orld leaders are meeting in Dubai to discuss the pathways to keep global warming below 1.5°C. Various lobbies are active. A never-ending blame game has reached its peak. Industrialists accuse the agriculture sector (dairy and meat specifically) of being the biggest emitter; therefore reduction in the greenhouse gas emissions in agriculture sector are necessary to achieve any emissions reduction target.

Developing and least-developed economies are happy because, at the very outset of the COP 28, the operationalisation of the Loss and Damage Fund, a longstanding demand of these economies, was granted. To safeguard the L&D Fund deal, they are facing pressure from friends from developed economies and from lobbies within their territories to give in on other counts.

While both developed and developing economies are willing to reduce their current emissions level, including in the agriculture sector, oil-producing countries are threatening to veto any agreement if an ambitious target for fossil fuel phasing out is reached. These countries are more inclined to introducing carbon-capturing technologies.

Pakistan, which has a negligible contribution to global GHG emissions (less than 1 percent), has also agreed to work to reduce its emissions. According to the 2021 National Determined Contributions report, the energy sector is the largest GHG emitter in Pakistan, followed by agriculture and industries.

Food poverty in Pakistan is rising due to inflation and reduced production due to calamities such as floods, untimely torrential rain and drought in some parts of the country. Currently, as per the State of Food Security and Nutrition Report 2022, 19 percent of the population is malnourished. Also, 83 percent of the population can’t afford healthy diet. The major energy source for most people in Pakistan is wheat, which contributes 50-70 percent of the caloric needs depending on which segment of the society one belongs to. It’s important to mention that wheat consumes more than 70 percent of the available water during the Rabi season.

To find a level playing field, governments representing economies such as Pakistan need to ask whether they can afford a reduction in their agricultural and industrial output in the short to medium run without compromising on their development and food security needs. According to recent research, most poor countries cannot achieve SDG 1 and SDG 2 if they reduce their industrial output or agricultural production decreases.

Governments of economies such as Pakistan need to ask whether they can afford a reduction in their agricultural and industrial output in the short to medium run without compromising on their development and food security needs. 

Therefore, it is crucial for developing economies to enhance production by efficient use of available resources without adding to GHG emissions. All the countries that have achieved a significant reduction in poverty during the recent decades have done so by increasing their agricultural and industrial production.

The developing countries share a responsibility to reduce this existential threat to humanity, but the question is how can they contribute? The governments of agrarian economies should not forget that the agriculture sector is not only an emitter, as has been argued in the current and past negotiations. Plants absorb atmospheric CO₂, roughly 25 percent, during the photosynthesis process. This absorption of CO₂ is not accounted for in the global accounting system. However, this argument is gaining strength and appears as a window for developing economies to earn carbon credits and a bigger share in global carbon markets.

As per recent research by the International Institute for Environment and Development, UK, 439 million small farmers, the vast majority hailing from developing and least developed countries, are investing $368 billion annually for adaptation to climate actions dwarfing the $230 million pledged by the governments to the Adaptation Fund in COP 27 in Sharm el-Sheikh in 2022. The contribution of small farmers mentioned above is a sheer under estimation of their investment for adaptation because it does not factor in labour cost which is nearly a third (107 days on average) days in a year.

Thus, to be fair to people with low incomes globally, countries need to recognise the needs of people experiencing poverty and how these can be met under a new arrangement to curtail the global rise in temperature to 1.5°C. Be it SDG 1 or SDG 2, it can only be achieved provided that

a) technology transfer from developed economies to developing economies picks up; and b). financing pledged in such meetings materialises.

Less developed countries, on the other hand, with enhanced consumption, can help in sustaining production locally and globally, spinning the wheel of the industries as well as the agriculture sector. The cost to the world for reducing extreme poverty will not be much. According to another study published in Nature in November this year, the global emissions increase associated with alleviating extreme poverty will be 2.37 gigatons of CO₂ equivalent annually, or 4.9 per cent of the global emissions level of 2019.

The writer is associated with the Sustainable Development Policy Institute. The views expressed by him do not necessarily reflect SDPI’s official stance.