Introduction
According to Cleugh et al (2011), climate change is among the greatest economical, ecological and social challenges facing humanity today. Evidence shows that human activities including the burning of fossil fuels, deforestation, pollution, ecosystem degradation among many other agricultural and industrial activities have increased the levels of greenhouse gas emissions to the atmosphere leading to global warming. Climate change is purely due to anthropogenic factors. Australians have been regarded as superb adapters having been able adapt to small variations of climate, but in recent times the accelerated changes have proven more than what many can take. With the glaring reality of this global environmental issue, there is need for climate change adaptation, which refers to the actions taken to adjust or respond to the effects of climate change (Cleugh et. al, 2011).
Australia has warmed over fifty years since the year 1960. The black Saturday fires, the major cyclones and the rising sea levels along some parts of the Australian coast are some of the evidences of climate change in Australia (Garnaut, 2011). The modern climate change is posing challenges to the present generations and those one’s to come. People need to know the various mechanisms and ways to adapt to these changes and also know of how they can mitigate these effects and benefit from the range of opportunities present. It is now clear that climate change is as a result of human activities and hence it becomes an issue of concern as to who is responsible for adaptation to its detrimental effects. Some pundits hold the view that it is the citizens themselves that should take responsibility given their knowledge about cause and effect of climate change. Some argue that it is entirely the government’s responsibility and whereas others for example the Australian Conservation Foundation (2007) hold the view that responsibility rests with both the citizens and the government.
In this paper, I would try to argue out to what extent the responsibility for action to assist Australians adapts to climate change rest with the federal government giving the roles Australians and the federal governments play in cause and effect of climate change and roles they can play in adaptation to the same.
Most parts of Australia are urbanized with only few remote areas. Many people hence have the information and are somewhat wealthy. It is expected that with this they would shift to renewable sources of energy and reduce their water usage which many of them have managed to do hence reducing their impact on their environment. An increase in wealth means that people buy more efficient products and work hard to ensure that they consume sustainably. However Mckibben (2012) found out that as the level of affluence increased the more people get accustomed to energy-sucking electronics like the flat screen televisions, cheap flights to warm places and many more luxuries that they may not be willing to let go. Evidence puts it that the average Australian generates 3 tonnes of greenhouse gases pollution through the direct electrical usage in their home each year and only uses about 120,000 litres of water. Australia Conservation Foundation (2007) found out that this figure does not represent what the true figure is as most of the emissions are by the indirect consumption of goods and services. It is argued that the indirect impacts of consumption outweigh the direct impacts of household usage of water, energy and land. The findings further found out that burning of fossil fuels account for the most emissions of greenhouse gases in Australia. A shift to renewable sources of energy by each household would lead to a decline in emissions by only 18% which means that emissions generated from food production and the goods we purchase is four times that of our electricity usage.
An increase in wealth means would mean an increase in expenditure which would further mean an increase in the impact on the environment. Households with higher incomes buy more and consume more hence more emissions to the environment through the wastage of food and production of more waste.
Consumer Australia’s main findings argue that to reduce our impacts to the environment, we must reduce our indirect impacts of consumption patterns to be able to adapt climate change. On the contrary Mckibben (2012) found out that most of us are beneficiaries of fossil fuels hence tackling the problem of climate change would be like building a movement against ourselves.
Federal government’s role
The federal government plays a crucial role in ensuring that Australians adapt to climate change. It can do this through the regulation and policy formulations, provision of incentives, setting of standards, developing educational programmes aimed at sustainable development, carbon pricing among others. For example, through the limiting of global emissions to 2 degree Celsius as agreed in the Copenhagen conference would reduce the rates at which global warming is happening. But signing of treaties would also come with the ethical responsibility of following them. A case in point is whereby Canada signed the Kyoto protocol only to go against it when the global oil prices shot up, this led to Canada withdrawing from the protocol to avoid any fines to be imposed on them(Mckibben, 2012). According to Garnaut climate change review 2011, an economy would continue to produce more as long as it has the resources for easy gains as evidenced by the Australian economy that produced more during the global crush in 2010. Currently Australia’s projected emissions at 2020 lie at 24%, which is 4% above the expected.
Currently, most Australians are concentrated in urban areas and mostly live alone. This means that they consume more and waste more as compared to if they shared in larger households. Efficiency offered by larger households is an issue the government needs to pick and factor in its planning of what kinds of units need to be built, funded and regulated to curb the greenhouse gas emissions. Australians are also tasked with ensuring that they share widely some of their products and ensure emissions are to minimum levels.
Mitigation measures such as carbon pricing and taxation would also enlist markets in the fight against global warming. Once this companies for example Exxon pay for their carbon emissions to the atmosphere, this would mean a drop in profits in most of these companies. Prices of their products would go up, but with an educated public, they would consume fewer products associated with fossil fuels. In as much as it’s the federal government’s role to put in place such measures, the same measures are dependent on the people’s ethics to smartly consume goods and services and also use few fossil fuel products.
Conclusion
It is evidently clear that it is not entirely the federal government’s government responsibility in assisting Australians to adapt to climate change; Australians also have a key role play in limiting the amount of greenhouse gas emissions to the atmosphere. Through a reduction of consumption of goods and services consumed, sharing more of what they have, cutting the level of waste generated and buying of smart services, the rate at which we are experiencing climate change effects would be greatly reduced hence enabling us to cope more. The federal government’s role is to ensure proper planning of urban cities, formulation of regulations regarding carbon emissions, provision of incentives to households and provide a favourable for Australians to shift to sustainable development and consumption.
References
Australia Conservation Foundation. (2007). Consuming Australia. Main findings Top of Form
. Carlton, Vic., Australia: The Foundation.
Cleugh, H. (2011). Climate change: Science and solutions for Australia. Collingwood, Vic: CSIRO Publishing.
Climate commission. (2012). Climate Change. Victoria high time to innovate, adapt,cope. Retrieved from
http://climatecommission.gov.au/others/climate-change-victoriahigh-time-innovate-adapt-cope/
Garnaut, R., & Garnaut, R. (2011). The Garnaut review 2011: Australia in the global response to climate change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mckibben, B. (2012). Global Warming's Terrifying New Math. Three simple numbers that add up to global catastrophe - and that make clear who the real enemy is. Retrieved from http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/global-warmings-terrifying-new-math-20120719
