To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
In this world, where everything and everyone is for sale, we must sustain independent media we can trust. If you believe independent journalism is critical to protecting democracy and the common good, please support Common Dreams this Giving Tuesday! We wouldn't exist without you.
Negotiations have resumed in Copenhagen after a walkout by the African delegation
on Monday. African governments were concerned with the lack of
commitment by rich country governments to reducing their own emissions.
This follows on the heels of last week's leaked "Danish text" controversy;
the text contained proposals that have the world's poorest countries
carrying the largest share of the environmental burden. How the Obama
Administration deals with fairness questions in Copenhagen will also
signal what we can expect domestically as we respond to the recession
by building a green economy.
Wealthy countries have done the most environmental damage -- the top 10 contribute nearly 70 percent of all carbon emissions.
Yet the Danish draft ignores these numbers, requiring the poor to
reduce twice as much as the wealthy. This is expensive -- it's cheaper
and faster to use existing energy sources to produce plastic, say,
rather than to develop new energy for new products that don't hurt the
environment. The great irony, of course, is that poor countries have
already paid for the damage caused by rich ones. I can't recall the
last time a drought or tsunami killed hundreds of thousands of Danes.
The same divisions have played out in our own economy. Communities of color, who experience the highest rates of joblessness and poverty, have also been hardest hit by environmental injustices. According to J. Andrew Hoerner and Nia Robinson of Redefining Progress,
African Americans suffer a number of losses from environmental
degradation. Remember the heat waves of recent summers? They caused
black people to die almost twice as often as whites. Racism itself
fuels the climate crisis by generating inefficient overdevelopment.
"White flight" and racial segregation in earlier decades meant growing
white suburbs while rural and urban neighborhoods populated by people
of color fell prey to the discriminatory placement of toxic
incinerators, power plants, factories, and other big polluters.
These inequities have been thrown into high relief by the current
recession. Officially, unemployment among blacks and Latinos runs
almost 50 percent higher than it does for whites. The California
jobless rate for whites was 10.7; for blacks and Latinos over 14
percent. Among young blacks and Latinos, the rate is over 50 percent.
Green jobs could save our economy. Hoerner and Robinson note that
renewable electricity schemes generate three to five times more jobs
than similar efforts based on fossil fuels. Great models for jobs programs are emerging
at the local level, like the building retrofit program with local
hiring and other equity requirements that the City of Los Angeles
established under pressure from the Apollo Alliance. San Francisco and
Oakland have released new plans to green their buildings, neighborhoods
and industries in coming years.
Yet, it would be all too easy to build a green economy as unfair as the
industrial age has been. People of color hold less than 30% of green
jobs. Moreover, we're concentrated in low-skill jobs such as
weatherization and urban horticulture, which are seasonal or otherwise
temporary. By contrast, white men occupy ninety percent of executive
jobs in green sectors. The gendered picture is even worse. A study by the Women of Color Policy Network shows that black women occupy 1.5 percent, Latinas 1 percent and Asian women, 0.7 percent of energy-related jobs.
To ensure real change, local communities have begun to use an equity
impact analysis tool to push for higher standards and more resources to
historically disadvantaged communities. The tool measures the actual
outcomes of emerging green economic programs to help us see if they're
eliminating barriers to employment, such as lack of public
transportation; achieving racial and gender parity in contracting and
employment; and creating good jobs with livable wages, benefits and
career paths. Those outcomes are key to overall economic growth.
Economies marked by large inequities have a tendency to stagnate or
crash.
The Obama Administration has taken a "lift all boats" approach to the
domestic economy. The great failure of this approach is that it leaves
in place the gap between rich and poor. Equity doesn't mean that
everyone gets the same resources, but rather that each person (or
country) gets what it needs according to both responsibility and
capacity. In equitable situations, well-off communities and countries
make more sacrifices than poor ones because the system accounts for the
fact that they've benefited or suffered respectively from the reverse.
Thousands of people from the global South have converged on Copenhagen
this month, fearing that a plan controlled by a handful of wealthy
countries will set the parameters for fighting climate change. They're
educating each other, protesting bad action, pushing for equitable
solutions, and generally setting their own standards for solving the
climate crisis. As the climate debate hits home, Americans should lobby
our own government for a fair domestic plan, one that includes all the
people who have been left out in the heat for too long.
