Violating Rights Before Your Eyes: Climate Change and the Effect on Human Rights

* I’d like to extend my thanks to the wonderful and inspiring Dana Perez and Christina Pao in helping me with the research for this article (which itself will help to create a podcast unrelated to this blog). Your energy, passion and drive to help people who are oppressed and struggling worldwide has helped reinvigorate my own faith in the campaigns that we are all involved with.

I write this during a period of unprecedented global upheaval. Since it first appeared in Wuhan, China, the novel corona virus (COVID-19) has spread like wildfire. It has killed roughly 13 thousand as of writing, infected countless more and put an incredible strain on health services in both the developed and developing worlds.

The constant, if unconscious, factor echoing through our lives. Photo by cottonbro on

It could be argued, as British journalist George Monbiot did so recently in the international edition of the Guardian, that this is nature’s wake-up call to wealthy nations. It has disabused us of the notion that we have successfully insulated ourselves against all natural hazards, and that we can continue to seal ourselves in a bubble of consumerism, distraction and denial. To help counteract increasing infection rates, localities such as New York State, California, Australia, the United Kingdom and Italy have implemented lock downs of varying severity. It goes without saying that these measures have impacted the human rights that most of us take for granted, such as the right to freedom of movement and association. Many of these have not required aggressive enforcement and application by officers of the law. Nonetheless, there have also been other measures, both legislated and suggested, such as the UK law that gives police greater powers to hold in custody and force biological samples from those they believe to be infected and the reported proposal from the US Department of Justice suspending the right to a trial in front of a judge.

With such an understandable focus on this crisis, it can be easy to be caught up in the realities of our present and forget the imperatives of our future. In this vein, there has been a crisis that science has been warning us about for quite some time. It will also ultimately have a bigger effect on both human survival as well as human rights. This crisis is the one yet to be realized by climate change.

COVID-19 should not be made light of. Some have downplayed it’s significance down to being nothing more than fights over toilet paper on the nightly news, and the moral scalding that they believe it warrants. This spectacle is unedifying, but the ripple effects the virus is causing are undeniable. The deaths caused by it alone are tragic, but the potential collapse of health systems worldwide, particularly in the developing world, and the mass unemployment generated by it are a real concern.

However, the potential for mass migration caused by famine and flooding, extreme weather, increases in disease and premature death spanning generations are a real possibility should we not learn the lessons of this crisis, and listen to the experts in the field. If we don’t, the human rights that we hope the world has temporarily lost during this crisis will be a drop in a bucket compared to what will disappear if the battle to save our environment is not won.

Why Is Climate Change Even a Human Rights Issue?

The move to recognize climate change as a human rights issue has been crystallized through two particular international legal decisions concerning the link between human rights and climate change. The first was the ruling by the Dutch Supreme Court in December 2019 mandating that the government of that country was required to cut greenhouse emissions by 25% from 1990 levels by the end of 2020. The suit, which was filed by the environmental group, Urgenda, was argued from the perspective that failure to halt climate change was an abrogation of Holland’s responsibilities under the European Convention on Human Rights.

The second decision concerned the Teitiota family from the South Pacific island of Kiribati, and their application for protection from New Zealand in 2013 in the face of his home becoming ‘uninhabitable’ due to crop failures and overcrowding. After being rejected by that country, they appealed to the United Nations to help overturn that decision. While not supporting the Teitiota family’s case specifically, the wording of the UN’s final verdict made it possible for asylum seekers to seek protection based on human rights violations inflicted by climate change.

While these two decisions have brought some recognition to climate change as a human rights issue, academic research has also shown that human rights discourses have also been becoming more prescient at the intergovernmental level when discussing climate change mitigation. Climate justice rhetoric, of which the relationship between climate change and human rights is a key plank, has been found to have increased overall during the period spanning 2009 to 2016, with multiple references visible in the Paris Climate Agreement. In particular, references to human rights in these discussions increased from 2009 to 2015, with a peak being achieved in 2014. There was a drop off post 2016, but the prevalence of this terminology today is still considerably greater than that observed in 2009.

