The following table describes the status, the proposer and other metadata of this amendment.
| Resolution: | 2% of GDP towards climate solutions |
|---|---|
| Proposer: | Scottish Young Greens |
| Status: | Published |
| Submitted: | 04/29/2023, 00:15 |
R11 A1: 2% of GDP towards climate solutions
Motion text
From line 1 to 8:
To keep global warming below 1.5°C, strong action by national governments is needed urgently. One way these governments can contribute to climate solutions is by investing structurally in a just transition. Scientists at Sapienship calculated that the 1.5°C target could be achieved with only 2% of global GDP invested in climate solutions. The Global North bears a historic responsibility in the climate crisis. As long as GDP is the main indicator for the financial situation of a country, European governments should incorporate 2% of their GDP towards a just transition in their (annual) budgeting.
To keep global warming below 1.5°C, strong action by national governments is urgently needed. As long as GDP is the main indicator for the financial health of a country, European governments should incorporate at least 2% of their GDP towards a just transition in their annual budgets. As the former colonial powers of Western Europe bear a historical responsibility for the climate crisis, they should also bear a greater financial responsibility for implementing climate solutions.
From line 14 to 22:
The focus of these investments should be in line with the focus points and priorities stated in the FYEG Political Platform for a just transition towards climate neutrality. Technical fixes thus cannot be the center of these investments. National governments should think how they could invest public money towards climate solutions in the most cost-effective way, aligned with their national policy matters. Climate solutions oftentimes are interlinked and feed into each other. For thematic practical implementation, we again refer to our views in the FYEG Political Platform.Technical fixes thus cannot be the center of these investments. National governments should think how they could invest public money towards climate solutions in the most cost-effective way, aligned with their national policy matters. Climate solutions oftentimes are interlinked and feed into each other. Since more than 75% of greenhouse gas emissions in the EU stem from the energy sector and as example case, the
From line 25 to 42:
The most effective way to save energy is by not using it. Energy efficiency should be the number 1 priority for public spending by national governments. Investments should go towards the insulation of all homes and buildings by 2030. For a society that runs on 100% renewables, as it should by 2050, the energy grid needs to be electrified. Public money should thus Energy efficiency should be a high priority for public spending by national governments. Investments should go towards the insulation of all homes and buildings by 2030. For a society that should run 100% on renewable energy by 2050, public money should flow towards the electrification of the energy grid and energy infrastructure.
Energy should be generated from renewable sources. Investments in wind and solar energy would becanbe part of the 2% GDP towards climate solutions package. Although nuclear energy emits less carbon emissions, they cannot bemust notbe included in this budget, as they have other serious environmental implications (like the extraction of uranium, security risks and the production of nuclear waste). Investment in fossil fuels does notwillnot belong within this budgeting package, as it’sitis an energy source from the past and needs to be phased out of the energy mix completely as soonand as quickly possible. As the production of hydrogen is energy-intensive, it can only be considered a sustainable and green source of energy if produced in a 100% renewable way and used only when no more energy efficient options are available. Investments in research & development onof hydrogen power are eligible, yet should not be the core objective of the 2% of GDP towards climate solutions. In this
From line 50 to 57:
generate economic & societal gain. This resolution focuses on ‘national governments’, but 2% of of budgeting towards climate solutions should be the goal of every government & could also be a goal for budgets of non-state actors (organisations, universities, schools, …) all from their own focus & competence. From the economic and financial gain that will emerge from these investments, European governments have more budgetary room to pay up for ‘loss & damage’, to countries in the Global South. ‘Loss & damage’ is not part of this financial plan, but should get its own program in government spending.must be the goal of every former colonial powers government & could also be a goal for budgets of non-state actors (organisations, universities, schools, …) all from their own focus & competence.
From line 1 to 8:
To keep global warming below 1.5°C, strong action by national governments is needed urgently. One way these governments can contribute to climate solutions is by investing structurally in a just transition. Scientists at Sapienship calculated that the 1.5°C target could be achieved with only 2% of global GDP invested in climate solutions. The Global North bears a historic responsibility in the climate crisis. As long as GDP is the main indicator for the financial situation of a country, European governments should incorporate 2% of their GDP towards a just transition in their (annual) budgeting.
To keep global warming below 1.5°C, strong action by national governments is urgently needed. As long as GDP is the main indicator for the financial health of a country, European governments should incorporate at least 2% of their GDP towards a just transition in their annual budgets. As the former colonial powers of Western Europe bear a historical responsibility for the climate crisis, they should also bear a greater financial responsibility for implementing climate solutions.
From line 14 to 22:
The focus of these investments should be in line with the focus points and priorities stated in the FYEG Political Platform for a just transition towards climate neutrality. Technical fixes thus cannot be the center of these investments. National governments should think how they could invest public money towards climate solutions in the most cost-effective way, aligned with their national policy matters. Climate solutions oftentimes are interlinked and feed into each other. For thematic practical implementation, we again refer to our views in the FYEG Political Platform.Technical fixes thus cannot be the center of these investments. National governments should think how they could invest public money towards climate solutions in the most cost-effective way, aligned with their national policy matters. Climate solutions oftentimes are interlinked and feed into each other. Since more than 75% of greenhouse gas emissions in the EU stem from the energy sector and as example case, the
From line 25 to 42:
The most effective way to save energy is by not using it. Energy efficiency should be the number 1 priority for public spending by national governments. Investments should go towards the insulation of all homes and buildings by 2030. For a society that runs on 100% renewables, as it should by 2050, the energy grid needs to be electrified. Public money should thus Energy efficiency should be a high priority for public spending by national governments. Investments should go towards the insulation of all homes and buildings by 2030. For a society that should run 100% on renewable energy by 2050, public money should flow towards the electrification of the energy grid and energy infrastructure.
Energy should be generated from renewable sources. Investments in wind and solar energy would becanbe part of the 2% GDP towards climate solutions package. Although nuclear energy emits less carbon emissions, they cannot bemust notbe included in this budget, as they have other serious environmental implications (like the extraction of uranium, security risks and the production of nuclear waste). Investment in fossil fuels does notwillnot belong within this budgeting package, as it’sitis an energy source from the past and needs to be phased out of the energy mix completely as soonand as quickly possible. As the production of hydrogen is energy-intensive, it can only be considered a sustainable and green source of energy if produced in a 100% renewable way and used only when no more energy efficient options are available. Investments in research & development onof hydrogen power are eligible, yet should not be the core objective of the 2% of GDP towards climate solutions. In this
From line 50 to 57:
generate economic & societal gain. This resolution focuses on ‘national governments’, but 2% of of budgeting towards climate solutions should be the goal of every government & could also be a goal for budgets of non-state actors (organisations, universities, schools, …) all from their own focus & competence. From the economic and financial gain that will emerge from these investments, European governments have more budgetary room to pay up for ‘loss & damage’, to countries in the Global South. ‘Loss & damage’ is not part of this financial plan, but should get its own program in government spending.must be the goal of every former colonial powers government & could also be a goal for budgets of non-state actors (organisations, universities, schools, …) all from their own focus & competence.