News & Media

Carbon emissions of richest 1 per cent more than double the emissions of the poorest half of humanity

September 21, 2020

The richest one per cent of the world’s population are responsible for more than twice as much carbon pollution as the 3.1 billion people who made up the poorest half of humanity during a critical 25-year period of unprecedented emissions growth.

Oxfam’s new report, ‘Confronting Carbon Inequality,’ is based on research conducted with the Stockholm Environment Institute and is being released as world leaders prepare to meet at the UN General Assembly to discuss global challenges including the climate crisis.

The report assesses the consumption emissions of different income groups between 1990 and 2015 – 25 years when humanity doubled the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. It found:

· The richest 10 per cent accounted for over half (52 per cent) of the emissions added to the atmosphere between 1990 and 2015. The richest one per cent were responsible for 15 per cent of emissions during this time – more than all the citizens of the EU and more than twice that of the poorest half of humanity (7 per cent).

· During this time, the richest 10 per cent blew one third of our remaining global 1.5C carbon budget, compared to just 4 per cent for the poorest half of the population. The carbon budget is the amount of carbon dioxide that can be added to the atmosphere without causing global temperatures to rise above 1.5C – the goal set by governments in the Paris Agreement to avoid the very worst impacts of uncontrolled climate change.

· Annual emissions grew by 60 per cent between 1990 and 2015. The richest 5 per cent were responsible for over a third (37 per cent) of this growth. The total increase in emissions of the richest one per cent was three times more than that of the poorest 50 per cent.

Tim Gore, Head of Climate Policy at Oxfam and author of the report said: “The over-consumption of a wealthy minority is fuelling the climate crisis yet it is poor communities and young people who are paying the price. Such extreme carbon inequality is a direct consequence of our governments’ decades-long pursuit of grossly unequal and carbon-intensive economic growth.“

Carbon emissions are likely to rapidly rebound as governments ease Covid-related lockdowns. If emissions do not keep falling year on year and carbon inequality is left unchecked the remaining carbon budget for 1.5C will be entirely depleted by 2030. However, carbon inequality is so stark the richest 10 per cent would blow the carbon budget by 2033, even if all other emissions were cut to zero.

A report published by Oxfam New Zealand this week highlighted how New Zealand’s national targets are inequitable and woefully insufficient to limit global warming to 1.5C. Communications and Advocacy Director Dr Joanna Spratt said that by not pulling its weight, New Zealand is placing an unfair burden on poorer countries, including Pacific nations, who are on the front lines of climate breakdown.

“As a wealthy nation with historical responsibility for causing climate breakdown, New Zealand has a responsibility to do more than the global average to reduce emissions,” Spratt said. “The impacts of climate change are not distributed equally amongst individuals or nations – nor should be the responsibility for tackling it.”

During 2020, and with around 1C of global heating, climate change has fuelled deadly cyclones in India and Bangladesh, huge locust swarms that have devastated crops across Africa and unprecedented heatwaves and wildfires across Australia and the US. No one is immune, but it is the poorest and most marginalised people who are hardest hit. For example, women are at increased risk of violence and abuse in the aftermath of a disaster.

‘Confronting Carbon Inequality‘ estimates that the per capita emissions of the richest 10 per cent will need to be around ten times lower by 2030 to keep the world on track for just 1.5C of warming – this is equivalent to cutting global annual emissions by a third. Even reducing the per capita emissions of the richest 10 per cent to the EU average would cut annual emissions by over a quarter.

Governments can tackle both extreme inequality and the climate crisis if they target the excessive emissions of the richest and invest in poor and vulnerable communities. For example, a recent study found that the richest 10 per cent of households use almost half (45 per cent) of all the energy linked to land transport and three-quarters of all energy linked to aviation. Transportation accounts for around a quarter of global emissions today, while SUVs were the second biggest driver of global carbon emissions growth between 2010 and 2018.

Gore said: “Simply rebooting our outdated, unfair, and polluting pre-Covid economies is no longer a viable option. Governments must seize this opportunity to reshape our economies and build a better tomorrow for us all.

“Governments must curb the emissions of the wealthy through taxes and bans on luxury carbon such as SUVs and frequent flights. Revenues should be invested in public services and low carbon sectors to create jobs, and help end poverty,” added Gore.

-ends-

For more information or to arrange an interview please contact:

Kelsey-Rae Taylor | [email protected] | +64 21 298 9854

Notes to editor

The media brief ‘Confronting Carbon Inequality’ and the full research report and data on which is it based is available here.