So why is climate change not recognized as a human rights issue in globally available mass media and in discussions around the water cooler? Perhaps it is because that when those from the global north, English speaking nations and developed countries think about human rights, there may be a tendency to consider this concept in terms of what are considered first generation human rights. These are what are referred to civil and political rights, and revolve around freedom of speech and association, political suffrage, the right to a fair trial and legal representation. Indeed, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, a document viewed by the lay person as embracing of human rights of all stripes, was largely written by Western and liberal interests. In keeping with this, the rights put forth could be perceived as favoring what are more libertarian concerns. What is less known is that the concept of universal human rights also entail what are known as economic, social and cultural rights. These rights differ from the first generation ones in that they guarantee more survival based rights, such as the right to food, water, education, health and economic self determination. Their establishment was a reaction to the ideological split of the Cold War, and the of more pressing material concerns of 3rd world nations. The belief was, and is, that these rights run parallel to civil and political rights. Summed up, the crux of the argument for their enshrinement in international law was that there was no point in having freedom of speech or voting rights if you didn’t even have the chance to eat, drink water, have a roof over your head or get an education. It is at this juncture that we should note that while it is hard to know what effect climate change will have on first generation human rights, they will definitely affect economic, social and cultural rights.

It also should be recognized that when looking at this issue, there is an underlying assumption possessed by some that all nations will be ravaged equally under the worst outcomes of climate change. Indeed, much of the scientific viewpoint can tend towards a viewpoint of ‘egalitarian suffering’. While all nations will experience blowback of some type, the truth is that the developing world and the global South are more likely to be disadvantaged sooner and to a greater degree by this phenomenon in areas that directly impinge upon the economic, social and cultural rights I have just outlined. This may be the reason that non-Annex I Kyoto Protocol nations (i.e. developing nations) were more likely to discuss climate change in terms of a climate justice paradigm of which human rights and economics are a vital component.

With this in mind, I will now largely focus on areas where climate change has and will continue to wreak havoc in the developing South and Third World, although I will also discuss the recent Australian bush fires as well. My aim is to challenge assumptions of what human rights are, and how climate change influenced misery will mostly be distributed.

What Types of Human Rights Violations Will Be Caused by Climate Change?

Photo by Markus Spiske on

As intimated in the previous section, climate change will have a demonstrable effect on multiple human rights that have been recognized by international bodies. I will now flesh out this contention, and go over some of the specific outcomes borne of climate change, such as extreme weather events playing out over a finite time frame and longer term and progressive weather trends. I will also briefly look at some of the forced migration that has been, and will be, realized because of the climate crisis. Let’s start this analysis by looking at extreme weather events such as bush fires, flood and typhoons.

Concurrent Human Rights Violations Caused by Extreme Weather Events Over a Finite Time Frame (i.e. Bushfires, Floods and Typhoons):

Specific Rights Affected:
〇 The Right to Life (Article 6 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights/Article 3 Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948)
〇 Right to Adequate Food, Housing and Clothing (Article 11 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 1966/Article 25 Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948)
〇 The Right to Water: (Article 24, Clause 2c Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989 Re: combating disease and malnutrition/ Article 14 clause 2h Convention on Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women 1979 Re: Role of Women in Rural Areas/Comment No. 15 OHCHR The Right to Water Re: Prerequisite for All other Human Rights)
〇  The Right to the Highest Standard of Mental and Physical Health (Article 12 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 1966/Article 25 Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948)

While according to Amnesty International UK, 26.4 million people are internally displaced yearly due to weather related disasters since 2008, I will use the example of three specific countries to show how localized and shorter term extreme weather events and natural disasters impact on human rights in more contextual terms. When looking at that number alone, it is easy to lose track of what the statistic of ‘24.6 million’ actually means.

The first example hits very close to home for me as someone born in Australia. The 2019/2020 bush fire season in that country was utterly catastrophic. Burning roughly 6.7 billion hectares of land in New South Wales and Victoria alone and killing roughly 1 billion animals, the latter figure which has been described by experts in the field as an approximate, yet conservative and reasonable, number, Australia’s ecosystems were devastated. The nation witnessed the incineration of a plethora of biodiversity and the loss of food and hiding places for surviving herbivorous animals was appalling. On top of the environmental damage, the human and economic cost was substantial with 33 people dying, 2000 homes lost, a damage bill of around 700 million dollars (AU), and air quality that was deemed at one stage as the most hazardous in the world.

The sheer scale of the fire that Paul Parker and many other volunteer fire fighters confronted resulted in astronomical loss in terms of financial cost, human life and ecosystems lost.

