Climate change fixes must fight short-term problems

Apart from emission reductions, we need wise agricultural policies, social safety nets, and international cooperation

on assumptions, for example, about how rising temperatures and other climate effects will influence food productivity, something we know little about. Other research concludes that rising temperatures could reduce GDP even in developed nations by as much as one-third by 2100. Uncertainties aside, the researchers’ best guess is that on the matter of food security, climate change would be bad, but a carbon tax big enough to reduce emissions significantly could actually be worse.

It points out why we’re going to have to be creative in finding ways to deal with the negative short-term consequences of the policies that will deliver long-term benefits. In addition to emissions reductions, we need wise agricultural policies, stronger social safety nets, and better international cooperation.

Policies designed to avoid climate disaster a century into the future and beyond might be expected to have some negative consequences over times as short as 30 years. Likewise, if governments implement a carbon tax — or take other serious actions on climate — they can also take further steps to handle adverse consequences stirred up as a result. Revenue from the tax could be used for food aid, for example, or to transfer more efficient production methods to food insecure regions, which might also further reduce CO2 emissions.

In this sense, the paper makes a useful point that long term climate policy will stir up short term issues, like food security. It offers information on what other policies we might put in place to counteract these problems, and so ensure a path forward for everyone.