Do smaller countries' climate efforts matter when they produce little pollution?

Some leaders argue that their country's small share of global pollution, like less than 1%, means they shouldn't have to make difficult changes to reduce emissions. For example, the former UK prime minister, Rishi Sunak, questioned why British citizens should make more sacrifices when the UK's share of emissions is so low. This argument has been used by leaders in countries like Australia and Germany to avoid making stronger commitments to cut pollution.

Leaders in Italy and Germany have also pointed to their country's or the EU's small percentage of global emissions to justify weaker climate targets. Even former UK prime minister Tony Blair suggested the UK should abandon clean energy goals, using the UK's 1% share as a reason.

These arguments are often made while comparing their country's emissions to larger polluters like the US, China, and India, which together produce more than half of the world's pollution. Some politicians claim that even if their country became completely 'climate neutral' tomorrow, it would not prevent any natural disasters, like the heatwaves seen in Europe.

However, climate scientists disagree with this view. They point out that these wealthy countries have a much larger historical contribution to global warming. Additionally, these nations have more financial resources to invest in reducing pollution. When looking at emissions per person, European countries have contributed significantly more than the global average over time.

Experts like Professor Piers Forster argue that this comparison is misleading. He compares it to wealthy individuals not paying their fair share of taxes. He explains that future warming depends on future emissions, so every bit of carbon dioxide avoided will help improve conditions for future generations. Even though countries like the US, China, and India produce over 5% of fossil fuel emissions, the remaining countries, despite producing less individually, together account for nearly half of the world's yearly emissions.

This argument about small emission shares has been used to delay climate action, especially by nationalist and populist parties in Europe. Recent analysis shows that politicians in countries producing less than 2% of global CO2 emissions have made hundreds of claims in newspapers to justify weakening climate policies. For example, an editorial in a British newspaper suggested that Britain, contributing about 1% of global emissions, could do little to stop climate change.

A poll in Britain found that many people believe countries with very low emission shares should stop trying to reduce them, with strong support for this view among supporters of the Reform UK party. The party's leader has called it 'mindless' for a country producing less than 1% of global CO2 to harm its own economy. However, climate scientists stress that the climate crisis is a global problem requiring action from all countries, especially those with a large historical responsibility like the UK. They emphasize that the UK is responsible for 100% of its own emissions and has the chance to lead by example in reducing them.