaculada Martínez-Zarzoso & Dierk Herzer & Stephan Klasen & Axel Dreher, 2009. "In Search for a Long-run Relationship between Aid and Growth: Pitfalls and Findings," Ibero America Institute for Econ. Research (IAI) Discussion Papers 196, Ibero-America Institute for Economic Research.
    23. Abrams M E Tagem, 2017. "Analysing the determinants of health aid allocation in sub-Saharan Africa," Discussion Papers 2017-09, University of Nottingham, CREDIT.
    24. Emmanuel Frot & Javier Santiso, 2011. "Herding in Aid Allocation," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(1), pages 54-74, February.
    25. Gulrajani, Nilima, 2010. "Re-imagining Canadian development cooperation: a comparative examination of Norway and the UK," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 30036, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cgd:wpaper:134. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Publications Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cgdevus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.