Global Catastrophic Risks 2020 - Global Challenges Foundation
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Global
Catastrophic
Risks 2020
Global Catastrophic Risks 2020
INTRODUCTION GLOBAL CHALLENGES FOUNDATION (GCF) ANNUAL REPORT: GCF & THOUGHT LEADERS SHARING WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ON GLOBAL CATASTROPHIC RISKS 2020 The views expressed in this report are those of the authors. Their statements are not necessarily endorsed by the affiliated organisations or the Global Challenges Foundation. ANNUAL REPORT TEAM Ulrika Westin, editor-in-chief Waldemar Ingdahl, researcher Victoria Wariaro, coordinator Weber Shandwick, creative director and graphic design. CONTRIBUTORS Kennette Benedict Senior Advisor, Bulletin of Atomic Scientists Angela Kane Senior Fellow, Vienna Centre for Disarmament and Non-Proliferation; visiting Professor, Sciences Po Paris; former High Representative for Disarmament Affairs at the United Nations Joana Castro Pereira Postdoctoral Researcher at Portuguese Institute of International Relations, NOVA University of Lisbon Philip Osano Research Fellow, Natural Resources and Ecosystems, Stockholm Environment Institute David Heymann Head and Senior Fellow, Centre on Global Health Security, Chatham House, Professor of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Romana Kofler, United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs Lindley Johnson, NASA Planetary Defense Officer and Program Executive of the Planetary Defense Coordination Office Gerhard Drolshagen, University of Oldenburg and the European Space Agency Stephen Sparks Professor, School of Earth Sciences, University of Bristol Ariel Conn Founder and President, Magnitude 10 Consulting 2 Global Catastrophic Risks 2020
Contents
Foreword4
Taxonomy6
Weapons of mass destruction 7
Nuclear warfare 8
Biological and chemical warfare 12
Catastrophic climate change 16
Ecological collapse 25
Pandemics31
Asteroid impact 37
Supervolcanic eruption 41
Artificial intelligence 45
Endnotes50
3 Global Catastrophic Risks 2020
FOREWORD
Dear reader,
In 2020, COVID-19 catapulted catastrophic risks and their There is of course a serious risk that political and public
governance into the global consciousness. The warning attention for climate issues will dramatically decline in
signs have been increasingly strong as humans disrupt the face of the acute economic and social consequences of
biodiversity, come into close contact with virus-carrying the pandemic. And yet some of us believe that this crisis
creatures and travel intensively throughout the world. can be a turning point, giving rise to a greener future as
the economic recovery packages being prepared by many
The Global Challenges Foundation’s Annual Report aims countries offer an opportunity to re-build economies and
to give an overview of all the greatest threats to humanity, societies towards sustainable modes of production and
to track developments in the issues, to highlight their consumption.
interconnectedness and to explore how they are being
managed at the global level. The essays illustrate, more As debates continue about the best way to manage the
than ever, the complex linkages between these global risks greatest threats to our species’ existence, one thing
and how they can reinforce each other. is certain: we will need to build new forms of global
governance, more urgently and more creatively than
This year's survey of global catastrophic risks comes with ever envisioned. The Global Challenges Foundation
added significance. As in previous years, we are honored will continue to promote understanding and joined-up
to have collaborated with Professor David Heymann of the thinking about how we manage and govern these threats.
London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine who has
reviewed the chapter on catastrophic pandemics, bringing We will be feeding into ongoing global discussions on these
it up to date with a section on COVID-19. themes. As the United Nations marks its 75th anniversary
this year, at a time of great disruption for the world, UN
If ever there were an argument for enhanced global Secretary-General António Guterres has launched the
cooperation to tackle catastrophic risks, COVID-19 is it. ‘UN 75’ initiative. It promises to be the largest and most
The pandemic respects no borders and underlines our far-reaching global conversation to date on “The future we
interdependency. No one is truly safe until everyone is want – the UN we need”. We are contributing to this debate
protected – which means vaccines and treatment must by supporting the UN and the important work of one of
reach everyone, a massive collective undertaking. the teams that won our 2017 ‘New Shape Prize’ to remodel
But what of other pressing risks, notably the climate crisis global governance for the 21st century.
which finally and belatedly topped the global agenda last This multinational team of experts - economist Augusto
year but has since been largely overshadowed by the race Lopez Claros, scientist Arthur Dahl and international
to contain the virus? The pandemic will likely lead to a lawyer Maja Groff - is examining the key structural changes
reduction in global carbon emissions in 2020. But how needed for the UN to effectively address the greatest
could it affect climate change in the medium to long-term? challenges of our time. They are developing an integrated
set of proposals to review the UN Charter which would
aim to give the UN the binding legislative, judicial and
enforcement functions to effectively address catastrophic
risks, while still reserving most functions to states.
4 Global Catastrophic Risks 2020
FOREWORD
As well as UN reform, GCF is specifically addressing
If ever there were
climate governance by setting up a Climate Governance
Commission. The Commission will diagnose obstacles to
an argument for
effective climate action and propose global governance
responses. It aims to develop and mobilise support for a
enhanced global
number of proposals for the improvement of global decision-
making and cooperation to stimulate effective solutions to
cooperation to tackle
the climate crisis. The Commission will include expertise
not only from climate experts, but also from experts on
catastrophic risks,
economics, the social sciences, global governance, public
policy, diplomacy, business and the labor market. The aim is
COVID-19 is it.
to kick-start progress in the failing international process to
end catastrophic climate changes.
We hope you find this report thought-provoking as a
summary of the latest evidence on the risks we face. We
are sincerely grateful to all the scientists and experts who
have helped us - and who continue to help us - in fulfilling
our mission. This is an urgent global discussion that must
accelerate from here. We invited these respected experts to
inform and explain the risks as a catalyst for a more intensive
and urgent global discussion. As we continue to support
research and policy development, we welcome your feedback
and contributions.
Thank you.
