A
ND so this is Christmas,
and what have we done?
A year ago, I was writing a
preview of 2021, which was shaping
up to be pivotal for our fractious
relationship with the environment.
The UN was getting ready to
launch not one, but two decades:
one on ecological restoration
and one on ocean science for
sustainable development. The
world was preparing to get to
work on a new set of biodiversity
targets. And the headline act, of
course, was the COP26 climate
summit in Glasgow in November.
I spent a head-spinning week at
COP26 and still have very mixed
feelings about its outcome. There
were genuine successes – not least
an agreement to renegotiate
targets on an annual rather than
five-yearly basis – but also some
glaring failures. The worst of these
was the continuing and shamefulW
HAT with everything
that has happened
this year, I have found
myself at home watching the box
more often than usual. That was
especially true recently when I was
laid up in bed for three weeks with
covid-19. I spent my time largely
watching my favourite genre
of film: science fiction. This has
made me realise how surprisingly
often my main passion – plants –
plays a vital role in the plot of
such films. And so, as 2021 draws
to an end, I offer you my essential
analysis of the botanical accuracy
of a selection of sci-fi films.
Sometimes, the science is OK.
In 2015’s The Martian, botanist-
turned-astronaut Mark Watney
survives being marooned on the
Red Planet by growing his ownfailure by high-income countries
to honour pledges to the poorest
nations on compensation for
the loss and damage they have
incurred due to climate change.
Indigenous people also continue
to be marginalised and exploited
even though their lands provide
the world with priceless ecosystem
services (which don’t come for
free, counter to the wisdom of
the classical economics that has
done so much to get us into this
mess). They and their culturesare literally keeping the world
liveable. We owe them the earth.
This is an aspect of the climate
change story that I was woefully
ignorant of before Glasgow.
Low-income countries bear
the least responsibility for theclimate crisis, but shoulder the
greatest burden. Richer nations
got that way through industries
that pump greenhouse gases into
the atmosphere while pillaging
the poorer nations’ natural
resources. COP26’s failure to
rectify these historical injustices
was, I fear, a historic mistake.
The parallels with covid-19 –
which I also spent much of 2021
covering – are depressingly clear.
Rich countries cornered vaccines
and ignored the warnings of the
World Health Organization that
nobody is safe until everybody
is safe. The threat of the omicron
variant reveals the self-destructive
folly of pandemic nationalism.
You could say the same about
climate nationalism. There can
be no global solution without
global justice, but that is nowhere
to be seen. Trust is already an issue
that threatens the legitimacy
of international efforts to curb
climate change.
Experts say that the continued
failure of Western governments
to honour their promises also
opens the door to legal action
to force them to do so, or even to
extract reparations. The 2015 Paris
Agreement explicitly ruled this
out, but it is an open question how
much longer this red line can hold
in the face of rising frustration
and anger. I am now woke to those
injustices. (I use “woke” advisedly
and think progressives should
reclaim it as a badge of honour.)
Looking forwards to 2022,
the highlight ought to be the
completion of the long-delayed
new framework for biodiversity.
The talks began last year and were
due to resume next month, but
have been postponed because of
the difficulties posed by omicron.
By this time next year, we may
well have run out of Greek letters
with which to name coronavirus
variants and be bemoaning the
failure of COP27. What have we
done, indeed. ❚“ I spent a head-spinning
week at the COP26
summit and still have
very mixed feelings
about its outcome”Graham Lawton is a staff writer
at New Scientist. Follow him
@ GrahamLawtonJames Wong is a botanist
and science writer. Follow
him @ botanygeek34 | New Scientist | 18/25 December 2021