Compared to these countries the emissions by developing countries like Nepal is negligible. It is only fair that the countries with most emissions through the use of fossil fuels should take the necessary steps to mitigate the harmful effects of climate change and global warming that have raised the temperature quite ominously on this planet. The effects could be the melting polar caps and rising sea level leading to the inundation of many islands and sea shores. The mountain ecology would also face the consequences of melting glaciers as is happening in Nepal, with the threat of glacial lake outburst floods, which would mean heavy loss of life, settlements and infrastructure. Nepal being an impoverished country does not have the sufficient resources to deal with these threats. and, thus, requires funds. But, as the the rich industrilised countries are responsible for the problem, they should have come up with action plans funded totally by them to tackle climate change instead of offering loans for it to poor nations. Accepting such a loan, howsoever small it may be, would add more to the woes of the poor countries.
Global warming and climate change are not only the problems of any particular country, it is a global problem. The government, undoubtedly, needs money to fight climate change, but instead of taking the $ 36 million loan it should have lobbied for grants. That the government took the loan despite criticism from many quarters, including the respected parliamentarians is indeed very disconcerting. Taking a loan would only make us more vulnerable, as Nepal would have to take up the uncalled for burden of servicing the debt.
The Ministry of Environment had taken the loan after much criticism from the civil society as well. One wonders if the argument that loans are more effective than grants might be true under different circumstances, but not this instance of fighting global warming and climate change. The parliamentarians and civil society are indeed right for putting the blame for climate change and global warming entirely on the developed countries. Therefore, the developed countries should support the fight against climate change and global warming. As most of the developing countries do not have the sufficient resources for the purpose, it would be appropriate for the developed countries to provide the required resources and funds to do so. It is alright to have funds to build resilience to climate-related hazards through private sector involvement, but it is not appropriate to argue that it was necessary to take loans for the purpose. The strategy to mitigate climate change effects being a global one, it sounds out of place for the developed countries to put the carrot in front in the form of loans. It is necessary for the government to rethink its decision on the climate change loan. Read the full report here.
Source: The Himalayan Times.