JENS ORBACK
Executive Director, Global Challenges Foundation
5 Global Catastrophic Risks 2020
Taxonomy
This report aims to present an overview of the
CURRENT RISKS FROM
global catastrophic risks that the world currently
HUMAN ACTION
faces, based on consideration of certain crucial
Weapons of mass destruction – nuclear,
facts and the latest scientific research. It proposes
chemical and biological warfare – catastrophic
to complement the World Economic Forum’s Global
climate change and ecological collapse are all
Risks Report1, which offers an up-to-date picture
current risks that have arisen as a result of
of global risks as perceived by leading political and
human activity. Although action on them is time
economic actors. These two approaches are highly
sensitive, they are still within our control today.
complementary: perception is a strong driver of
collective action and decision-making, while a more
NATURAL CATASTROPHES
focused examination of the risks themselves will
Pandemics, asteroid impacts and supervolcanic
guide better long-term strategy and support the
eruptions are known to have caused massive
design of more efficient governance models.
destruction in the past. Though their occurrence
is beyond human control to a large extent, our
When preparing this report, we aimed to develop a
actions can significantly limit the scale of impact.
taxonomy that would reflect the best current under-
This is especially true for pandemics, where
standing and be useful to decision-makers. We
the recent experience of COVID-19, Ebola and
combined historical evidence and scientific data to
Zika outbreaks highlighted the challenges and
decide which risks should be included in the report.
opportunities of global cooperation.
For the sake of clarity, we identified ten key risks,
which we then organised into three main categories:
current risks from human action, natural catastro-
EMERGING RISKS
Artificial intelligence might not seem like an
phes, and emerging risks. The reader should keep in
immediate source of concern. However, we
mind, however, that many of those risks are closely
should remember that challenges widely
interconnected, and their boundaries sometimes
recognised as the greatest today – climate
blur, as with climate change and ecological collapse,
change and nuclear weapons – were unknown
or as in the case of synthetic biology, which could
only 100 years ago, and late response – as in
be presented as a risk of its own, an additional risk
the case of climate change – has increased the
factor in biological warfare, or a potential cause for
risk level considerably. Significant resources
engineered pandemics.
are devoted to further the potential of those
The report offers a description of the current risks, technologies; in comparison, very little goes
exploring what is at stake, what is known, and key into mapping and managing the new dangers
factors affecting risk levels. Then, for each risk, the they bring. As we cannot expect the pace of
report considers current governance frameworks for technological development to be linear, and
mitigating the risks. Each section was prepared in given our limited knowledge and resources,
collaboration with leading experts in the field. leading experts are pressing for action on those
risks today2.
6 Global Catastrophic Risks 2020
Weapons of mass destruction
NUCLEAR WARFARE
On August 6, 1945, a nuclear bomb exploded in
Hiroshima, killing some 70,000 people within the
day. In total, almost a half of the city perished from
the effects of the bomb, half in the heat, radiation,
fires and building collapses following the blast, and
another half before the end of the year from injuries
and radiation, bringing the total number of deaths to
some 150,0001. Since then, the world has lived in the
shadow of a war unlike any other in history. Although
the tension between nuclear states has diminished
since the end of the Cold War and disarmament efforts
have reduced arsenals, the prospect of a nuclear war
150,000
remains present, and might be closer today than it
was a decade ago2. Its immediate effect would be
the catastrophic destruction of lives and cities, and
debilitation, illness and deaths from radiation, but
another concern is the risk that the dust released from
nuclear explosions could plunge the planet into a
mini ice-age3, with dramatic ecological consequences,
severe agricultural collapse, and a large proportion of is the estimated number of deaths caused by
the world population dying in a famine4. the nuclear bomb in Hiroshima on August 6, 1945
BIOLOGICAL AND CHEMICAL WARFARE
Toxic chemicals or infectious micro-organisms have Up to now, their destructive effect has been
been used as weapons to harm or kill humans for locally contained. However, new technological
millennia, from the ancient practice of poisoning an developments give cause for concern. In particular,
enemy’s wells and throwing plague-infected bodies developments in synthetic biology and genetic
over the walls of cities under siege, to the horrifying engineering make it possible to modify the
usage of germ warfare during the Second World War characteristics of micro-organisms. New genetically
in Asia, or the use of nerve gases in the Iran-Iraq engineered pathogens – released intentionally
War. Biological and chemical attacks not only cause or inadvertently – might cause a pandemic of
sickness and death but also create panic. unprecedented proportions.
7 Global Catastrophic Risks 2020Reviewed by
Nuclear warfare
KENNETTE
BENEDICT
HOW MUCH DO WE KNOW? According to one model, an all-out
Depending on their yield, technical exchange of 4,000 nuclear weapons,
characteristics and mode of in addition to the enormous loss of
explosion, today’s more powerful lives and cities, would release 150
nuclear weapons will cause 80 to 95 teragrams of smoke, leading to an 8
per cent fatalities within a radius of degree drop in global temperature for
1 to 4 kilometres from their point of a period of four to five years10, during
detonation, with very severe damage which time growing food would
being felt for up to six times as far5. be extremely difficult. This would
The largest arsenals are currently likely initiate a period of chaos and
held by the United States and violence, during which most of the
Russia who control approximately surviving world population would die
6,500 warheads each6. Seven other from hunger.
states are known to possess nuclear
weapons or are widely believed to
possess them: the United Kingdom,
France, China, India, Pakistan, North
Korea and Israel7. Various scenarios
of intentional use are currently
imaginable but nuclear weapons
could also be released by accident,
triggering an inadvertent nuclear war
– as has almost happened a number
of times since 19458.
In addition to their destructive
effect at the point of impact,
nuclear explosions may cause
what is known as a ‘nuclear winter’9,
where clouds of dust and sulphates
released by burning materials
obscure the sun and cool the
planet for months or years.
