Is there nothing new to say about climate change? Is the issue done and dusted?

We've all read the headlines: "Climate change is the greatest threat facing humanity"; "People living in poverty will be hit first and worst by climate change"; "Warming over 2ºC will lead to climate catastrophe"; "Climate change will spark wars".

So what do we do? Give up and accept defeat, or carry on fighting tooth and nail for a 'cooler' world?

I say fight tooth and nail but, as part of the battle, it may be time to start questioning some of the received wisdom on climate change. It may be time to ask some difficult questions, state some unpalatable truths and maybe - just maybe - do something different!

I'm starting to tire of hearing the same statements about climate change; the same rhetoric being offered by countless 'stakeholders'. We're all using the same language - the same climate change vernacular - but nothing really seems to be changing.

We are, arguably, the most creative species on Earth, but why can't we think of some new and innovative ways to address climate change. Are 'mitigation' and 'adaptation' the best we can do?

I believe we need to start discussing climate change differently. We need space in which to challenge received wisdom in the hope that new solutions will begin to emerge. But where could such discussions take place? Perhaps here?

I was delighted when AlertNet offered me the opportunity to write a few words each month about climate change in the hope they could spark some fruitful discussions that might lead to new ways of thinking about and engaging with the issue.

I've been in the climate change field for quite a few years - first as an academic and now in a development agency. I've seen interest in the issue grow, but I haven't really seen much innovative thinking emerge. I feel this is because few people are really questioning climate change discourse.

RECEIVED WISDOM

Where does the orthodoxy originate? Not surprisingly, it is generated and governed by those with power - governments, corporations and bodies of high powered scientists and policy makers.

It was while studying the links between climate change and security in the island states of the southwest Pacific that I first started to hear different narratives about climate change.

One of the things that shocked me most when I was in Fiji was the fact that everyone was talking about climate change when some island states in the region were suffering terrible environmental problems associated with unsustainable development.

I wondered why no one seemed to be worried about these 'other' environmental threats, even though they were being experienced long before the effects of climate change.

I realised there were political and economic reasons why climate change received so much attention. For example, one reason why governments focus on the issue is that impacts are always discussed as 'future' events, allowing serious action to be delayed. The future never arrives!

Through my work in the Pacific, I realised that the threat of climate change lies not only in the physical consequences, but also in the way we discuss the issue. In other words, the discourse of climate change constitutes a threat in itself.

If we really want to tackle global warming, we have to find solutions but we must also ensure those solutions aren't part of the problem. Is a new round of economic growth really going to solve the world's climate ills?

TOUGH QUESTIONS

I think a bit of healthy scepticism is needed in the climate change debate. We need to ask and answer questions such as:

• Is wealth a good indicator of a person's ability to cope with the impacts of climate change?
• Why does climate change receive so much more attention than other environmental threats and what are the implications of this?
• Why do so many non-specialists hold definite views on climate change when they don't understand the science?
• Are global agreements on climate change ever going to achieve the desired outcomes when they are often non-binding and toothless?
• Is the global level the appropriate scale to address climate change?
• Why have corporations embraced the climate change agenda?
• Does forcing people to adapt to climate change make them more vulnerable than if they had adapted naturally?
• Will existing poverty reduction strategies make the threat of climate change worse?

I'm afraid I don't have the answers to these questions. But I hope raising them with you will facilitate a conversation allowing us to address some of the difficulties and contradictions in the way we 'do' climate change.

I'd also like to start looking at our own hypocrisy when it comes to climate change. Why, for example, do so many of us continue to jump on planes to go to the next 'essential' climate change meeting when it would be better for the atmosphere if we stayed at home?

The moral offset is no longer enough of an excuse - although we're all doing good work, we have to change our own behaviour if others are to follow suit.

Most importantly, I hope this blog can create a space from which will emerge new wisdom about how we to tackle the 'greatest threat facing humanity'.

My next post will question what we mean when we talk about poverty and vulnerability in the context of climate change. Looking forward to some lively debate with you all...

Reuters AlertNet is not responsible for the content of external websites.