Australia was not alone in exposure to extreme weather events during 2019. Japan, the country I currently call home, saw initial reports of widespread flooding, landslides and water shortages being reported nationwide which evolved into a reality of 85,000 homes being damaged, 300 rivers overflowing, 25,000 hectares of land being flooded and ultimately 91 innocent souls losing their lives in the wake of Typhoon Hagibis. Initially predicted to be one of the most powerful storms on record, Hagibis was ironically named after the Tagalog word for ‘speed’, yet didn’t enter the PAR (Phillipine Area of Responsbility), thus sparing it of damage from this storm.

While the aforementioned Typhoon Hagibis didn’t affect the Philippines as much as it could, it’s sparing of that country is not an indication of the frequency of which it, and wider South East Asia, is ravaged by tropical storms. This is illustrated by the fact that PAGASA (Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical, and Astronomical Services Administration) has 4 sets of revolving typhoon names that they use for the average of 20 storms that hit the Philippines each year. According to studies published this year, an average of 5.8 million people were directly impacted each time a cyclone hit the Philippines during the period spanning 1998 to 2018. This in turn rang up an average damage bill of $865 thousand US dollars per incident and leaving a total of 144 million dollars damage throughout this entire period. To put things in perspective, this total of money could be used to buy 7 copies of the Magna Carta or multiple private islands in the American state of Florida. In particular, Typhoon Haiyan in 2013 took the lives of 6,000 people in what was the worst typhoon on record in the Philippines (see video below).

One subjective view of the actual damage than can be wrought through climate changed induced disaster is that of Filipina climate activist Marinel Sumook Ubaldo and her experience with Typhoon Haiyan.

While this is a snapshot of two particular areas, the Philippines and Vietnam, they are not alone in suffering the brunt of natural disasters. Flooding in the Philippines can be added to a procession of similar catastrophes such as the severe droughts in Afghanistan and tropical cyclone Gita in Samoa. Whether these disasters are one off events or part of a consistent trend is no longer a discussion to be had when one considers that the following examples run nearly parallel to 20 years of near consecutive warming.

Photo by Pixabay on

Relationship with the Australian fires: Findings from the Australia Institute public policy think tank states that between 1999 and 2018, the yearly total of days consistent with summer temperatures increased by a total of 30 days on average nation wide. Moreover, according to Emeritus Professor Tom Griffiths from the Research School of Social Sciences at the Australian National University, if one were to remove the variable of climate change from one’s calculations, the chances of 4 consecutive days of 40 degree plus temperatures in Australia is 1 in 16,000. If one is to factor it is in, it is 1 in 6. It is also not unfair to keep this in mind when considering that 2019 was Australia’s hottest year on record, beating the 2nd, 3rd and 4th hottest summers recorded in 2013, 2017 and 2018 respectively, with rainfall 40% lower than usual. The incidences of what are termed as mega fires in Australia has also increased. From 1939 to 2000, there was only one incidence of a fires on the scale witnessed this previous summer. There have been three incidences of these types of fires post 2000.

Relationship with storms in South East Asia: The incidence of extreme weather events observed in the Philippines could be explained by a phenomenon apparent in the period spanning from 1998 to 2018 which showed an increase in the intensity for both low and high precipitation periods consisting of extreme wet and dry seasons. Furthermore, the monsoon season, which traditionally run from June to October, has been lengthened during this period, as has the associated dry season. The effect this extension of the monsoon season may have had is best illustrated by the fact that Vietnam receives up to 25% of it’s precipitation during the wet season and the Philippines 53%.

This is stylized. Real and devastating typhoons are not. Photo by GEORGE DESIPRIS on

While I have used Australia, the Philippines, and Japan to a lesser extent, as examples of the damage that climate change induced extreme weather can inflict, it would be wrong to say that the pain it will distribute will be equal across all geographical areas and sectors of society. The truth is that much of the developing world, which ironically enough are the countries that contribute the least to overall emissions outputs, will suffer the most thanks to food shortages caused by reduced agricultural output. Let’s now take a look at this.