Credit/source: Unsplash
8 Global Catastrophic Risks 2020WHAT ARE THE KEY FACTORS AFFECTING RISK LEVELS? Continued efforts towards arsenal reduction will reduce the overall level of nuclear risk. Attention to geopolitical tensions and rising nationalism, along with continued efforts towards global conflict management, particularly among nuclear states, will reduce the underlying risk of an intentional nuclear war11. In addition, controlling and limiting horizontal proliferation12 will limit the number of potential nuclear conflict scenarios and is highly likely to reduce the overall risk level. The risk of accidental use depends largely on the systems in place to launch missiles and the growing threats of cyberattacks on command and control systems. Hundreds of nuclear weapons are currently in a state of high readiness and could be released within minutes of an order13. Building in longer decision-making time and broader consultation would reduce the risk of unauthorised launches or accidental launches based on misperception or false alarms. Increased awareness and understanding of the grave effects that nuclear weapons have on human life, economic infrastructure, governance, social order and the global climate would motivate efforts to avoid such catastrophic harm to our societies14.
Governance of nuclear warfare
Kennette Benedict, Senior Advisor, Bulletin of Atomic Scientists
States currently manage the risks of nuclear weapons In addition, the 1970 Nuclear Non-proliferation
through a range of measures that have prevented Treaty (NPT) has prevented the development of
the worldwide spread of these weapons of mass nuclear weapons in all countries beyond the original
destruction but have not significantly reduced the five (United States, Soviet Union/Russia, United
risk of catastrophic use. In fact, recent changes to Kingdom, France and China) with the exception of
nuclear doctrine and planned development of new India, Pakistan, North Korea and probably Israel.
nuclear weapons by the United States and Russia Altogether, some 25 governments have given up
make it more likely that nuclear weapons will be their nuclear weapons programmes, including South
used in military actions, or through miscalculation Africa, Libya, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine.
or accident, than at any time since the 1950s and the Another 15, like Canada, Brazil and Argentina, have
beginning of the Cold War. contemplated programmes but not embarked on
them, in keeping with their responsibilities under
The pillar of nuclear military strategy is deterrence, the NPT.
whereby nuclear-armed states threaten to retaliate
against other states’ use of nuclear weapons against The UN Security Council, whose permanent members
them. This doctrine is considered by some to be an include the five recognised nuclear weapons states,
effective way of preventing nuclear war. The fact that enforces the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty in
no nuclear weapons have been used in any conflict partnership with the International Atomic Energy
since 1945, however, suggests that political restraint Agency (IAEA). Although the IAEA was established
and a moral norm also may have played a role in primarily to promote and oversee the development of
discouraging their use. civilian nuclear power, it is entrusted with verifying
adherence to the Treaty (under Article III). Parties to
the Treaty regularly report to the IAEA about the means
68,000
In the late 1980s
14,000
Today
used to safeguard and secure enriched uranium and
plutonium used in civilian power plants, as well as steps
to prevent the use of nuclear materials for bombs.
As major powers relied on deterrence in their
military doctrines, however, international
cooperation, beginning
with the 1963 US-
Soviet treaty to ban
atmospheric testing, The pillar of nuclear military
along with subsequent
US-Soviet/Russian
strategy is deterrence, whereby
bilateral treaties and
agreements, has reduced
nuclear-armed states threaten to
and stabilised nuclear retaliate against other states’ use
arsenals from a high of
68,000 in the late 1980s of nuclear weapons against them.
to about 14,000 today.
10 Global Catastrophic Risks 2020NUCLEAR WARFARE
Several states have not complied with their Nuclear This new arms race underscores the difficulties of
Non-proliferation Treaty obligations and faced enforcing the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty when
penalties from the international community. Iraq countries do not wish to cooperate. The original
embarked on a nuclear weapons programme, but, treaty suggested a bargain whereby states without
after nuclear bomb technology was discovered in nuclear weapons would not acquire them but would
1991, the weapons were destroyed by a special UN have access to civilian nuclear power. In exchange,
Security Council-mandated force. In the case of Iran, the states with nuclear weapons pledged to disarm
international economic sanctions were applied when when conditions warranted. Many believed that the
suspicions arose about its possible pursuit of nuclear end of the Cold War was such a time, and yet, while
weapons. To prevent Iran from acquiring them, nuclear arsenals have radically decreased in Russia
multilateral negotiations produced the 2015 Joint and the United States, the recent reversal in doctrine
Comprehensive Plan of Action. It mandated reduction and rhetoric suggest that these and other nuclear
of the means to enrich uranium to a minimal level, weapons states have no intention at present of
allowing enrichment only to below weapons-grade. eliminating their nuclear arsenals.
It also ensured continuous IAEA monitoring of Iran’s
civilian nuclear programme. Even as formal treaties and informal norms of
restraint are eroding, however, non-nuclear weapons
As part of an unravelling of nuclear governance, states have introduced a UN treaty banning all
however, the United States has pulled out of the nuclear weapons. One hundred and thirty-five of the
Joint Comprehensive Plan Of Action and Iran has 193 member countries participated in the 2017 UN
increased production of enriched uranium beyond treaty negotiations; 122 countries voted in favour
that stipulated in the agreement. Even more of the final treaty, one against and one country
consequential, the United States has announced its abstained. As of December 2019, 80 countries have
abrogation of the 1987 Intermediate Range Nuclear signed the treaty and 34 have ratified it, adapting
Forces Treaty with Russia that banned a class their national legislation to comply with its
of missiles with nuclear weapons capability. In provisions. The treaty, which is indefinitely open for
addition, the United States has not yet announced signing, will take effect when 50 nations have ratified
its interest in working with Russia to extend the it. Not since the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty of
2010 New START, an agreement that places a cap 1970 have states taken such dramatic and collective
on American and Russian arsenals with provisions action to prohibit possession of nuclear arsenals
for robust inspections. Russia and the United States
have each declared their intentions to use nuclear Unfortunately, re-emerging nationalism is spurring
weapons, even if nuclear weapons are not used the nine nuclear weapons states – none of which
against them first. These actions, along with North participated in or voted on the UN ban treaty – to
Korea’s continued production of nuclear weapons, modernise, increase and lower the threshold to use
despite international economic sanctions, suggest their nuclear weapons. Such actions reinforce beliefs
that the norms of restraint may not be as strong as about the purported utility of nuclear weapons,
in the past. In fact, a new nuclear arms race is under undermine international cooperative efforts to reduce
way among all of the nuclear weapons states that the risks and seriously increase the probability of
reinforces the utility of nuclear weapons in war- catastrophic nuclear war.
fighting and increases the risk that these weapons
will be used.