The poorest 50 per cent of humanity comprised approximately 3.1 billion people on average between 1990 and 2015, the richest 10 per cent comprised approx. 630 million people, the richest 5 per cent approx. 315 million people, and the richest one per cent approximately 63 million people.

In 2015, around half the emissions of the richest 10 per cent – people with net income over $38,000 – are linked to citizens in the US and the EU and around a fifth with citizens of China and India. Over a third of the emissions of the richest one per cent – people with net income over $109,000 – are linked to citizens in the US, with the next biggest contributions from citizens of the Middle East and China. Net incomes are based on income thresholds for 2015 and represented in $ 2011 PPP (purchasing power parity).

The research is based on estimations of consumption emissions from fossil fuels, i.e. emissions consumed within a country, including emissions embodied in imports and excluding emissions embodied in exports. National consumption emissions were divided between individual households based on the latest income distribution datasets and a functional relationship between emissions and income. This assumes, on the basis of numerous studies, that emissions rise in proportion to income above a minimum emissions floor and until a maximum emissions ceiling. National household consumption emissions estimates – for 117 countries from 1990 to 2015 – are then sorted into a global distribution according to income. More details on the methodology are available in the research report.

The Stockholm Environment Institute is an international non-profit research and policy organisation that tackles environment and development challenges.

Oxfam is a confederation of 20 independent charitable organisations focusing on the alleviation of global poverty.

Carbon Inequality Report

September 21, 2020

In the 25 years from 1990 to 2015, annual global carbon emissions grew by 60%, approximately doubling total global cumulative emissions. This has brought the world perilously close to exceeding 2°C of warming, and it is now on the verge of exceeding 1.5°C. This paper examines the starkly different contributions of different income groups to carbon emissions in this period. It draws on new data that provides much improved insight into global and national income inequality, combined with national consumption emissions over this 25-year period, to provide an analysis relating emissions to income levels for the populations of 117 countries. Future scenarios of carbon inequality are also presented based on different possible trajectories of economic growth and carbon emissions, highlighting the challenge of ensuring a more equitable distribution of the remaining and rapidly diminishing global carbon budget.

Click here to read ‘The Carbon Inequality Report’ Report

Click here for the ‘Media Brief – Confronting Carbon Inequality’

Small group of rich nations have bought up more than half the future supply of leading COVID-19 vaccine contenders

September 17, 2020

Wealthy nations representing just 13 percent of the world’s population have already cornered more than half (51 percent) of the promised doses of leading COVID-19 vaccine candidates, Oxfam warned today as the health and finance ministers of G20 countries meet to discuss the global pandemic.

Oxfam analysed the deals that pharmaceutical corporations and vaccine producers have already struck with nations around the world for the five leading vaccine candidates currently in phase 3 clinical trials, based on data collected by Airfinity.

The international agency also warned that the same companies simply do not have the capacity to make enough vaccines for everyone who needs one. Even in the extremely unlikely event that all five vaccines succeed, nearly two thirds (61%) of the world’s population will not have a vaccine until at least 2022. It’s far more likely some of these experiments will fail, leaving the number of people without access even higher.

The calculations expose a broken system that protects the monopolies and profits of pharmaceutical corporations and favours wealthy nations, while artificially restricting production and leaving most of the world’s population waiting longer than necessary for a vaccine.

One of the leading vaccine candidates, developed by Moderna, has received USD$2.48 billion in committed taxpayer’s money. Despite this, the company has said it intends to make a profit from its vaccine and has sold the options for all of its supply to rich nations – at prices that range from USD$12-16 per dose in the US to around USD$35 per dose for other countries – putting protection out of reach for many people living in poverty. While it may be making real efforts to scale up supply, according to reports, the company only has the capacity in place to produce enough for 475 million people, or 6 percent of the world’s population.

Oxfam and other organisations across the world are calling for a People’s Vaccine – available to everyone, free of charge and distributed fairly based on need. This will only be possible if pharmaceutical corporations allow vaccines to be produced as widely as possible by freely sharing their knowledge free of patents, instead of protecting their monopolies and selling to the highest bidder.

Chema Vera, Interim Executive Director of Oxfam International, said: “Governments will prolong this crisis in all of its human tragedy and economic damage if they allow pharmaceutical companies to protect their monopolies and profits. No single corporation will ever be able to meet the world’s need for a COVID-19 vaccine. That’s why we are calling on them to share their knowledge free of patents and to get behind a quantum leap in production to keep everyone safe. We need a People’s Vaccine, not a profit vaccine.”