Concurrent Human Rights Violations Caused by Longer Term and Progressive Weather Trends (i.e. Droughts, Longer Summers, Increased Temperatures):

Specific Rights Affected:
〇 The Right to Life (Article 6 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights/Article 3 Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948)
〇 Right to Adequate Food, Housing and Clothing (Article 11 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 1966/Article 25 Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948)
〇 The Right to Water: (Article 24, Clause 2c Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989 Re: combating disease and malnutrition/ Article 14 clause 2h Convention on Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women 1979 Re: Role of Women in Rural Areas/Comment No. 15 OHCHR The Right to Water Re: Prerequisite for All other Human Rights)
〇 The Right to the Highest Standard of Mental and Physical Health (Article 12 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 1966/Article 25 Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948)
 The Right to Work (Part 3, Article 6 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 1966)

As documented above, climate change has been predicted to increase the frequency and intensity of natural disasters and extreme weather worldwide. It has also been linked to rising sea levels, changes in rainfall patterns and average temperatures. Each of these phenomena have been posited as leading to food shortages and crises such as decreased agricultural production, greater incidences of disease and depopulation in coastal areas due to rising sea levels.

Food shortages among staple crops:

When discussions of climate change and food come up in the English speaking West, discussion can sometimes flippantly drift to some of the luxury items we will lose. These include coffee due to the emergence of climate induced Roya disease in South America, or French wine due to hotter summers in that part of the world. For those in the developing world, the situation is much grimmer.

One of the great accomplishments in the field of public health over the last six decades has been the marked increase in food production. Much has been done to reduce the proportion of the world’s undernourished population from roughly 980 million in 1990–92 to around 850 million in 2010–12. Nonetheless, approximately 2 billion people are still deficient in one or more micro-nutrients in their daily intake. 160 million children under the age of five years old are too short for their age, and 50 million are underweight for their age. This has created a situation where 3 million child deaths annually can be attributed to malnutrition, which is a total of half of all child mortality world wide. These in themselves are daunting numbers.

While food demand over this time has increased, the effects of climate change on overall crop yield have been stretching back quite some way. Research published in the 2013 issue of Science magazine indicated that in the cropping regions and growing seasons of the majority of nations worldwide, excluding the the United States, temperature trends from 1980 to 2008 exceeded one standard deviation of historic year-to-year variability. Models that link yields of the four largest commodity crops (wheat, maize, soy and rice) to weather indicate that global maize and wheat production declined by 3.8 and 5.5%, respectively, relative to a counterfactual without climate trends with soybeans and rice showing inconclusive results. Considering that the former two of these four staples make up 75% of the world’s nutritional intake, this is concerning. When one also considers reducing bee and plant pollinating insects numbers due to changing summer lengths, increased pestilence (as witnessed recently with the locust plague in East Africa) and disease outbreaks that are linked to warmer temperatures, then we are looking at potentially devastating consequences over decades.

If we are to leave this situation as it stands, the human cost will become stark especially in Sub Saharan Africa. It has been estimated that with every increase in global temperature higher than 2℃, 23% of the population of this area will face increased risk of death and poor health. The reason for this may be associated with findings that indicate this area was particularly vulnerable due to high levels of poverty, low levels of human and physical capital as well as a predominately-poor infrastructure. Predicted effects of climate change included declines in crop yields at a rate of 14% for rice, 22% for wheat and 5% for maize. These shortages would exacerbate poverty among those who rely on these crops for survival. This lack of food can be measured at a rate of 500 calories less per person in 2050. It was also bring about a further increase in the number of malnourished children by over 10 million – a total of 52 million in 2050 in Sub-Saharan Africa alone.

While these effects are focused mainly on Africa, much of these agricultural shortfalls are predicted to be replicated at varying rates across South East Asia, South America and smaller island states.

Rising sea levels/Warming oceans:

This byproduct of climate change is often one that has been recognized by many with a surface level knowledge of the subject but concern for the implications of not stopping it. While their concern is not couched in the language used in this article, even the U.S. Military have recognized the threats posed by climate change, and in particular the flooding of coastal areas, in completing their mission as protector of the nation and as a challenge they must confront.

While we looked at the effects of climate change on staple crops in the previous section as it pertained to food supply, we initially did not take into account the effect that it will have on another food source, this being food produced via aquaculture. If we are to look at this industry, it’s worth pointing out that more than 1 billion of the world’s poor count fish as their main source of protein. 41% of these fish are farmed. However, warming ocean temperatures also have a tendency to encourage habitats polewards thus altering net primary production and food supply. However, there are other consequences to rise in sea levels triggered by climate change.

