How climate change can have unequal effects on different sectors of the population

Climate change is one of the most pertinent issues in the contemporary world and this is to such an extent that it has come to affect the way of life of individuals across the planet. It has brought about a situation where there is unequal development within the population to such an extent that while some individuals have ended up being able to survive the changes that are taking place, most others have not been so fortunate, with a considerable part of the human population feeling the adverse effects of climate change directly (Carleton & Hsiang, 2016). Government policies have also come to have an effect on the unequal development of individuals in society because of climate change. The latter has brought about the result that while those with close political and economic connections have been able to make sure that they continue to prosper despite the climatic circumstances, most of the population, which includes small farmers in the rural areas and the urban poor have been the worst hit (Eriksen, Nightingale, & Eakin, 2015). It is therefore essential to consider the diverse effects of climate change on the human population, especially considering the massive differences in effects that have taken place. This paper seeks to analyze the way that climate change can have unequal effects on different sectors of the population, with specific reference to India and Egypt, countries whose populations are at the forefront of the effects of global warming.

It is essential to note that climate change has already begun to exert its pressure on the human population. While this may be the case, there are individuals in society who have the resources that they need to cope with the changes in climate whole others do not. There has been an increase in the level of vulnerability especially among the poor, because these individuals do not have the resources that they need to ensure that they are able to survive the adverse effects of climate change (Dilling, Daly, Travis, Wilhelmi, & Klein, 2015). In addition, these individuals have been forced into a situation where they are not able to shift from the areas where they are worst affected to better areas where they can be able to improve their life circumstances. One of the most pertinent areas which have been negatively affected by climate change and is especially vulnerable is in Egypt, specifically the site known as the Mubarak Project villages, which are located on the shores of the Mediterranean (Malm & Esmailian, 2013). The soil of these villages has begun to undergo a considerable amount of salinization to such an extent that it is increasingly becoming uninhabitable for the farmers in the area. The farmers in the area have been forced into a situation where they have to apply sand on their fields in order to elevate them in such a way that they are above the salty water table. Despite these efforts, only the most resources are able to ensure that they achieve this goal because most of the other farmers in the area do not have the resources to apply sand to their fields. Under the Mubarak regime, there was a process of accumulation through dispossession to such an extent that some individuals in society ended up being pushed to the frontline of climate change. These individuals, as has been seen above, were moved to the Mubarak Project villages and initially viewed it as an opportunity to improve their lives (Malm & Esmailian, 2013). However, the latter turned out not to be the case because as a result of climate change, they ended up in a situation where they were essentially denied the resources to stay in the region where they had been moved. They could no longer return to their previous holdings because they had already been taken over by government and those close to it, resulting in their vulnerability and dispossession because of climate change.

The example of the Mubarak Project villages is an essential one when it comes to the advancement of the argument that there are unequal effects on different parts of the population because of climate change. The individuals that are most likely to suffer the most are the small farmers, who, because of their vulnerability, end up not having the resources that they need to ensure that they comfortably mitigate the effects of climate change. Small farmers in the contemporary world already struggle in order to ensure that they not only get a fair price for their crops, but also safeguard themselves against the weather and pests (Harvey et al., 2014). Furthermore, they also have to contend with large-scale farmers and monoculture agricultural systems and are often barely able to remain in business. Under such circumstances, the effects of climate change have begun to make matters worse for such farmers because there has been a major shift when it comes to the climate and agricultural zones. There have also been changes to production patterns because of an increase in temperatures, and an extreme change to precipitation patterns that has essentially come to put a threat to crops. These upsets are increasingly beginning to take away the livelihoods of small farmers and their families because they not only lose their main source of income, but also their entire communities because they are no longer able to make sure that they sell their crops in order to make a living (Altieri & Nicholls, 2017). The development of such a scenario should not be underestimated because it is one that has the potential of leading to a threat to food supplies and security, because despite their relatively smaller contributions, small farmers are still an integral part of the society. Therefore, a reduction to their contributions to the global food supply has the potential of leading to an increase in volatility when it comes to food prices across the world.

This argument is considerably enhanced through examples of the way that there has been an increase of human insecurity. The latter insecurity can be seen from the semi-arid Andhra Pradesh, in the south of India (Taylor, 2013). There is a considerable sense of vulnerability for households that has been brought about by changes to the climate, to such an extent that it has brought about an uneven control over such productive assets as land and water as well as credit and labor. It is therefore essential to consider the effects that climate change has brought about in this society because most of the individuals involved tend to be subordinate groups that have been forced into relations that are socially, economically, and politically unequal. There has been a considerable increase in the level of insecurity when it comes to agrarian life in the Andhra Pradesh region, which has essentially been developed along hierarchical lines (Taylor, 2013). Subordinate groups, which include small farmers, have come to rely heavily on access to assets that are controlled by dominant groups, in order to ensure that they effectively pursue their livelihoods. Under such circumstances, it has become more difficult for these individuals to make sure that they take advantage of opportunities presented to them because even though they may own some land, the cannot utilize it effectively because climate change has for the most part made it more difficult for them to achieve success (Tucker et al., 2015). They cannot be able to rise above their relative poverty because climate change has created a stratified human landscape because the risks and opportunities that have been brought about by changes to the climate have become unequally distributed. It has become pertinent to consider that there is need to consider that the massive inequalities in the distribution of power in society have further been exacerbated by the manner through which their vulnerability of small farmers has been used to further the security of others in society (Isakson, 2015). The latter case is an example of the limits that public policies have when it comes to the facilitation of sustainable adaptation to climate change.

