How the presidents of Brazil and Colombia want to address the climate crisis: an analysis
For leaders all over the world, the subject of how to respond to pressures about climate change has become more and more prevalent. For Latin American leaders such as Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva of Brazil and Gustavo Petro of Colombia, their views on the climate crisis were a subject that played an important role in both of them winning their respective elections this year. Both leaders were present at this year’s COP27 in Egypt. This year’s conference saw the creation of an agreement for “loss and damage” funding for countries that are hardest hit by disasters caused by climate change, as well as the strengthening of other commitments to lowering carbon emissions. Despite the initiatives taken at COP27, UN Secretary-General António Guterres claimed that the world must do more to lower carbon emissions now.
Lula
In Brazil, Lula has displayed his credentials as a leader that will make the health of the environment a priority by actively speaking out about climate issues. While campaigning for president, he promised to “aim for zero deforestation.” He is in a unique position to do this, as Brazil is home to large amounts of the Amazon Rainforest, the largest tropical rainforest in the world. According to the Convention on Biological Diversity, Brazil is the most biologically diverse country in the world and hosts between 15 and 20 percent of the world’s biodiversity. Outgoing president Jair Bolsonaro has been the target of criticism in the international community and from climate activists for the deforestation of the Amazon. Domestically, the Brazilian Climate Observatory has also been critical of Bolsonaro, with one executive secretary claiming that the main thing the Bolsonaro administration has done is to reduce the ability of the state to regulate illegal deforestation. Some research has shown that deforestation damages the forests ability to recover from events such as droughts, fires, and landslides.
Speaking at COP27, Lula announced to the world, “Brazil is back.” Referencing the Bolsonaro administration, Lula claimed that his electoral victory was significant for the health of the Amazon, and for the planet itself. This is indicative of his agenda to conserve the Amazon and to make Brazil a leader in addressing the climate crisis. The health of the Amazon as a whole is important, because it is critical for the absorption of carbon dioxide in Earth’s atmosphere.
In Lula’s view, the struggle against climate change can be addressed on three main fronts. First, the issue of income inequality has been highlighted as a problem for the reduction of carbon emissions. In his speech at COP27 Lula stated, “The inequality between rich and poor is manifested even in efforts to reduce climate change.” Citing a study presented at COP 6, he further elaborated that the top 1% of the world’s wealthiest individuals will soon emit more than 70 times more carbon dioxide than the bottom 50%. To meet the UN's 2030 climate goals, Lula claimed the top 1% will emit more than 30 times more carbon dioxide than necessary to avoid a global temperature increase of 1.5 degrees Celsius, according to the United Nations’s calculations. While in favour of reducing inequality in Brazil by increasing spending on social welfare programs, the reduction of inequality on a global scale is also a priority for this administration in order to facilitate a better response to the climate crisis. Going forward, the Lula administration will seek to increase the state’s power to regulate its economy in order to meet climate goals, likely hurting the business sector.
Second, Lula has strongly advocated for the indigenous peoples of Brazil, many of whom have been affected by the deforestation of the Amazon. Another important way that the fight against climate change has been framed is by working to protect indigenous lands. As one of the 12 new government ministries that will be created when Lula takes power on the first day of 2023, the Ministry of Indigenous Peoples (Ministério dos Povos Originários) will be formed. Lula has announced that Sônia Guajajara, an indigenous woman and politician, will lead this ministry. This ministry will provide indigenous peoples of Brazil a forum to present policy solutions that can “guarantee them a dignified survival, security, peace and sustainability.” Illegal mining, logging, and “improper agricultural occupation” have been cited as reasons for the need for a creation of this ministry.
Finally, Lula believes that more cooperation between states is necessary to address the climate crisis. Lula proposed a summit of member countries of the Amazon Cooperation Treaty. This summit will include Brazil, Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Guinana, Suriname, and Venezuela. For this summit, the stated goal is to, “sovereignly discuss the promotion of integrated development in the region, with social inclusion and climate responsibility.”
Petro
In Colombia, Gustavo Petro’s views on the climate crisis can be summed up in this quote: “We cannot guarantee life on this planet, including human life, without overcoming the (problem of) the accumulation of capital.” Petro has repeatedly and emphatically stated that addressing the climate crisis is a top priority of his administration, and has assured others in the region that he is determined to revitalise the Amazon. Petro’s description of the climate crisis was that it was not any problem, but “humanity’s worst problem”, which “has the power to extinguish life on this planet, including human life.” Colombia is an important country in the fossil fuel market, and fossil fuels are responsible for a large chunk of Colombia’s exports, over 40% in 2020. . Petro’s alarmism about the severity of this crisis will undoubtedly be problematic for the Colombian business community.
Petro attributes the climate crisis to being an economic problem, saying that it is generated by the economy and also has profound effects on the economy. According to him, the economic principle of neo-liberalism is to blame for the danger humanity faces. He explained it by saying, “The dominant way of thinking about the economy in countries like France, Colombia, the United States, and Japan is based on the idea that if you leave the market to act freely, it will maximise itself to reach its potential for usefulness…After decades of putting this into practice however, we are not experiencing the general well-being of the people; rather, we are on the verge of extinguishing ourselves.”
