With the world’s biggest polluters shirking their climate commitments, developing nations are left asking whether it’s our ‘turn to burn’.
- As America turns away from climate action, countries question whether to follow its profit-driven lead.
- Coal still powers South Africa and provides employment, making it hard to abandon immediately.
- Resource-rich countries are at a crossroads on how to benefit from their fossil fuels, as developed nations have historically done.
South Africa’s climate efforts are a drop in the ocean if major emitters like the United States don’t meet their climate goals. So, why should we sacrifice if they are doing the opposite?
The talk by philosophy professor Lucy Allais presented this question to a packed audience at the Wits Club on Wednesday, August 13, during the Pro VC Seminar.
The event was the brainchild of Professor Imraan Valodia, Wits Pro Vice-Chancellor: Climate, Sustainability and Inequality. It brought together students, academics, and researchers to question what fair and equitable climate action looks like for developing nations.
For South Africa, deciding to abandon fossil fuels is not only a question of doing the right thing, but a major economic consideration as well. “We derive significant foreign reserves from coal, and we’ve got about 80,000 direct jobs in coal mining and even more indirect jobs. Burning coal is also our main source of electricity,” Allais said.
She also pointed out that for many, expecting South Africa to abandon this key energy source is unfair.
“We haven’t caused the problem and we’ve got resources that we could profit from. The developed world has profited from their natural resources, and from ours. Isn’t it only fair that we get to profit from our resources too?” Allais probed.
That sense of unfairness only grows when looking at the United States, a former climate leader that is now retreating from this responsibility. Allais argued that America’s confused climate agenda did not begin with President Donald Trump – it has long been a nation that often talks left and walks right. “The U.S. under Biden signed historical legislation investing in renewable infrastructure, but also increased oil production,” she said. Biden’s presidency saw the country become a net exporter of oil, with the share price of the Dow Jones U.S. oil and gas index rising by 120% between the first and last year of his presidency.
South Africa and America have vastly different impacts on the environment. Graphic: Mbali Khumalo
Still, Trump has accelerated the rolling back of America’s climate commitments.
Under his leadership, the U.S. has withdrawn from the Paris Agreement, an international treaty to keep global warming below 2°C. Trump has also revoked the country’s pledge to provide green energy transition funding, including R1.5 billion which would have gone to South Africa.
South Africa has not followed America’s lead in abandoning the fight against climate change. Neither have the other 194 countries still signed to the Paris Agreement.
While wealthy nations should be obligated to reverse climate change, Allais disagrees that developing countries have an entitlement to not reduce emissions. “All countries have an obligation to avoid collective catastrophe,” she concluded.
FEATURED IMAGE: The United States is no longer a climate action champion, leaving the rest of the world to forge its own path. Graphic: Mbali Khumalo.
RELATED ARTICLES:
- Wits Vuvuzela, Your clicks online influence the climate in more ways than one, August, 2025.
- Wits Vuvuzela, Cattle farmers have beef with climate change, August 2022.
- Wits Vuvuzela, Climate change and migration in SA, December, 2022.
