How much do rich nations owe Africa for climate damage?

From prolonged droughts across the Horn of Africa, to heavy rainfall and floods in Southern Africa, African countries are the most vulnerable to climate induced disasters. This is despite them having a minimal contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions (at around 3-4%). A damning report from Action Aid titled "Who Owes Who," has found how Africa is owed USD $36 trillion in climate debt by rich polluting countries. 

But why do rich* nations owe Africa that much money?

Rich nations, especially those in North America and Europe, industrialised early, emitting massive amounts of carbon dioxide for centuries. The industrial revolution and continued fossil fuel consumption are key causes which have led to global warming. Unfortunately, Africa has contributed less than 4% of global emissions yet the continent suffers some of the worse climate impacts.

An idea called ‘climate debt’ suggests that rich nations have used more than their fair share of the Earth’s atmospheric capacity, leaving countries in Africa vulnerable and having to bear the consequences. The continent tends to face more extreme weather events than rich nations, examples of which include:

• Severe droughts in the Sahel and Horn of Africa, affected food security

• Cyclones and floods in Mozambique, Sudan and Nigeria, destroying infrastructure

• Rising temperatures, making parts of the continent nearly uninhabitable.

Due to the emergent nature of these weather events, African nations are having to spend more on recovery and adaptation costs instead of development, widening the gap between themselves and richer nations. A Guardian article from 2022 found how billions of pounds a year to cope with the effects of the climate crisis by African nations is diverting potential investment into schools, hospitals and roads to name but a few threatens to drive them further into poverty.

The financial strain is worsened by the fact that many African countries are already burdened with external debt to international lenders. Despite promises made by wealthy nations to provide financial support through climate finance. The reality is that these commitments have largely fallen short. The $100 billion per year climate finance pledge which was first proposed in 2009 is yet to be fully delivered. Furthermore, as stated by the Action Aid report, this figure has evolved to $36 trillion which means that more ways of funding and supporting need to be found. 

What needs to change?

Primarily, there needs to be a widespread acknowledgement by rich nations that they have a moral and historical responsibility to compensate for the damage that their emissions have caused.

Secondly, it is paramount that financial mechanisms are restructured to ensure that climate funding is provided in the forms of grants, not loans, so as to not increase debt across Africa. This could allow African nations to build resilience against climate disasters without further indebting themselves. Additionally, a significant portion of external debt owed by African countries should be cancelled to free up resources for climate adaptation and development.

Finally, rich nations must recognise that climate justice is not only an ethical obligation but also a necessity for global stability. Without adequate compensation and support, the climate crisis will continue to deepen inequality, drive migration crises and exacerbate relations internationally.

Overall, addressing Africa’s climate debt is a crucial step in righting historical injustices and ensuring a fairer and more sustainable world. Rich countries should not ignore their responsibility more - they need to engage in immediate and meaningful action to ensure a just future for millions across the continent.

*While the United Nations does not have a single, universally agreed-upon definition of a ‘rich country’, it uses Gross National Income (GNI) per capita to categorise countries, with high-income countries typically having a GNI per capita of over $12,615. Countries which fit into this definition include those in Europe, North America and Australasia; thus this article will refer to these countries when mentioning the term.

Published in the 7th edition of Developmental Insights