Beyond the five leading vaccine candidates, reported vaccine deals also reveal stark inequalities between countries. The UK government has managed to secure deals on several leading vaccine candidates, equivalent to five doses per head of population. By contrast, Oxfam analysis reveals that Bangladesh has so far secured only one dose for every nine people.

There are also large differences in the willingness of pharmaceutical companies to set aside supply for poorer nations. While Moderna has so far pledged doses of its vaccine exclusively to rich countries, AstraZeneca has pledged two-thirds (66 percent) of doses to developing countries. Although AstraZeneca has done most to expand its production capacity by partnering with and transferring its technology to other manufacturers, it could still only supply up to 38 percent of the global population, and only half of this if its vaccine requires two doses.

Winnie Byanyima, Executive Director of UNAIDS and Under-Secretary General, said: “We in the AIDS movement have seen in the past how corporations use monopolies to artificially restrict supplies of life-saving medicines and inflate their prices. UNAIDS and other members of the People’s Vaccine Alliance are calling for a new approach that puts public health first by sharing knowledge and maximising supply. Anything short of that will lead to more deaths and economic chaos, forcing millions into destitution.”

The estimated cost of providing a vaccine for everyone on Earth is less than 1 percent of the projected cost of COVID-19 to the global economy. The economic case for requiring pharmaceutical companies to share their vaccine knowledge free of patents so that production can be scaled up as fast as possible could not be clearer, the agency said.

Ends

For more information or to arrange an interview please contact:

Kelsey-Rae Taylor | [email protected] | +64 21 298 9854

Notes to editors:

All figures in USD.

The G20 Health and Finance Ministers meeting takes place virtually on Thursday 17 September 2020.

Nine COVID-19 vaccines are currently going through phase 3 clinical trials, of which supply deals have been made public for five. These vaccines are being developed by AstraZeneca, Gamaleya/Sputnik, Moderna, Pfizer and Sinovac. Data on vaccine supply and production has been provided by Airfinity, the data and science analytics company https://www.airfinity.com/

Oxfam calculated the combined production capacity of these five vaccine candidates at 5.94 billion doses, enough for 2.97 billion people given that all five future vaccines will or are highly likely to require two doses. Supply deals have already been agreed for 5.303 billion doses, of which 2.728 billion (51 percent) have been bought by developed countries including the UK, US, Australia, Hong Kong & Macau, Japan, Switzerland and Israel, as well as the European Union. The remaining 2.575 billion doses have been bought by or promised to developing countries including India, Bangladesh, China, Brazil, Indonesia and Mexico among others. Included within the supply for developing countries are the 300 million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine pledged to the Covax Advanced Market Commitment (AMC), the vaccine pooling mechanism. To avoid double counting we have assumed the recent additional agreement between the AMC and the Serum Institute of India to ‘accelerate’ the production of 100 million AstraZeneca or Novavax vaccines is already captured within those companies’ respective supply deals with the Serum Institute.

The calculation for the UK is based on Airfinity’s data and includes all of the UK’s published vaccine deals. The calculation for Bangladesh is based on the country’s share of the doses currently available under the Covax AMC, and would be the same for all 92 AMC eligible countries if the vaccine is distributed evenly.

The People’s Vaccine Alliance is a coalition of organisations and activists united under a common aim of campaigning for a ‘people’s vaccine’ for COVID-19 that is based on shared knowledge and is freely available to everyone everywhere. The alliance is calling on pharmaceutical corporations to share all vaccine knowledge with other companies and research institutions, including through the COVID-19 Technology Access Pool (C-TAP).

The IMF’s latest World Economic Outlook from June 2020 projected the cumulative loss to the global economy for 2020 and 2021 at $12 trillion. Using data provided by the Access to Covid-19 Tools (ACT) Accelerator, Oxfam has calculated that the estimated cost to research, make, procure and distribute a vaccine to everyone on the planet could cost $70.6 billion. Therefore, the cost of providing a vaccine for everyone on Earth is equivalent to 0.59% of cost of COVID-19 to the global economy.

New Zealand must scale up climate ambition to meet zero emissions by 2030 – Oxfam report

September 16, 2020

Oxfam New Zealand is publishing a ground-breaking report on New Zealand’s contribution to global climate action this week.

A Fair 2030 Target for Aotearoa shows the stark discrepancy between what New Zealand is currently doing and what it should be doing, to meet its commitments under the Paris Agreement and to stand with our Pacific neighbours and others on the frontlines of climate breakdown.

