Race and Class in a Time of Crisis with Sunita Narain

Event summary by Emily Passmore

Although Covid-19 has affected everyone, it has not affected everyone equally. Those living in crowded, precarious housing don’t have the capacity to social distance, and many are struggling more than ever to make a living. Those who are struggling are often people of colour, especially in the Global South, and people on very low incomes. In short, they are the same people most affected by the climate crisis. Both Covid-19 and the climate crisis stand to further inflame these existing inequalities.
 
Sunita Narain has been working on these issues of development and the environment since the 1980s, and OCS was delighted to host a talk with her on race and class in a time of crisis. Ms Narain is an Indian environmentalist and activist, currently serving as Director General of the Centre for Science and Environment in New Delhi, using science to campaign for legislative change. She has spent her career advocating for equitable climate agreements, allowing for development without compromising the future. She has also been heavily involved in campaigning for air pollution controls and better water management in India.

Global inequality and the Covid-19 crisis
Ms Narain began by reflecting on the unprecedented nature of the current crisis, causing a scale of disruption not seen since the Second World War. We should expect to be changed by this. And although it’s easy to view planning for the future as an academic issue, we need to learn from the present and plan accordingly to prevent a repeat of this crisis.
 
One important feature of the crisis is how much worse it is for the poor. Migrant labourers in the global South live in overcrowded housing with little sanitation or water. The WHO has issued advice to wash your hands for twenty seconds in running water, but for millions of people, this is impossible. Furthermore, these labourers will be most affected by an economic collapse; they are often daily wage labourers, without savings to fall back on.
 
The cost to the poorest in society is too devastating for the environmental benefits of the Covid shut-down to be celebrated by environmentalists. The crisis has revealed the scale of intervention needed to protect the climate, but we need to pursue an inclusive route towards this goal.   
 
What can we learn from the pandemic?
1.   We live in an interconnected world.
Globalisation has deeply linked our economies, whilst air travel has made us more mobile than ever. There are no longer distinct boundaries between countries that can be completely locked down. This is reflected in the issue of air pollution – we share one atmospheric air space that can’t be partitioned.
 
2.   We live in an interdependent world
We are only as strong as our weakest link, so to get rid of the virus, we need to eliminate it everywhere. If the virus survives in the poorest households, it will continue to spread within and between countries due to migration. Thus, while the poor are the worst affected, the virus is an equaliser in the sense that nobody can independently make themselves safe. Thus, only inclusive solutions can end the crisis, just as is the case with climate change. If a solution only helps the rich, the issue, be it Covid-19 or carbon emissions, will just continue to grow among the poor, and thus become ever more severe.  
 
3.   We have a dystopian relationship with nature
The virus was able to mutate between species and get stronger in part due to our industrial agriculture systems. If this isn’t changed in the future, our food and our societies will remain susceptible to disease.
 
How can we take these lessons and build a better future?
The future of work
Millions of labourers have returned home, having initially moved away to find work. These workers will be the most affected by climate change as our agriculture systems begin to collapse. Thus, immigration will remain a pressing issue. The virus gives us a chance to think differently about globalisation. By investing in self-reliant local economies, people could get work without being forced to leave their homes.
 
The future of production
We live in a consumption driven economy. Increasing consumption means breaching planetary boundaries. We now have the chance to shift to a system where the value of labour and the environment are not discounted, particularly as the pandemic drives the cost of labour higher.​

The future of democracy
Democracy underpins every solution. One of the best ways to change behaviour is for the poor to be able to say, ‘Not in my back yard’. For example, waste disposal sites are usually located near the homes of the poor. Democracy allows the poor to push back, and force more sustainable solutions to be developed. Giving the poor their right to decide will also reinvent global cooperation, allowing us to work towards more just climate solutions for all.
 
Tipping points and change over time
What concrete steps can be taken towards a just and sustainable future? The UK government has announced huge investment in cycling and walking – could the crisis prove to be a tipping point, leading us to a new reality?

• This investment is a good step. It will be hard for traditional public transport to recover, as it is so congested normally, but movement makes an economy viable. Solutions such as promoting cycling are thus a win-win for the economy and the environment – we need to seek these solutions.
• To do this, we need to get an inclusive conversation going, forcefully presenting our ideas so the government is forced to consider different ideas for the future.
• Believing in an upcoming green revolution is too romantic. However, this pandemic has truly shaken us, and this could drive change.
• It is important to retain nuance. The economy needs to recover, and we should push for change working alongside this.