Petro also has strong beliefs regarding the influence that he predicts climate change will have on immigration, with many people being forced to leave their country due to increased flooding, droughts, or irregularities with planting and harvesting crops. Specifically, he suggested that millions more refugees and immigrants will arrive in Europe from Africa, and millions more will migrate from South America north to the United States. Referring to migrants from South America making their way to the US, Petro said, “And in the north, the ideas of self-defence and xenophobia will grow more and more and more, up to the point that through voting they will stimulate the building of walls, the shooting of machine guns, and the building of concentration camps. From a negative point of view, we approach a 1933, but on a global scale.” This rhetoric shows how important this issue is to his administration. Combined with his disenchantment for the structure of the US economy, Petro has been critical of the United States and will continue to call for it to modify its policies that affect the climate crisis.
In Petro’s view, the key to reducing CO2 emissions is to reduce the demand for fossil fuels. Petro views the Chinese economy favourably because of its ability to be planned centrally, explaining that this means that they are well equipped to decarbonise their economy. Petro notes that in contrast, the United States cannot easily transition because it does not have the capacity for a centrally planned economy, which is considered problematic given the huge CO2 emissions that the United States is responsible for. To offer potential solutions, Petro asserted, “The system to create these changes is planning (by the state), not the (free) market.” While Colombia is a democracy, and the president of Colombia does not have the authority to unilaterally make sweeping changes in the state’s economy, these remarks have important implications for Petro’s vision for Colombia’s future.
International cooperation and coordination is also viewed as a necessity by Petro. The United Nations is especially essential. He stated, “The United Nations should be already developing a capacity for planning on a public and global scale to bring society, markets, and capital to an intense decarbonization process. This does not exist today.” If this view is adopted by other countries, the UN would become an organisation with much more power to regulate states’ behaviour, meaning states would lose sovereignty.
At COP27, Petro made an important speech in which he gave 10 points that summarise his views on the climate crisis. The most important ones are:
Humanity should know that if the world does not overcome the climate crisis it will be extinguished. It is time for the mobilisation of all of humanity.
The (free) market and the accumulation of capital created the climate crisis and will never be its remedy.
Only public, global, and multilateral planning (of the economy) will facilitate the transition to a decarbonized world economy. The UN should be the setting for such planning.
The Amazon is one of the pillars of the planet’s climate. Colombia will grant 200 million USD over 20 years to save the Amazon Rainforest.
We will only overcome the climate crisis if we stop consuming fossil fuels.
It is time to devalue the hydrocarbon economy with defined dates for its end. The solution is a world without oil and without coal.
The world's private and multilateral banks must stop financing the fossil fuel economy.
Petro’s ideas have been met with some criticism. Phasing out fossil fuels will hit Colombia itself pretty hard, given that over 40% of the state’s exports in 2020 were fossil fuels. Daniel Guardiola, an analyst at investment bank BTG Pactual, estimates that oil is responsible for 15% of Colombia’s fiscal revenue and 30% of its foreign direct investment. To combat this, a progressive tax reform has been passed to raise funds. One of the important provisions of this tax reform is that oil companies in Colombia will be taxed additional percentages based on “international prices” of oil per barrel. The higher the price per barrel, the more oil companies will be taxed. Former Colombian Mines and Energy Minister Tomas González has criticised Petro, saying, “You can ignore the laws of economics, but the laws of economics won’t ignore you.”
Summary and Implications
Both Petro and Lula, the presidents of prominent South American economies, are eager to push their climate agendas. This will bring new life and energy to efforts to unite Latin American states and encourage cooperation between them. This is also true for multilateral cooperation efforts on a global scale. The new governments of Lula and Petro will undoubtedly guide their respective countries into a more cooperative role with the United Nations. For Brazil, this starkly contrasts the scepticism that Bolsonaro had for the institution of the United Nations. Petro calls for a more centrally planned economy, not only in countries with a more free market economy, but on a global scale with the United Nations being the planning authority, meaning that powerful states will have to give up sovereignty. The stated goal of this central planning is to bring about an “intense decarbonization process.” Outside of the United Nations, increased ties between South American states will likely grow even more as Lula has also called for more multilateral cooperation in the form of the World Alliance for Food Security and a summit of the member countries of the Amazon Cooperation Treaty.
Implementing these measures will prove to be more difficult. For Colombia especially, increased taxes and the attempt to phase out oil will be damaging to the private sector and eventually the economy as a whole. Furthermore, convincing the citizens of countries that are high emitters of carbon dioxide, such as the United States, that they must forfeit political and economic sovereignty to the UN in order to properly fight climate change will be a very hard sell. The business community in Colombia and Brazil will be in favour of less national and international regulation, which should provide resistance to the proposals of Lula and Petro. Increased government spending from both Petro and Lula will also prove difficult to sustain over the long-term. However, both will continue to make the case that it is necessary due to their perception of the pronounced and existential threat of climate change.