The report highlights how New Zealand must enhance its 2030 target under the Paris Agreement and increase climate finance for developing countries as a critical part of meeting our fair share of the global effort to limit warming to 1.5 degrees.

Oxfam New Zealand Campaigns Lead Alex Johnston said: “What’s clear is that New Zealand is not doing its fair share to keep global heating within 1.5 degrees. Our neighbours in the Pacific know all too well that the impacts of climate change are not distributed equally – nor should the responsibility for tackling it. As a well-off, industrialised nation New Zealand has a responsibility to do more than the global average to reduce emissions.

“Our fair share equates to getting emissions to zero by 2030. If we can’t manage that domestically, we must support frontline countries who would be forced to carry our load. We can do this by greatly increasing climate finance.”

Through the Zero Carbon Act incorporating the Paris Agreement’s principles, there is a legal obligation for New Zealand to consider equity and how the burden of reducing emissions is shared between different countries – including our relative wealth, and historic pollution compared to developing countries.

According to the report, if every country were to share the effort to keep to 1.5 degrees based purely on their population when the Paris Agreement was signed, New Zealand would still need to reduce emissions by 80% from 1990 levels by 2030.

When considering historical responsibility, New Zealand’s fair share of global efforts to reach 1.5 degrees would increase to reductions of at least 99% by 2030. Our current target is equivalent to an 11% reduction.

Johnston said before the next major global milestone on climate action, COP26 next year, we must increase our 2030 target by our maximum possible ambition, and make up the gap between what we can do domestically and what our fair share is through greatly enhancing the climate finance we give to developing countries to reduce their emissions and adapt to climate breakdown.

“As we look to recover from the pandemic and its effects on communities, now is the moment to reset the barometer of action and look to where we are heading. Our current pathway is miles off a safe climate future. If Aotearoa is to be a good Pacific neighbour, we need to aim for the best chance of staying to 1.5 degrees, and to pull our weight to get there.”

-ends-

For more information or to arrange an interview please contact:

Kelsey-Rae Taylor | [email protected] | +64 21 298 9854

Notes to editors:

Oxfam New Zealand’s report A Fair 2030 Target for Aotearoa is available to download here

New Zealand’s current Nationally Determined Contribution under the Paris Agreement sets a 2030 emissions reduction target of 30% below 2005 levels, equivalent to 11% below 1990 levels. This international target is distinct from the targets set under the Zero Carbon Act.
The Climate Commission has been asked by the Minister of Climate Change to advise on the consistency of New Zealand’s current Paris Agreement 2030 target with global efforts to keep to 1.5 degrees, ahead of the next global climate talks, COP26, to be held in Glasgow next year.
Oxfam and a dozen more of New Zealand’s leading international aid agencies launched a joint campaign in July at www.bighearts.org.nz, calling for New Zealand to dramatically increase its aid funding and climate finance for poorer countries.

A Fair 2030 Target for Aotearoa Report

September 16, 2020

New Zealand should greatly enhance its 2030 target under the Paris Agreement on the basis of equity. Climate finance for developing countries must play a critical part in meeting our fair share of the global effort to limit warming to 1.5ºC.

Aotearoa New Zealand’s current Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) of 11% off 1990 levels by 2030 falls short of its equitable contribution to the global effort to limit warming to 1.5ºC.

International and New Zealand law both require the Government to consider equity in setting emissions budgets and targets, and therefore to differentiate New Zealand’s emissions reductions.

Several competing equity models exist. When each model is based on a trajectory that limits warming to 1.5ºC, with no or limited overshoot, these models suggest that New Zealand’s fair NDC for 2030 would involve emissions reductions ranging from at least 57% off 1990 levels, to cutting emissions by 99%, or even reaching net negative emissions by 2030.

Click here to read ‘A Fair 2030 Target For Aotearoa’ Report

Click here for the supporting calculations

Pandemic Exposes the Obscenity of our Economy: 3 Ways We Got Here and 4 Ways We Can Get Back on Track

September 10, 2020

Released today, Oxfam’s report – Power, Profits and the Pandemic – reveals how global corporate behaviour has not only made the economic impacts of the coronavirus pandemic worse, but has also shielded many of these corporations from the economic fallout felt by the rest of us. Throughout the disaster, they have continued to profit and pass these gains on to their mostly wealthy shareholders.

Oxfam found that 32 of the world’s most profitable corporations are together expected to rake in nearly NZ$165 billion more in 2020 than the average of the four previous years. These corporations are household names including Visa, Procter & Gamble, Nestle, Johnson & Johnson, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, and Apple.