 
In Ms Narain’s 1991 report, Global Warming in an Unequal World (co-authored with Anil Agarwal), she explored the issue of environmental colonialism. The report responded to a World Resources Institute (WRI) report attributing half of all emissions to developing countries. Narain and Agarwal found that the WRI report often ignored the science to play a political blame game. By recognising historical emissions and adjusting the assumptions made, only one fifth of emissions could be attributed to developing countries. Has this dynamic changed since then?

• The subsistence economy can be environmentally intensive, but the extractive economy of the developed world causes environmental devastation on a far larger scale.
• Everyone has a right to the global atmospheric space, and development will mean releasing some emissions. This is very different to releasing emissions for luxuries.
• Ms Narain has stopped personally working on this issue due to heartbreak, having repeatedly been shot down by Western NGOs and the media who ignored equity.  
• To broker an effective climate deal, these issues must be tackled. The poor deserve the right to be aspirational, and we need to acknowledge this in any agreement.

 
How does the environmentalism of the poor differ from the environmentalism of the rich?

• As a student, Ms Narain visited some poor women in the Himalayas protecting trees from wood cutters. They were not driven by conservation, but because they survived from these trees; they wanted the right to cut what was needed and regrow.
• Middle class environmentalism tries to clean up existing problems by shifting them somewhere else. For example, cleaning up diesel and petrol meant the size of polluting particles was reduced; but now we face the problem of nanoparticles.
• Thus, the rich are always behind the curve, tackling existing issues. The poor however can force the reinvention of our systems, for example by refusing to have waste dumps built near them. This leads us towards a more harmonious relationship with nature.

 
Democracy needs to be strengthened – how do we show people tackling climate change is within their own interests despite all the other issues at play?

• People do not need to understand climate change to tackle it; poor farmers know the damage done to weather patterns and will make wise choices to avert further change.
• However, we also need to make a leap of faith, trusting people to understand what is at stake.
• The state’s role is to give opportunities to move towards a greener future, then give people the right to decide. We shouldn’t force change, or it won’t be effective and fair. 

 
How can we ensure a just transition to decarbonisation in developing countries, and what role can technology play in this process?

• Technology is ultimately a means to an end. For example, in the developed world, underground sewage networks and treatment plants manage excretion in a resource- and capital-intensive way. Inequalities are created by this technology between those who do and do not have access to flushing toilets, meaning the poor can miss out on proper sanitation.
• A more distributed system, allowing for more mobile treatment, and the reapplication of waste on land to close the nitrogen cycle, could be more cost-effective and more inclusive.
• By selecting technologies that allow us to reach affordable futures involving everyone, we can improve health, well-being and environmental performance.

 
Can we get Western powers to see climate change as an issue of equity, or are corporate agendas simply too strong for them to admit this?

• The young people coming out of the Western world give a renewed hope for the future; they understand the issues of equity in terms of class and race and are willing to speak harsh truth to power.
• If they remain strong, committed and angry, they could broker a commitment to a just future, and thus a sustainable future.

 
How important is climate justice within climate education?

• We’re all products of our education, and are shaped by the discussions we’re part of.
• At the moment, we live in bubbles, talking only to those we agree with. Covid-19 has burst these bubbles and forced us to understand how others live.
• For example, Singapore was thought of as an ultra-clean city that could handle Covid-19, yet the virus has grown in the modern shanties that migrant labourers live in, usually overlooked.
• By bringing the marginalised into our discussions, we can make education more inclusive and thus more effective.

 
How can we further connect with other movements for racial and class-based equity?

• Now is the time for strategy. Connections need to be made today to facilitate concrete change in the future.
• There are many amazing groups, but given the time available to act, it is best to network on specific projects to ensure they don’t become exclusive.
• We need to adjust to a world with and after Covid-19, but climate change is also happening today. We need to act urgently, pushing governments to act and holding them accountable for inaction.

  
How can we balance scientific reality and political feasibility?

• We need to focus on things that can actually happen, seeking win-win solutions, for example developing renewable energy sources for the poor, modern public transport systems or decentralised waste management systems. We’ve yet to run out of these kinds of solutions.
• We need to remember the principles driving this work – justice, equity and inclusive development. This will help us find new solutions.

 To close, Ms Narain called for bravery in identifying what has gone wrong in the past, speaking truth to power in order to hopefully get things right next time. OCS are very grateful for her time and all her insights into these issues!