11 Global Catastrophic Risks 2020Reviewed by
ANGELA
Biological and chemical warfare
KANE
HOW MUCH DO WE KNOW? WHAT ARE KEY FACTORS
Unlike nuclear weapons, which require rare AFFECTING RISK LEVELS?
materials and complex engineering, biological • Global frameworks controlling research on
and chemical weapons can be developed at a chemical or biological weapons, including revised
comparatively low cost15, placing them within the strategic trade controls on potentially sensitive
reach of most or all states as well as organised dual-purpose goods, technology and materials;
non-state actors. Chemical and biological weapons biological and chemical safety and security
carry various levels of risk. Toxic chemicals could be measures; and an ongoing commitment and
aerosolised or placed into water supplies, eventually capacity to enforce disarmament and arms control
contaminating an entire region. Biological weapons conventions19.
possess greater catastrophic potential, as released
pathogens might spread worldwide, causing a • The number of laboratories researching potential
pandemic. pandemic pathogens for military or civilian
purposes, along with the public availability of
Recent developments in synthetic biology and dangerous information circulating for scientific
genetic engineering are of particular concern16. The purposes20.
normal evolution of most highly lethal pathogens
ensures that they will fail to spread far before killing • Further developments in synthetic biology and
their host. Technology, however, has the potential genetic engineering lowering skill levels and costs
to break this correlation, creating both highly lethal to modify existing pathogens or to develop new
and highly infectious agents17. Such pathogens could pathogens21.
be released accidentally from a lab, or intentionally
released in large population centres18. Current • Lack of public health preparedness in quickly
trends towards more open knowledge sharing can tackling any potential outbreak of a pathogen
both contribute to, and mitigate, such risks. The release or even a pandemic in order to avoid
COVID-19 pandemic – while not an engineered massive harm to populations.
pathogen release – has shown us the existential and
economic consequences such a pandemic can cause.
Unlike nuclear weapons, which require
rare materials and complex engineering,
biological and chemical weapons can be
developed at a comparatively low cost.
12 Global Catastrophic Risks 2020BIOLOGICAL AND CHEMICAL WARFARE
CHEMICAL WEAPONS: Governance of
AN UNRAVELLING CONSENSUS?
Deadly agents like sulphur mustard were used biological and
during and between the World Wars, but the
horrific results of such attacks eventually led to a chemical warfare
global consensus to ban toxic chemical weapons,
the most widely-used and easily proliferated Angela Kane, Senior Fellow, Vienna Centre for
weapon of mass destruction22. Disarmament and Non-Proliferation; visiting Professor,
Sciences Po Paris; former High Representative for
This consensus, however, represented by the near- Disarmament Affairs at the United Nations
universal 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention
(CWC) is under strain. The Syrian Civil War has
resulted in well-documented and indiscriminate
uses of various deadly toxic chemicals against The Biological The Chemical
the civilian population, including some 20 Weapons Weapons
Convention Convention
children dying from the deadly nerve agent (BWC) (CWC) of
Sarin (or a ‘sarin-like’ compound). Though the
risk may always exist from easily available dual- 1975 1997
use chemicals, and from terrorists like the Aum
Shinrikyo (now know as Aleph), which perpetrated
the Tokyo attack in 1995, there is a global risk that
the hard-won consensus on banning state use of Biological and chemical weapons are banned by
toxic chemicals will be further weakened23. two international treaties: the Biological Weapons
Convention (BWC) of 1975, with 178 State Parties,
The international community has established a and the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) of
number of investigative bodies to uncover the 1997, with 189 State Parties. In both cases, dual-use
facts and determine responsibility, yet attribution creates a particular difficulty: the same chemicals
remains problematic and until now, no person and biological agents can be applied for beneficial
or entities have been brought to justice. The purposes or serve as the core components of deadly
danger is that the weakening consensus could weapons.
lead to the devastating use of more advanced
toxic chemical weapons of mass destruction in The CWC, negotiated with the participation of the
any potential large-scale conflict in the future. chemical industry, defines a chemical weapon by its
It could also cause long-term changes in how intended purpose, rather than lethality or quantity.
states understand the development, evaluation It allows for stringent verification of compliance:
and use of ‘non-standard chemical substances’ acceding to the CWC means mandatory destruction
(substances other than deadly substances like of all declared chemical weapons as well as their
sarin) for domestic riot control, counter-terrorism production sites – to be subsequently verified by
operations, international peacekeeping, and as appointed inspectors.
a mechanism to maintain a standby offensive
chemical weapons capability.
13BIOLOGICAL AND CHEMICAL WARFARE
The BWC is less prescriptive, which results in Only four UN countries are not State Parties to the
ambiguities and loopholes. Research is permitted under CWC (Egypt, Israel, North Korea and South Sudan).
the Convention, but it is difficult to tell the difference The highest concern among those is North Korea,
between legitimate and potentially harmful biological said to possess large quantities of chemical weapons
research. States are required to “destroy or to divert that could be sold or traded to unscrupulous non-
to peaceful purposes” their biological weapons, but State actors. It also needs to be mentioned that,
no agreed definition of a biological weapon exists. In while Russia announced in late 2017 it had destroyed
addition, there is no secretariat to monitor and enforce its large chemical arsenal, that the United States
implementation, except for a small administrative has not been able to complete the destruction of
support unit in Geneva. No mechanism exists to verify its own arsenal, due to the cost and environmental
destruction or diversion, despite efforts since 1991 to challenges of chemical disposal. Both countries had
include legally-binding verification procedures in the requested extensions of the deadlines imposed by
BWC. Some lesser steps have been taken, including the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical
confidence-building measures on which State Parties Weapons, yet the existence of large stocks
are to report each April, and management standards on remains a risk.
