The world’s conversations about climate change fundamentally have shifted during the last few years. We have moved beyond old debates around whether climate change is happening (hint: it is) to more constructive discussions about addressing it. That’s excellent news, even if we spent decades getting here. In the sudden rush to address climate change - or at least look as if we are - we have seen many companies, industry groups and countries stake out leadership positions. Many have made so-called "net zero" climate pledges, complete with fancy logos and bold-sounding names. Making and fulfilling pledges is a crucial aspect of climate leadership, but it’s only a first step. As my Project Drawdown colleague, Jamie Alexander, points out in a recent Fast Company article: Corporate emissions reductions pledges - however ambitious they may be for a particular company - completely miss the deeper issues that the climate crisis demands we grapple with, and only play at the edges of the revolutionary change we need. She calls for companies to adopt more robust climate pledges and targets, as well as push for better climate policy, support stronger climate action in the community and be transformative climate leaders. And she’s right. As a cornerstone of climate leadership, the weakness of today’s pledges is particularly troubling. Without clear, robust and scientifically sound goals, it is impossible to raise climate action to the level Earth needs. Today it seems "net zero" pledges are all the rage. And in the lead-up to the next big climate conference - the COP26 meeting in Glasgow - we will see even more politicians, CEOs and celebrities make net-zero pledges. Unfortunately, net-zero commitments - which once seemed a good idea - have become so distorted and abused they are largely meaningless. Sadly, the net-zero concept has been misused by bad or indifferent actors, allowing them to make bold-sounding climate pledges... |