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. |
Negotiations have resumed in Copenhagen after a walkout by the African delegation
on Monday. African governments were concerned with the lack of
commitment by rich country governments to reducing their own emissions.
This follows on the heels of last week's leaked "Danish text" controversy;
the text contained proposals that have the world's poorest countries
carrying the largest share of the environmental burden. How the Obama
Administration deals with fairness questions in Copenhagen will also
signal what we can expect domestically as we respond to the recession
by building a green economy.
Wealthy countries have done the most environmental damage -- the top 10 contribute nearly 70 percent of all carbon emissions.
Yet the Danish draft ignores these numbers, requiring the poor to
reduce twice as much as the wealthy. This is expensive -- it's cheaper
and faster to use existing energy sources to produce plastic, say,
rather than to develop new energy for new products that don't hurt the
environment. The great irony, of course, is that poor countries have
already paid for the damage caused by rich ones. I can't recall the
last time a drought or tsunami killed hundreds of thousands of Danes.
The same divisions have played out in our own economy. Communities of color, who experience the highest rates of joblessness and poverty, have also been hardest hit by environmental injustices. According to J. Andrew Hoerner and Nia Robinson of Redefining Progress,
African Americans suffer a number of losses from environmental
degradation. Remember the heat waves of recent summers? They caused
black people to die almost twice as often as whites. Racism itself
fuels the climate crisis by generating inefficient overdevelopment.
"White flight" and racial segregation in earlier decades meant growing
white suburbs while rural and urban neighborhoods populated by people
of color fell prey to the discriminatory placement of toxic
incinerators, power plants, factories, and other big polluters.
These inequities have been thrown into high relief by the current
recession. Officially, unemployment among blacks and Latinos runs
almost 50 percent higher than it does for whites. The California
jobless rate for whites was 10.7; for blacks and Latinos over 14
percent. Among young blacks and Latinos, the rate is over 50 percent.
Green jobs could save our economy. Hoerner and Robinson note that
renewable electricity schemes generate three to five times more jobs
than similar efforts based on fossil fuels. Great models for jobs programs are emerging
at the local level, like the building retrofit program with local
hiring and other equity requirements that the City of Los Angeles
established under pressure from the Apollo Alliance. San Francisco and
Oakland have released new plans to green their buildings, neighborhoods
and industries in coming years.
Yet, it would be all too easy to build a green economy as unfair as the
industrial age has been. People of color hold less than 30% of green
jobs. Moreover, we're concentrated in low-skill jobs such as
weatherization and urban horticulture, which are seasonal or otherwise
temporary. By contrast, white men occupy ninety percent of executive
jobs in green sectors. The gendered picture is even worse. A study by the Women of Color Policy Network shows that black women occupy 1.5 percent, Latinas 1 percent and Asian women, 0.7 percent of energy-related jobs.
To ensure real change, local communities have begun to use an equity
impact analysis tool to push for higher standards and more resources to
historically disadvantaged communities. The tool measures the actual
outcomes of emerging green economic programs to help us see if they're
eliminating barriers to employment, such as lack of public
transportation; achieving racial and gender parity in contracting and
employment; and creating good jobs with livable wages, benefits and
career paths. Those outcomes are key to overall economic growth.
Economies marked by large inequities have a tendency to stagnate or
crash.
The Obama Administration has taken a "lift all boats" approach to the
domestic economy. The great failure of this approach is that it leaves
in place the gap between rich and poor. Equity doesn't mean that
everyone gets the same resources, but rather that each person (or
country) gets what it needs according to both responsibility and
capacity. In equitable situations, well-off communities and countries
make more sacrifices than poor ones because the system accounts for the
fact that they've benefited or suffered respectively from the reverse.
Thousands of people from the global South have converged on Copenhagen
this month, fearing that a plan controlled by a handful of wealthy
countries will set the parameters for fighting climate change. They're
educating each other, protesting bad action, pushing for equitable
solutions, and generally setting their own standards for solving the
climate crisis. As the climate debate hits home, Americans should lobby
our own government for a fair domestic plan, one that includes all the
people who have been left out in the heat for too long.