biosafety and biosecurity. However, implementation is
voluntary and the vast majority of State Parties do not In the 55 years since the BWC was negotiated, rapid
submit declarations on their activities and facilities. advances in biotechnology have been made, which
challenge our current governance models. The
Under the BWC, complaints can be lodged with the UN pharmaceutical and medical industries possess the
Security Council – which can investigate them – but tools and knowledge to develop biological weapons;
no complaint has ever been made and enforcement the internet spreads this know-how to those who
mechanisms do not exist. The CWC includes a provision might use it for nefarious purposes. Biological threats
for “challenge inspections” in case of suspected chemical do not respect borders and, as global travel increases,
weapons use – but again, it has never been invoked, could quickly have a regional or even global impact.
not even in the case of Syria, though doubts about a Terrorists could contaminate the water supply or
chemical weapons programme are regularly debated at release deadly bacteria, but it is also possible that
the Security Council. Over the last six years, regular visits the lack of lab safety could result in the inadvertent
by the “Declaration Assessment Team” have not been release of a virus or disease. The first step towards a
able to clarify discrepancies and determine if Syria’s solution would be to acknowledge the seriousness
declaration is accurate and complete, and monthly of the situation and create public health entities to
reporting to the UN Security Council continues. handle any potential outbreak. But leadership is also
needed to place this issue at the right place on the
Additionally, the security context and shifting territorial global agenda. This could come from the UN Security
control present significant challenges in ensuring that Council, the G7 or the G20, coalitions of government
prohibition is fully implemented within the country. In and industry bodies, civil society groups, or one or
cases of alleged use of chemical or biological weapons in more nations acting as global champions.
countries not party to the conventions – like Syria in 2013 –
investigations can be requested through the UN Secretary-
General’s Mechanism for Investigation of Alleged Use of
Chemical and Biological Weapons, concluded in 1988.
14 Global Catastrophic Risks 2020Only four UN countries
are not State Parties to the
Chemical Weapons Convention
Israel North Korea
Egypt
South SudanReviewed by
Catastrophic climate change
DR JOANA
CASTRO
PEREIRA
WHAT IS AT STAKE? HOW MUCH DO WE KNOW?
Catastrophic climate change has The Earth's climate is impacted
been associated with an increase by the concentration of certain
in global average temperature of gases in the atmosphere known
>3 °C1. This level of global warming as greenhouse gases, the most
would probably imply a serious important being carbon dioxide
shift in global climate patterns, and methane. As a result of human
unprecedented loss of landmass activity since the Industrial
creating large flows of climate Revolution, the atmospheric
refugees, significant risks to concentrations of greenhouse
regional and global food security, a gases – generally expressed as the
combination of high temperature number of greenhouse gas molecules
and humidity jeopardising normal per million or ppm – have risen
human activities, as well as massive consistently, from 280 ppm at the
species extinctions having adverse dawn of the Industrial Revolution
cascading effects on ecosystem to 407 ppm in 2018. Current carbon
functioning and services critical for dioxide levels are the highest in at
sustaining humanity2. least 800,000 years5.
Catastrophic climate change would Climate change is accelerating and
be triggered by crossing one or its impacts increasing. Human
more tipping points of the Earth’s actions are estimated to be causing
climate system. Decision-makers the planet’s climate to change 170
have tended to assume that tipping times faster than
points are of low probability and natural forces.
poorly understood. This is in spite 2015-2019 and
of growing evidence that these 2010-2019 were
tipping points may be more likely the warmest five
than previously thought, have high and ten-year Human actions
impacts and interact in complex and periods on record. are estimated to be
dangerous ways, threatening long- Over the past causing the planet’s
term irreversible changes3. Political decade, extreme climate to change
170 times faster
discussions about climate change weather, ice loss,
than natural
rarely acknowledge catastrophic sea level rise forces.
climate risk4. and ocean heat
and acidification
have accelerated7.
16 Global Catastrophic Risks 2020CATASTROPHIC CLIMATE CHANGE
Degrees
4.0°
3.5°
3.0°
2.5° Under current
2.0°
policies, global
temperatures
1.5° are expected
1.0°
to exceed 1.5 °C
around 2035, 2 °C
0.5° around 2053 and
0.0° 3.2 °C by 2100.
Year 2035 2053 2100
Human activities have caused Climate change is a non-linear
approximately 1.0 °C of global phenomenon where tipping points
warming above pre-industrial levels8. play a determining role12. When
Under current policies, global warming rises above a certain level,
temperatures are expected to exceed self-reinforcing feedback loops set in
1.5 °C around 2035, 2 °C around 2053 and the concentration of greenhouse
and 3.2 °C by 21009. If countries fully gases increases rapidly. Although
achieve the emissions cuts they have precise thresholds and exact
committed to under the Paris Climate scenarios remain very uncertain, we
Agreement, the planet is likely to know that the level of risk increases
warm by approximately 2.9 °C by with the rise in temperature. The
the end of the century10. Most of the latest science suggests that tipping
world’s major emitters are not even points could be exceeded even
on track to meet their pledges11. between 1.5°C and 2°C13. For example,
at 2 °C of warming there is a 10-35%
chance that the Arctic becomes
largely ice-free in summer14.
17 Global Catastrophic Risks 2020CATASTROPHIC CLIMATE CHANGE
Scientists recently found that 45 per cent of all
potential ecological collapses are interrelated
and could reinforce one another15; in other words,
‘exceeding tipping points in one system can
increase the risk of crossing them in others’16.
Limiting the Earth’s temperature rise to 1.5
°C – the aspirational goal of the Paris Climate
Agreement – is thus not only crucial for saving
the majority of the world’s plant and animal
species17 as well as safeguarding low-lying
island states from sea level rise and the poorest
countries from climate extremes18, but also a
precautionary step to prevent triggering climate
tipping points. Nevertheless, countries must raise
their level of ambition by over five times to reach
the 1.5 °C goal19.
According to the 2018 special report by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
of the United Nations, the remaining carbon
budget, to stand a reasonable chance (66%) of
limiting warming to 1.5 °C would be depleted by
around 203020. The panel’s conclusions were,
however, criticised for being too conservative21.