This isn’t right. How have we managed to build a global economy that puts more and more wealth in the control of a handful of people, while billions of other people suffer? As of this writing, more than 800,000 people have died from Covid-19. Approximately 400 million people, mostly women, have lost their jobs, which impacts entire families. Some estimates have up to 500 million people being pushed into extreme poverty while the pandemic rages on. Meanwhile, the 25 wealthiest billionaires – some of the largest shareholders in the above-mentioned corporations – have increased their wealth by a staggering NZ$340 billion between mid-March and late-May alone.

How did we get here?

1) Corporations made trillions for the few, almost nothing for the many.

Between 2010 and 2019, the companies listed on the S&P 500 Index paid a total of NZ$13.7 trillion to their shareholders – approximately 90% of their profits over that time. While these corporations could have been investing in the well-being of their workers and climate-friendly technologies, they were channelling the vast majority of their profits back into the hands of a small number of already wealthy individuals. If they had been investing more in their businesses, they would have been more resilient in the face of this crisis. They would have had cash on hand to protect their workers, prevent lay-offs, and avoid costly public bail-outs when the coronavirus pandemic hit.

2) Governments have helped, corporations have not.

The pandemic has highlighted the crucial role our governments play in providing for all people, especially in times of crisis. Yet, many of the largest global corporations have done very little to help. They stand to make NZ$165 billion more during 2020 than in the past four years, and some of their largest shareholders increased their collective wealth by an unfathomable NZ$340 billion during the height of the pandemic. Despite this windfall, these companies’ donations to Covid-19 relief have amounted to less than 0.5% of their 2019 profits. In stark contrast, 94% of their 2020 profits have gone back to their already wealthy shareholders.

3) Corporations prioritised their profits over their own people.

Oxfam has found that more than 400 corporations have continued to make shareholder pay-outs and executive compensation despite laying-off workers and receiving government bail-outs. These companies have shifted costs and risks down their supply chains, impacting workers in vulnerable situations.

This situation is not right

It is the result of a broken economy that works for the few, not the many and puts the wealth of a small number of people before the well-being of our planet and billions of people across the world. But we created this economy — we can fix it. We can reprogramme the economy to put people and the planet at the centre, protect workers in the most vulnerable situations, share profits fairly, and ground it in democracy. The way to do this is by focusing on the four Ps: purpose, people, profits and power.

1) Purpose

We should re-examine the purpose of corporations. A corporation’s ‘reason for existence’ is a policy choice, not an inevitability. Corporations should be redefined to ensure that they exist not only to compensate shareholders, but also to care for workers, consumers, and their communities. The objectives of corporations and director’s duties should include non-financial aims, such as improving social and environmental conditions.

2) People

We should put people at the centre of business models, and insist that corporations invest in decent jobs, protect and promote their workers’ human rights, and address human rights risks, and support efforts for universal social protection.

3) Profits

We should ensure that all stakeholders get a fair share of the profits that corporations create. For example, dividends paid out to shareholders should be capped, and only paid out after corporations are paying a living wage to all their workers and investing in achieving carbon neutrality. These measures should also be extended through corporations’ supply chains, which could have a massive impact on people across the entire world.

4) Power

We should change the rules that currently allow global corporations and their shareholders to have vast amounts of power to protect their own interests. This is possible through increased transparency, and more inclusive and equitable governance structures. Governments should require corporations to limit CEO-to-worker wage gaps, disclose human rights risks, enforce human rights due diligence, and publish corporate carbon footprints. Collective bargaining and robust grievance mechanisms should be enforced. And corporations should prioritise suppliers that give greater voice, power and value to workers and farmers.

We can fix this

As a first step, we propose a World War II-style Covid-19 Pandemic Profits Tax to make sure these corporations do their bit to help us all during this global disaster. Oxfam estimates that the excess profits of these 32 global corporations could raise an estimated NZ$157 billion — enough to pay for Covid-19 testing and vaccines for every single individual on the planet. After that, there would still be plenty left over to invest in supporting small and medium-sized enterprises, protecting workers, and providing robust health services for all.

The coronavirus pandemic has shown us how connected we are as a global human family. Global corporations have grown and benefitted from these connections for centuries, but they have not contributed to the global public good in the way that they should. In fact, in many cases, they have done harm. The excess profits the largest corporations are making through a time of great suffering for millions of people across the world exposes the obscenity of the way our global economy has been built. We need to fix this now so that all people, everywhere, can enjoy the basic dignities of life, on a planet that thrives.

To read the report in full click here