Warming up to a paradigm change

India can and must be a leader in responding, both at home and internationally. Domestic emissions of carbon, especially soot, are an easy target.

The strategies for limiting black carbon emissions are straightforward: tackle biomass-based cooking more seriously, allocate more funding for 8220;smokeless chulhas8221; and ensure that they are suitable for local cooking needs, and support distribution of LPG in rural areas.

Moving to fossil fuel, we must crack down on fuel adulteration and provide incentives for engine tuning. We must also deliver on the promise for rural electrification to cut down the use of diesel generators and encourage the use of CNG for buses and cabs.

International strategies are trickier. On the one hand, India is a developing country, starting to ramp up its fossil-fuel use and emissions after the richer countries have contributed to the problem for decades. It has inherited problems it neither created nor benefited from creating. On the other hand, it is one of the world8217;s largest economies and, along with China, the future centre of economic activity 8212; and emissions.

India has two choices: stubbornly claim its right to unfettered emissions in its economic transition, or acknowledge that the world has changed and that development today might require different strategies than it did in the last century.

India has always sought differentiated treatment in any international agreements to limit emissions. It currently has no reduction obligations and can earn credit under the Clean Development Mechanism CDM for the emissions it does forgo.

There are three reasons to reconsider this stance and to consider committing to phased limits on emissions growth. India should not have to overpay for past emissions, but it also should not underpay for its current and future emissions.

First, full exemption from emissions controls is not sustainable. The negotiations over emissions controls look like a classic war of attrition, with stubborn adherence to positions while the costs of stalling steadily increase. Climate change will affect India at least as much as the developed nations that it blames for the problem. It is not as if climate change gives India special treatment.

Second, energy efficiency 8212; one component of limiting emissions 8212; is not necessarily incompatible with rapid growth. One indicator is China8217;s energy intensity of GDP measured as BTU per dollar of GDP decreased by 4.5 per cent annually in the 1980s and nearly 6 per cent annually over the 1990s, according to the US Energy Information Administration. India, too, has the domestic scientific and technical capacity to compete in the growing international market for green technology.

Third, the demonstration value of emissions controls would short-circuit many of the current international cries of 8220;but they need to stop polluting before we do.8221; India is home to a fifth of the world8217;s population and many of the world8217;s poorest. If it commits to emissions reductions, others have few excuses. It can play the leadership role.

There is a saying, 8220;Death waits for no man.8221; Neither does climate change. We must move away from the past paradigm.

Regular columnist N.K. Singh and Dr. Jessica S. Wallack, a professor of economics at University of California, are collaborating on a book on infrastructure reforms on India. Essays based on their research will appear every fortnight.