Considering, for example, an upper estimate of a
wide range of potential Earth system feedbacks,
humanity might have already exceeded the
remaining budget to limit warming to 1.5 °C, (66%
probability)22. Moreover, mitigation pathways
compatible with 1.5 °C imply the deployment of
negative emissions technologies (e.g., bioenergy
production with carbon capture and storage)23.
Science and policy advances in these fields are
currently far from ideal24.
Global Catastrophic Risks 2020CATASTROPHIC CLIMATE CHANGE
CLIMATE TIPPING POINTS As to methane emissions, they
The Earth’s climate system is largely relate to large-scale animal
formed by large-scale components farming, driven by demand for meat,
characterised by a threshold dairy and wool28.
behaviour known as tipping
elements. Put another way, climate Second, some ecosystems store large
tipping elements are supra-regional amounts of carbon, particularly
constituents of the Earth’s climate forests and coastal marine
system that may pass a tipping ecosystems; their destruction
Credit/source: Unsplash
point25. The Greenland ice sheet and could result in the large-scale
the Amazon rainforest are examples release of greenhouse gases into the
of tipping elements. A tipping atmosphere29.
point is ‘a threshold at which small
quantitative changes in the system The third factor is our capacity
trigger a non-linear change process for global coordination to reduce
that is driven by system-internal emissions. This may be positively
feedback mechanisms and inevitably impacted by a better understanding
leads to a qualitative different of tail-end climate risk and climate
state of the system, which is often tipping points, increasing the sense There is a
irreversible’26. of urgency and prompting faster serious risk
action30. that political
WHAT ARE KEY FACTORS
AFFECTING RISK LEVELS? Finally, the risk of catastrophic and public
Climate change is a highly complex climate change is increased attention
phenomenon affected by many by insufficient knowledge and
to climate
factors. We may divide them into understanding of impacts and
four categories to better discern vulnerability, in turn affecting issues will
the various areas where action is our ability to build resilience. The dramatically
possible. complex and interrelated nature
of global catastrophic risk suggests
decline in
First, the risk is directly related to an integrated research agenda to the face of
the release of greenhouse gases in address related challenges and the pressing,
the atmosphere through human dilemmas and ensure human
activity. Carbon dioxide mainly development and the protection of
severe
results from the burning of fossil the non-human living beings that economic
fuels for energy and transport. In enable life on the planet to thrive. and social
turn, this is a factor in population One such related challenge is the
growth and unsustainable use of solar radiation management consequences
production and consumption techniques (namely, stratospheric of the crisis.
models27. aerosol injection) to reduce the risk
of catastrophic climate change,
which might harm in other ways31.
19 Global Catastrophic Risks 2020CATASTROPHIC CLIMATE CHANGE
The impact of the COVID-19
pandemic on climate change
The COVID-19 global health crisis will likely In China, by the end of March, demand for
lead to a reduction in global carbon emissions in energy and carbon emissions were already
2020. But how could the pandemic affect climate returning to normal levels following a 25 per
change in the mid to long-terms? cent reduction in emissions34. The country may
also be considering relaxing emissions standards
Some fear that the virus will weaken climate to help hard-hit carmakers35. Moreover, the
action. There is a serious risk that political economic impact of the crisis may undermine
and public attention to climate issues will investments in clean energy36 and further
dramatically decline in the face of the pressing, complicate the transfer of financial resources
severe economic and social consequences of the to assist developing countries in their climate
crisis32. The year 2020 is a critical one for climate change mitigation efforts.
change mitigation and nature protection, as new
emissions reduction commitments are expected Others believe that the COVID-19 crisis can be a
to be presented within the United Nations turning point, giving rise to a greener future, as
Framework Convention on Climate Change the economic recovery packages that are being
and new global agreements on biodiversity prepared by many countries around the world
concluded within the Convention on Biological offer an opportunity to re-build economies
Diversity. In addition, governments may be and societies towards sustainable modes of
tempted to pursuit short-term easy fixes with production and consumption37.
negative environmental impacts, e.g., rolling
back environmental standards and subsidising
fossil-fuel-heavy industries to stimulate the
economy, prioritising indiscriminate economic
growth over environmental sustainability
imperatives33.
… global warming makes conditions
more favourable to the spread of some
infectious diseases and air pollution makes
people more vulnerable to infection.
20 Global Catastrophic Risks 2020CLIMATE CHANGE, BIODIVERSITY
LOSS AND HUMAN HEALTH
The COVID-19 global health crisis Moreover, and although there is
urges us to rethink our relationship no direct evidence that climate
to nature and the non-human species change is influencing the spread of
with which we share the planet. The the new coronavirus, we know that
coronavirus has been attributed to global warming makes conditions
anthropogenic interferences on the more favourable to the spread
natural world such as deforestation, of some infectious diseases and
a major contributor to climate that air pollution makes people
change, encroachment on animal more vulnerable to infection40. We
habitats, and biodiversity loss, which also know that when biodiversity
is also driven by climate change declines, the species that thrive are
among other factors38. The pandemic the ones that are best at transmitting
is a reminder of our enmeshment diseases e.g., bats and rats41. As
in a more-than-human world39. It current species extinction rates
also calls our attention to the critical have no parallel in human history42,
links between climate change and there are strong reasons for concern.
biodiversity loss, and their impacts Finally, attention is also needed
on human health. on the thawing of the Arctic’s
permafrost as a result of global
By eroding wild spaces for agriculture warming and the possibility that
and changing the climate – thus viruses and bacteria once buried in
forcing animals to find food and the region are released43.
shelter close to people or migrate
to escape heat – we are creating Future policies must thus integrate
new opportunities for pathogens to climate, biodiversity and health
get into new hosts. By trading and considerations as well as the needs
consuming wild animals, we increase and rights of the non-human living
the likelihood that zoonotic viruses beings with which we share the Earth.