For more information, refer to ‘Select Regional Players’

South Pacific nations such as Kiribati, Tuvalu and Fiji have been recently pushing for stronger action against climate change despite intransigence from select regional players. Their enthusiasm to fight this battle was well founded. It has been predicted that a projected sea level rise of 5 millimeters per year over the next 100 years will occur based on current trends which will in turn cause increased soil erosion, loss of land, poverty, dislocation of people, increased risk from storm surges, reduced resilience of coastal ecosystems and saltwater intrusion into freshwater resources in small island states of the type that the Teitiota family was seeking refuge from.

Access to Water:

The effects of access to water will differ across regions. In Africa, it has been predicted that it will see an increase in droughts, floods, and other extreme events that will add to stress on water resources, food security, human health, and infrastructure.

Water is a given in many parts of the world. In others, it plays a major role in day to day living. Photo by Dazzle Jam on

Within SE Asia, while actual total water will not be affected, the whole region will be affected by increasing variability in wet and dry seasons. Climate change itself is projected to affect water quality by increases in water temperatures leading to increasing disease. Increases in water temperature of between 2℃ and 5℃ have been shown to result in increase in algae and bacteria in water sources. Decreases in streamflow during low flow periods in rivers will lead to less dilution of pollutants and less drinkable water. When topped off by the introduction of industrial and agricultural byproducts, further problems can be predicted concerning the leeching of these products into drinking and agricultural water supplies. This in turn will require more investment in water treatment. While this can play a role in countering the leeching mentioned previously, it is no silver bullet, as this infrastructure can be damaged in both wet and dry seasons.

Flooding can also bring pollutants into ground water sources, such as wells. When one considers that this region is rapidly urbanizing, the amount of people climate change could potentially impact could be devastating. Extreme weather can create water source toxification after the fact. Excess coliform bacteria was found in ground water after Haiyan due to destruction of sanitation facilities and ground water sources can be infected by effluent due to flooding.

Effects of rising temperatures on the ability to work:

While the collapse of agriculture catalyzed by climate change triggered and the sheer destruction brought forth by natural disasters is no doubt a burden on the type of economic stability required to maintain regular employment, there are other types of initially unseen issues that can be created by this environmental malady. Indeed, there have been multiple theories positing that families can turn away from the agricultural sector in Africa due to climate induced hardships. It has been hypothesized that this ultimately skews the employment market, though research looking into the link between climate shocks and urban/rural out migration has also depicted a more unexpected situation.

Looking beyond the macro level, there is also a home truth that we have to confront as flesh and blood humans: we are all ultimately mortal and our bodies fallible. The ability to work is already restricted in the agricultural field in tropical and subtropical regions during certain seasons and times of the day. However, under a moderate CO2 emissions scenario, it is predicted that heavy outdoor labor would be limited to 50% of the workday during the hottest month is a large part of India and parts of Sub-Saharan Africa in addition to Australia. A high emissions scenario will see this state of affairs also applied to the tropical and subtropical regions by the end of the century. While mechanization can counter this in developed nations such as the US, this option is not as realistic in developing nations.

Effects on Migration and Claiming Asylum

Specific Rights Affected:
〇 The Right to Life (Article 6 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights/Article 3 Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948)
〇 The Right to Seek Asylum (Article 14 Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948/The Convention Relating to the Rights of Refugees 1951)

The world we live in is already witnessing some of the largest numbers of refugees, asylum seekers, and internally displaced people since the Second World War. At figures of around 71 million, that’s one of every 107 people on planet Earth. Most of the drivers causing them to flee have revolved around war or persecution. This is observable in the conflict wracked nature of the top 5 nations of origin for refugees and asylum seekers: Syria, Afghanistan, Myanmar, South Sudan and Somalia. Increasing asylum seeker and forced migration numbers are being observed in Central and South America in nations such as Venezuela, El Savador and Guatemala, albeit for different reasons.

To those opposing asylum seeker/refugee claims: if you don’t like them, try to stop creating them.

