Turning point?
Authors: None The Lancet Planetary Health
Journal: The Lancet Planetary Health (2020)

Climate change is a collective action problem, but because some countries like the United States are particularly high emitters—as well as having wider economic and political influence—they play an outsized role in setting the political landscape for international climate action. Consequently, it is likely that the Paris Climate Agreement struck in 2015 would have been less successful if the US was not on board. That situation of course changed after the 2016 US presidential elections as the Trump administration took office with a clear stance against climate policy, climate science, and environmental regulation in general. A great deal of environmental legislation was rolled back, and support for coal, oil, and gas sectors ramped up. That attitude towards climate policy, as well as an aversion to international governance, was a huge blow to the chances of meeting the Paris Agreement objective of limiting climate heating to 2°C above pre-industrial temperatures (and ideally just 1·5°C). The Trump administration's intentions came to fruition in early November this year when the US became the first nation to formally withdraw from the Paris Agreement. In spite of this context many regional administrations have continued to push forward decarbonization under the banner We Are Still In, but domestic policies have hamper efforts at the national level. The transfer of leadership in 2021 to Joe Biden and Kamala Harris after the recent election promises to flip the US government's attitude towards climate policy in a dramatic way. The Biden-Harris administration may not be as climate progressive as some hoped, but they have by far the most ambitious US government climate strategy to date. On the campaign trail, Biden outlined plans to re-join the Paris Agreement, early in his term, and commit to net zero carbon emissions by 2050. He pledged to spend $2 trillion over 4 years improving building efficiency (with a special provision for disadvantaged communities), decarbonising public transport, investing in electric vehicle manufacturing and charging infrastructure, and incentivising consumers to buy cleaner cars in a twin effort to decarbonise and create jobs. Of course delivering on those promises will be trickier. The election revealed an American populace deeply divided; combined with a less than decisive Democrat performance in the Senate race, the Biden-Harris administration will have an uphill task enacting their climate policies. Domestic US policy success will be materially important and will also serve as an indicator of climate credibility. However, the outward facing attitude of the government could also be important. Biden's aim to “lead an effort to get every major country to ramp up [decarbonisation] ambition”, and to shame “climate outlaws” who are not delivering, or are stalling progress, is itself a potentially significant step in the right direction. America is not the only big emitter, of course, and China made an important step in committing to Net zero emissions by 2060 back in October. President Xi's announcement, which surprised many outside of China, represents another important step towards reducing greenhouse gas emissions globally. Combined with the European Union's 2050 net zero commitment, these developments in China and the US are starting to provide a sense of momentum in the lead up to the 26th session of the Conference of Parties (COP26) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), in Glasgow in November next year. Continuing reductions in the price of renewables, allowed the International Energy Agency's World Energy Outlook 2020 to announce that the best performing solar power schemes now offer the “cheapest…electricity in history”. Encouraging political alignment on net zero commitments also sends a loud and clear message to the private sector, and combined with increasingly competitive renewable energy means that perhaps for the first time there is a real sense that serious decarbonisation in line with the Paris Agreement is possible. Possible is far from inevitable though. Health professionals, researchers, campaigners, and activists, as well as entrepreneurs, engineers, governors, teachers, and everybody concerned with, or about, climate change still have much to do. So far national governments have mostly responded to pressure rather than taking a lead. This implies they need to be pushed further in their ambition and held accountable to their existing pledges. Any instances of backsliding and creative accounting must be quickly exposed and overturned. There is every chance that momentum will build around a clean and healthy recovery from COVID-19 which could even surpass our expectations, but not if we stop pushing.