By 2050, 200 million people will need humanitarian assistance due to climate-related disasters. So says the Ifrc, the world's largest humanitarian organisation.
It has been just a few weeks since Hurricane Dorian brought the Bahamas to its knees, destroying 13,000 homes and leaving a toll of 54 dead and 1,500 missing. At the end of August 2017, it was Texas's turn, devastated by Hurricane Harvey. In the spring of that same year, flooding in Peru had affected more than 1.2 million people, leaving 107 dead. These natural disasters have one thing in common: in every case, scientific studies have directly linked them to ongoing climate change. The humanitarian cost of events such as these is already extremely high, but in the coming years it risks rising out of all proportion. The alarm is being raised by the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (Ifrc), the world's largest humanitarian organisation, in a report with an eloquent title: The cost of doing nothing.
Every year throughout the past decade, around 206 million individuals have suffered the consequences of floods, storms, droughts and wildfires. Setting aside those with an income above 10 dollars a day — and who therefore fall within the more affluent segment of humanity — it can be estimated that around 108 million have needed assistance from international humanitarian organisations. The resources available are already far from sufficient: between 3.5 and 12 billion dollars a year would be required.
But if global temperatures continue to rise, with all that this entails, what should we expect in the near future? The report offers an answer by modelling several scenarios. According to the most pessimistic one, as early as 2030 there will be 150 million people in a state of humanitarian emergency, and assisting them will require up to 20 billion dollars a year. By 2050, the figure will reach 200 million people every year.
Enormous figures, which could nonetheless prove inevitably incomplete, because they take into account only extreme weather events (and not, for example, epidemics and conflicts) and immediate assistance provided by international humanitarian organisations, leaving aside the long-term recovery process. Also excluded are the costs borne by governments, healthcare systems, insurance companies and so on.
We cannot prevent cyclones, storms and heatwaves from occurring, the Ifrc study makes clear, but that does not mean we should consider ourselves powerless. "Hunger, collapsed buildings and deaths are not 'natural disasters'. On the contrary, they represent our failure, as a global community, to prepare for extreme climate events and to adapt to a changing climate. Resilient and well-equipped societies regularly face extreme weather events with the fewest possible deaths and the least damage to property. For example, while a serious drought is always a challenge, in a resilient society even the most extreme drought does not lead to hunger, let alone famine. In most cases, people who have access to adequate support — whether from family and friends, financial instruments or social protection systems — manage to recover quickly from disasters," the report states.
In short, there is still time to act, on three different fronts. The first is resilience: buildings and infrastructure must be designed with future climate disruptions already in mind and, in the meantime, natural ecosystems — which have proven capable of containing these risks — must be protected and restored.
Read also: To tackle climate change we need to plant a trillion trees
Despite all human efforts, extreme weather events will occur regardless. This is why investment is needed in public awareness, in early warning systems and in response policies. The third priority is reconstruction, which should not be understood solely in emergency terms. A more inclusive socio-economic system is needed — one that allows even the most vulnerable sections of the population to regain a decent standard of living over the long term.
Experts consulted by the Ifrc argue that, by immediately deploying a mix of adaptation and resilience measures, the number of people requiring international humanitarian assistance could be reduced to 68 million by 2030 and even to 10 million by 2050 — 90 per cent less than today — avoiding an enormous burden of human suffering.