Like the other examples listed earlier, the effects of climate change can create a need to leave one’s homeland that may extend beyond famine or natural disaster. On top of those who tragically perished at the site of the disaster, the totality of natural disasters, like those referred to earlier, created 18.8 million people had been displaced as of 2017 due to causes related to natural disasters; a number equivalent to the size of the greater Tokyo metropolitan region. Yet there are other side effects concerning forced migration that can come about from climate change. For example, the security community highlights the connection between climate change and terrorism. A good example of this is the phenomena that suggests the decline of agricultural and pastoral livelihoods has been linked to the effectiveness of financial recruiting strategies by al-Qaeda, thus causing a number of the residents of the areas they are active in to flee. In West Africa, the almost total disappearance of Lake Chad because of desertification has empowered terrorists and forced more than four million people into camps.

Against the backdrop of the Teitiota family’s case, the current carnage borne of war that continues to be wrought, the troubling predictions of what awaits us under the worst CO2 emission outcomes, an unwillingness for nations across the developed world to share the burden of accepting refugees and asylum seekers, and the fact that the term “climate refugee” has currency in public discussion, and but not in international law, the world may be facing a perpetual crisis spread out over many years that will be comparable, if not worse, than the 2015 refugee crisis.

While much of what I have written has related to parts of the world separate from G7 style nations, the fact that people will need a place to go to find safety is the convergence where the materially comfortable world and the problems of the world’s poor and margin will meet. People can talk about building walls or of locking people up all they like, but in the end, this problem will reverberate in Europe, North America and Australiasia if we don’t tackle climate change. If we don’t act to head it off now, we will be left with one of two options: either act with basic humanity in recognition of the role we played in reaching this state of affair or descend into a moral sewer by locking up, shooting at or casting those who need our help into just as dangerous locales because of a situation we created.

What also ultimately needs to be remembered as well is that as developed countries are exhausted from the ravages I have outlined, they will ultimately reach us in the end. Just because they will hit the developing world first and initially hardest doesn’t mean they will leave the financially and materially abundant untouched.

So Where Do We Go From Here?

It seemed not so long ago that this speech had the electrified the environmental movement across the world.

Raw, passionate and willing to speak truth to power, Greta Thunberg summed up the urgency of the crisis confronting humanity.

Since that time nearly six months ago, the world has been overcome by the COVID-19 pandemic. For understandable reasons, this has taken up most of the planet’s time, resources and expertise.

When we look back on this historical epoch, I hope that the society that emerges from it is one that is more communitarian, far sighted and generous. We are currently facing a crisis that threatens human welfare on a grand scale. However, the aim, as Nigerian poet and writer, Ben Okri has written, is to be clear headed about the urgency and scale of the danger we face in. I believe this mindset can also be applied to the climate crisis. By approaching this rationally but approaching it with the seriousness which it is due, we can move to create a world that is more humane, less self interested and respecting of the rights of all men, women and children.

Human history contains multiple examples where humans have put naked self interest aside for the betterment of our fellow humans to strive for an ideal that brings a greater amount of happiness and freedom to a greater amount of people. From the abolition of the Trans Atlantic slave trade, the fall of Apartheid, the movement for Indian independence, the civil rights movement in the USA to the suffragette movement in the UK, the people involved in those movements where prepared to sacrifice, fight and even die for a movement larger than them, and which was populated by those they were very unlikely to meet personally. As a result, people like Thomas Clarkson, Nelson Mandela, Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King and Emelline Pankhurst are nearly universally admired. The fact that they are shows there are ties that bind among us regadless of gender, nationality and age. It shows a willingness to act should the better angels in our nature be appealed to. Should this happen, we can insure the same rights for our children and our neighbors’ children. I know we can do it!

The next logical step would be? Photo by Luke Webb on

3 Easy Things You Can Do To Make A Start In Helping Us In This Struggle.

Start your own chapter: While this might have to wait after restrictions on movement are lifted, is an organization aiming to move the world away from fossil fuel.

Join an Online Climate Strike: While in person gatherings are out of the question, you can join Fridays for Future online climate strike by posting your photo to social media with the hashtag #onlineclimatestrike (My photo from last Friday is posted to the left).

Take the Darwin Challenge: A campaign founded by the great-great grandson of Charles Darwin that also has designed a mobile phone application that commits you to go a set amount of days without eating meat. This app spells out in concrete terms the environmental impact your dietary choices make and you can also create groups to compete against others.

5 thoughts on “Violating Rights Before Your Eyes: Climate Change and the Effect on Human Rights

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.