will jump to humans.Governance of catastrophic climate change
Dr Joana Castro Pereira, Postdoctoral Researcher at Portuguese Institute of International Relations,
NOVA University of Lisbon
The challenge of climate change has been defined Moreover, the rules already established for
as a ‘super-wicked’ problem. It is intricately operationalising the agreement provide very few
linked to everything else – energy, land use, obligations for countries to implement ambitious
food, water, transportation, trade, development, climate action at the domestic level. Other important
housing, investment, security, etc.44 Solving it guidelines remain undefined as parties have not
requires tremendous, unprecedented collective reached consensus yet. These include rules to develop
action by countries with heterogeneous interests, a global carbon trading system and how to channel
priorities and circumstances 45, where powerful new financial resources for helping countries already
forces pushing for environmentally destructive facing the adverse impacts of climate change51.
development prevail46. The sharing of responsibility
in mitigating climate change has thus been a In spite of the devastating fires, storms, social protests
central challenge in international negotiations47. and climate strikes that swept the world in 2019, the
last Conference of the Parties of the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change ended in
failure. Countries such as Brazil, Australia and Saudi
Arabia, ‘invigorated by the US withdrawal from the
Paris agreement and rising nationalism at home (…)
The Paris Climate Agreement, signed in
defended loopholes and opposed commitments to
2015 and in force since November 2016,
enhance climate action’52.
avoids the critical issues of the allocation of
responsibilities for safeguarding the climate
and fairness of each country’s mitigation It thus appears highly unlikely that the international
efforts48. In addition, it fails to include: community will be able to prevent global warming
from exceeding 1.5 °C. In this context, we need to
• Dates by which countries must reach a
prepare for dealing with the consequences of an
global peaking of emissions,
increasingly unstable ecological environment and
• Legal obligations determining concrete mitigating the risk of a climate catastrophe. There are,
mitigation actions, however, a number of limitations and obstacles that
• Means for coordinating the countries’ challenge our ability to do so53.
contributions49,
• Solid mechanisms for monitoring the The first is the fact that our brain is wired to process
implementation of national pledges linear correlations, not sudden, rapid and exponential
and supporting the mitigation efforts of changes; our cognitive expectations are failed by the
developing countries, uncertainty and non-linearity of socio-ecological
systems54. In addition, our political-legal system
• Tools to punish the parties that do
was developed to address structured, short-term,
not comply with its provisions, and
direct cause and effect issues (the exact opposite of
any references to the end of fossil fuel
subsidies50. the climate issue); our institutions provide simple
solutions with immediate effects55.
22 Global Catastrophic Risks 2020CATASTROPHIC CLIMATE CHANGE
Managing catastrophic risks requires proactivity to Fourth, there tends to be a general distrust in human
anticipate emerging threats, mobilise support for agency in the face of high-magnitude situations
action against possible future harm and provide that demobilise people. In addition, people tend to
responses that are sufficiently correct the first time, experience strong, mobilising feelings about recent,
as those risks offer little or no opportunity for visible events, and develop feelings of compassion
learning from experience and revising policies. especially when a subject is given a face; as societies
Nevertheless, in addition to the fact that few existing have never lived a global climate catastrophe and
institutions are capable of acting in this manner, nature is a vast and blurred subject, public and
there is the risk that such a proactive approach political concern for that possibility is low59. It
translates into oppressive behaviours and security remains to be seen whether the COVID-19 pandemic
measures56. will make people more open to considering abrupt,
high-impact situations.
The second is the possibility of creating a new risk
through efforts to prevent another57,e.g., large-scale Finally, averting a global climate catastrophe requires
deployment of bioenergy with carbon capture and deep levels of global cooperation. Global cooperation
storage to help prevent catastrophic climate change, is currently facing enormous challenges e.g., the rise
which would erode natural habitats and cause the loss of anti-globalisation nationalism and the ‘Cold War’
of biodiversity, thus increasing the risk of ecological between the US and China over trade and technology.
collapse.
More research is needed to increase our
Third, mitigating the risk of a climate catastrophe understanding of catastrophic climate risk, better
requires that current generations resist short-term reach the public and pressure political actors to act.
individual benefits with the aim of improving the
far future of human civilisation. Many people lack
motivation to help the far future58.
… as societies have never lived a global
climate catastrophe and nature is a vast
and blurred subject, public and political
concern for that possibility is low.
23 Global Catastrophic Risks 2020CATASTROPHIC CLIMATE CHANGE
Credit/source: Unsplash
...mitigating the risk of a
climate catastrophe requires that
current generations resist short-
term individual benefits with the
aim of improving the far future of
human civilisation.
24 Global Catastrophic Risks 2020Reviewed by
Ecological collapse
PHILIP OSANO
WHAT IS AT STAKE? Local ecological collapse may have
Ecosystems are the foundation for caused the end of a civilisation on
human life. They perform a range Easter Island in the Pacific Ocean4.
of functions, generally referred More recently, ecological collapse in
to as environmental services, and around the Aral Sea in Central
without which human societies and Asia has had dramatic social and
economies could not operate at their economic consequences for the
current level1. We depend on the region5, although timely intervention
services they provide for air, water, has led to some marked recovery6.
food and nourishment, shelter and In today’s highly connected world,
energy. Ecosystems can tolerate local disruptions may sometimes
a measure of impact from human also lead to unintended ecological
use and recover relatively quickly effects on other far flung areas.
with minimal negative effects – This might escalate into the rapid
an attribute generally known as collapse of most ecosystems across
resilience – but beyond a certain the Earth7. With no time for effective
threshold, or “tipping point”, sudden recovery – and amplified by climate
and radical disruption occurs2. change impacts8 – these disruptions
Under such conditions, soil quality, could drastically compromise the
fresh water supplies and biodiversity planet’s capacity to support a large
diminish drastically, while and growing human population
agricultural capacity plummets sustainably.
and daily human living conditions
deteriorate significantly3.
…beyond a certain threshold,
or “tipping point”, sudden
and radical disruption occurs.