Negotiations have resumed in Copenhagen after a walkout by the African delegation
on Monday. African governments were concerned with the lack of
commitment by rich country governments to reducing their own emissions.
This follows on the heels of last week's leaked "Danish text" controversy;
the text contained proposals that have the world's poorest countries
carrying the largest share of the environmental burden. How the Obama
Administration deals with fairness questions in Copenhagen will also
signal what we can expect domestically as we respond to the recession
by building a green economy.
Wealthy countries have done the most environmental damage -- the top 10 contribute nearly 70 percent of all carbon emissions.
Yet the Danish draft ignores these numbers, requiring the poor to
reduce twice as much as the wealthy. This is expensive -- it's cheaper
and faster to use existing energy sources to produce plastic, say,
rather than to develop new energy for new products that don't hurt the
environment. The great irony, of course, is that poor countries have
already paid for the damage caused by rich ones. I can't recall the
last time a drought or tsunami killed hundreds of thousands of Danes.
The same divisions have played out in our own economy. Communities of color, who experience the highest rates of joblessness and poverty, have also been hardest hit by environmental injustices. According to J. Andrew Hoerner and Nia Robinson of Redefining Progress,
African Americans suffer a number of losses from environmental
degradation. Remember the heat waves of recent summers? They caused
black people to die almost twice as often as whites. Racism itself
fuels the climate crisis by generating inefficient overdevelopment.
"White flight" and racial segregation in earlier decades meant growing
white suburbs while rural and urban neighborhoods populated by people
of color fell prey to the discriminatory placement of toxic
incinerators, power plants, factories, and other big polluters.
These inequities have been thrown into high relief by the current
recession. Officially, unemployment among blacks and Latinos runs
almost 50 percent higher than it does for whites. The California
jobless rate for whites was 10.7; for blacks and Latinos over 14
percent. Among young blacks and Latinos, the rate is over 50 percent.
Green jobs could save our economy. Hoerner and Robinson note that
renewable electricity schemes generate three to five times more jobs
than similar efforts based on fossil fuels. Great models for jobs programs are emerging
at the local level, like the building retrofit program with local
hiring and other equity requirements that the City of Los Angeles
established under pressure from the Apollo Alliance. San Francisco and
Oakland have released new plans to green their buildings, neighborhoods
and industries in coming years.
Yet, it would be all too easy to build a green economy as unfair as the
industrial age has been. People of color hold less than 30% of green
jobs. Moreover, we're concentrated in low-skill jobs such as
weatherization and urban horticulture, which are seasonal or otherwise
temporary. By contrast, white men occupy ninety percent of executive
jobs in green sectors. The gendered picture is even worse. A study by the Women of Color Policy Network shows that black women occupy 1.5 percent, Latinas 1 percent and Asian women, 0.7 percent of energy-related jobs.
To ensure real change, local communities have begun to use an equity
impact analysis tool to push for higher standards and more resources to
historically disadvantaged communities. The tool measures the actual
outcomes of emerging green economic programs to help us see if they're
eliminating barriers to employment, such as lack of public
transportation; achieving racial and gender parity in contracting and
employment; and creating good jobs with livable wages, benefits and
career paths. Those outcomes are key to overall economic growth.
Economies marked by large inequities have a tendency to stagnate or
crash.
The Obama Administration has taken a "lift all boats" approach to the
domestic economy. The great failure of this approach is that it leaves
in place the gap between rich and poor. Equity doesn't mean that
everyone gets the same resources, but rather that each person (or
country) gets what it needs according to both responsibility and
capacity. In equitable situations, well-off communities and countries
make more sacrifices than poor ones because the system accounts for the
fact that they've benefited or suffered respectively from the reverse.
Thousands of people from the global South have converged on Copenhagen
this month, fearing that a plan controlled by a handful of wealthy
countries will set the parameters for fighting climate change. They're
educating each other, protesting bad action, pushing for equitable
solutions, and generally setting their own standards for solving the
climate crisis. As the climate debate hits home, Americans should lobby
our own government for a fair domestic plan, one that includes all the
people who have been left out in the heat for too long.