Few days back a verdict of the Supreme Court has recognised Climate Justice as a part of the Constitutional Rights. Adverse effects of human induced climate change which pose a threat to human life can now be considered as unconstitutional. Hence, Supreme Court has given a ruling that climate crisis impairs the constitutional rights to life. What does this ruling mean in terms of a social nudge to reorient the behaviour of society which is more environment friendly?
This ruling gives a citizen the legal power to question any human action or economic activity which can create adverse impacts of human induced climate change through global warming. So if a community near a thermal power plant feels that the smoke, pollution from the thermal power plant can create a climate crisis and impact their lives, they can go to court and challenge the operation of the thermal power plant?
But does that mean, the thermal power plant will stop operating given that coal driven electricity is still less costly to reach households in comparison to decentralised solar panel based or solar thermal power plant based electricity?
Will this mean that coal based thermal power plants can afford to close down and lead to unemployment of millions of people whose lives are dependent on the value chain of coal based electricity production from thermal power plants? These transitions can only happen if it is economical to produce electricity from renewable than from coal. They can only happen if there are systems in place to absorb the communities who loose jobs from shut down of thermal power plants triggered by a legal appeal of one community to close down thermal power plants as their lives are threatened due to climate crisis from coal based thermal power plants.
An appeal by a community at the backdrop of the violation of rights to life from climate crisis arising from thermal power plants might not be enough to close those plants. The economic system has to degrow, go through a structural shift to stabilize the accelerating growth of economy which demands more of coal based electricity in the absence of comparable economic sources of electricity from renewable, clean sources.
However, if more communities start going to court and appeal for changes in the production system of electricity, goods, services in an economy, a social tipping can set in creating a pressure on the energy supply systems and economic systems. A social tipping point if achieved on the demand side can create a pressure on the supply side systems to transit to cleaner goods, services and electricity production systems. However it might not necessarily induce a shift on the supply side immediately. For the shift to happen nudges in the form of economic , behavioural incentives have to be given to energy supply and supply side of economic goods and services systems which can help them to attain short and long term economic gains. If the supply side systems change towards cleaner energy systems with larger profit, benefits arising from such cleaner systems then the potential chance of climate friendly supply side systems will evolve in a society.
All of these together needs to happen to sustain the success of the declaration of the Supreme Court which has the potential to set a social change but might not be enough to create a social tipping. A social tipping towards addressing the adverse effects of climate change from human induced actions of fossil fuel based economic activities needs to be necessarily be complemented by nudges and economic incentives on the supply side.
Once, all of these happen together, A Green Day will arrive when climate crisis will not impact the constitutional rights of a healthy human life within India any more!
Posts