25 Global Catastrophic Risks 2020ECOLOGICAL COLLAPSE
HOW MUCH DO WE KNOW? Human-induced factors that
Ecosystems are complex entities affect ecosystem vitality may be
which consist of a community of classified in the following manner:
living organisms in their non-living scholars describe the current
environment, linked together through historical moment as the start of
flows of energy and nutrients. a new geological era, called the
Anthropocene14, where humans, as
the predominant agent of change at
the planetary level, change the nature
of nature itself. Since the mid-1950s,
many elements that ensure the
The behaviour of an ecosystem
habitability of the planet, whether
is relatively stable over time,
greenhouse gas concentration,
but when the balance between
forested areas or the health of marine
some of its elements is altered
ecosystems, have been degrading
beyond a certain threshold,
at an accelerating pace15. In 2009,
it can experience a non-
an international group of experts
linear, possibly catastrophic
identified nine interconnected
transformation9.
planetary boundaries that
underpin the stability of the
• Changes in the balance of global ecosystem, allowing human
local biodiversity caused civilisation to thrive16.
by human intervention,
in particular as a result of Each of the nine identified
introducing new species or boundaries is characterised by
overharvesting of plants and thresholds or tipping points.
animals10 Exceeding those carries a high
• Alteration of the chemical risk of sudden and irreversible
balance in the environment environmental change, which could
due to pollution11 make the planet less hospitable to
• Modifications in the local human life.
temperatures and water
cycle because of climate
change12
• Habitat loss, whether 4 5 6
through destruction or 3 7
ecosystem fragmentation 2 8
in terrestrial and water/sea
1 9
systems13.
We have now exceeded the safe limits for four
of the nine identified planetary boundaries
26 Global Catastrophic Risks 2020ECOLOGICAL COLLAPSE
The latest research indicates that, WHAT ARE KEY FACTORS Integrating the valuation of
as a result of human activity, we AFFECTING RISK LEVELS? ecosystems into economic
have now exceeded the safe limits The development and adoption of decision-making and employing
for four of the nine identified new technologies or production robust environmental accounting
planetary boundaries17. models that are less resource- systems across businesses and
intensive and/or less polluting national economies would
It is argued that, having exceeded could reduce the risk of contribute to reducing the risk22.
the safe limits for four of those biodiversity loss and ecological
boundaries, we are now operating collapse, as would a shift towards Global governance mechanisms
in a high-risk zone for biosphere more sustainable lifestyles, more to conserve ecosystems and
integrity and biogeochemical specifically changing consumption reduce pollution, in particular
flows. As such, we are very patterns, possibly accompanied by more integrated approaches
likely to exceed all of the nine behaviour change20. between the global governance
boundaries and move beyond of ecosystems and trade, are of
the safe operating ecological It is estimated that environmental particular importance, as many
space where humanity has services, should their contribution ecosystems do not overlap with
thrived18. New evidence suggests to human well-being be calculated, national boundaries, and trade is
that changing course to stop would be worth more than twice as an important driver of ecosystem
the pervasive human-driven much as the entire global GDP 21. collapse23.
decline of life on Earth requires
transformative change19.
LAKE CHAD – An example of ecological collapse
The changes in Lake Chad have been called an of several factors, including
ecological disaster that have not only destroyed the shallowness of the lake,
livelihoods but also led to the loss of invaluable changing human uses such as
biodiversity. Lake Chad traverses Chad, Nigeria, increased irrigation, and the effects
Niger and Cameroon. The lake was considered of climate change25. A scientific
the sixth largest lake in the world in the 1960s assessment on the situation of the lake
but over the last 60 years, its size has decreased ranked freshwater shortage as severe
by 90 per cent as a result of over-use of the and as a primary concern affecting other changes,
water, extended drought and the impacts of including habitat modification and declining fish
climate change. The surface area of the lake has production26. The diminishing water resources
plummeted from 26,000 square kilometres in and the decline in the lake’s ecosystem leads
1963 to less than 1,500 square kilometres today, to severe health and economic impacts for the
affecting the livelihoods of over 40 million populations around Lake Chad. It has affected
people who depend on it24. The fluctuation of fishing communities and pastoralists and
the lake is attributed to the complex interaction generated resource-based conflicts27.
27 Global Catastrophic Risks 2020Governance of ecological collapse
Philip Osano, Research Fellow, Natural Resources and Ecosystems, Stockholm Environment Institute
Contemporary ecological risks are increasingly These include the UN conventions on climate
global in scale, scope and impact with strong levels change, biodiversity, migratory species, trade
of interconnection, not only across the borders of in endangered species, desertification and
nations but across continents28. Action to address persistent organic pollutants. The expectation is
them, however, has to be taken at both global that when countries implement their obligations
and national levels. The environment is a classic under the treaties, the problems will be managed
common good: everyone benefits from healthy and ultimately resolved. At the national level,
ecosystems and a pollution-free planet, while governments have established ministries and
extraction of natural resources and pollution by authorities to deal with environmental concerns,
some compromise the benefit for many. advocate for ecologically informed decision making,
and improve national capacity.
A number of international institutions oversee
monitoring, assessment and reporting on problem States voluntarily create international agreements to
identification and implementation. They set govern their relations through legal responsibilities.
standards, policies and laws and they support the There is, however, no overarching judicial system
development of institutional capacity to address or a coercive penal system that could ensure
existing and emerging problems at the national effective enforcement of the agreements that deal
level. Governments crafted the institutional with environmental issues. Breaches cannot be
architecture for managing global ecological sanctioned. Compliance and implementation have
risks in the 1970s with the creation of the anchor to be enticed rather than coerced. Environmental
institution for the global environment: the United agreements such as the 2015 Paris Agreement, for
Nations Environment Program (UNEP). Global example, are explicitly non-punitive: countries face
environmental conventions, also known as treaties no penalties for not meeting their commitments.
or agreements, are the main international legal Rather, they are facilitative, as international
instrument for promoting collective action toward institutions commit to support compliance and
managing ecological risk and staying within the implementation. The United Nations General
safe planetary operating space. Their number and Assembly Resolution 72/277, ‘Towards a Global
membership have increased dramatically. Pact for the Environment,’ seeks to explore how
to strengthen the implementation of international
About a dozen international treaties deal with environmental law and international environmental
global issues including climate change, land-system governance29.
change, biosphere change and chemicals and waste.
Contemporary ecological risks are
increasingly global in scale, scope and
impact with strong levels of interconnection.
28 Global Catastrophic Risks 2020You can also read