The cases of the Mubarak Project villages and Andhra Pradesh are extremely important because they show that climate change will most likely adversely affect the rural poor. More than a billion people in the contemporary world live in poverty and are dependent on the surrounding natural resources in order to survive (Cobbinah, Erdiaw-Kwasie, & Amoateng, 2015). The advent of climate change has proven that it would be an extremely difficult task for poverty and inequality to be eradicated because it involves a situation where disadvantaged groups do not have the resources that they need to ensure that they cope with its effects. It has forced a situation where society has become more stratified, to such an extent that it is extremely difficult for the parties involved to make sure that they are not only able to achieve a mitigation to climate change, but also the promotion of greater equality. Small farmers are the ones who are most at risk because climate change has brought with it a myriad of issues, including flooding and drought, which have ended up becoming problematic for the individuals involved (Eriksen & O'Brien, 2007). Small scale farmers are the ones who are most affected by these new problems because they may be forced to move in order to survive. However, their means of making a livelihood will essentially have been taken away; leading to an increase in the global poverty levels. Most of these individuals might be forced to move into urban areas to find work, and in the process, because of their poverty, it is likely that they will not only live in poorer areas, but also have to endure most of the ailments that are associated with heat, because of global warming.

The latter can be considered extremely pertinent because it involves a situation where there will be an unequal capacity for adaptation. The two cases above show that it is developing countries, which have not made any significant contributions to the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, are at a greater disadvantage when it comes to dealing with climate change (Hertel & Lobell, 2014). It is pertinent to note that both Egypt and India are developing countries, which still have to struggle in order to ensure that they have the necessary infrastructure and technological resources for their people because of the lack of financial resources. The lack of these resources is a hindrance for these countries when it comes to their ability to adapt to climate change. They have high rates of poverty and income inequality, and the financial resources that they do have, which is not often a lot, tend to be pushed towards mitigating these problems, which leads to a situation where not much can be spared to ensure that there is the advancement of the interests of the poor, who are most vulnerable to climate change. The poverty levels in these countries have been further exacerbated by climate change and this is a situation which has the potential of ending up leading to the deterioration of the lives and livelihoods of the poor, especially small farmers with little resources, who have to contend with climate change with very few viable options open to them (Burgess, Deschenes, Donaldson, & Greenstone, 2014). The case of the Mubarak Project villages is a prime example of the way that climate change has come to affect the poor while those with the resources have the ability to overcome the problems that are associated with this change. The ability of the latter to elevate their fields using sand to avoid salinization while their counterparts are not able to do so shows that climate change has for the most part contributed to the considerable stratification of society due to its unequal effects.

Furthermore, in the case of Andhra Pradesh, the agrarian community has ended up being in a situation where despite the disparities in power relations, initiatives by government have been taken to ensure that there is an improvement in the lives of the population. One such initiative is the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, which has sought to make sure that there is a reduction of the influence of power relations that have an adverse effect on the rural poor (Taylor, 2013). This piece of legislation has sought to make sure that there is the promotion of means through which the poor, who have often been held back by lower wages, are provided with the security that they need to not only have higher wages, but also have a safety net. This safety net is directed at the rural households that have been affected by underdevelopment and distress migration. It has ensured that there is the establishment of rules that helps to promote the interests of the rural poor in agrarian communities in such a way that has seen an increase in wages while at the same time promoting a reduction of the necessity of getting into dependency relations. The effects of climate change have made it imperative for initiatives such as the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, which have the positive effect of helping vulnerable rural households survive. The latter effect is essential for these households, especially those containing children and the elderly, who are most susceptible to health concerning that, are associated with changes to the climate. Among the most significant health problems that these individuals are vulnerable to include malnutrition due to a reduction in food supply, and heat-related ailments; meaning that more has to be done to prevent the advancement of such ailments.

It is also essential to note that because of climate change, many communities will be forced to move in order to ensure that they survive. These communities are those that do not have the resources to ensure that they survive the negative effects of climate change such as rising sea levels, extreme drought, and extreme rainfall (Sugden et al., 2014). Under such circumstances, there is need to consider that because they do not have the resources that they need to survive climate change, especially small farmers and the poor, the way of life of these individuals that has existed for centuries is likely to be brought to an end (Carr & Thompson, 2014). Individuals who are forced to relocate are most likely to end up moving to urban areas in a bid to seek work, resulting in not only an increase in poverty, but also the establishment or expansion of slums because these individuals will not have the resources that they need to survive. However, those with resources are most likely to be able to adapt to climate change in their own environments through the use of a diversity of technologies that they can make use of to bring about the mitigation of the effects of changes to the climate.

In conclusion, climate change has led to significant unequal effects in different sectors of the population. The discussion above has sought to make a study of the way that these effects have ended up influencing different sectors of the population through an analysis of the Mubarak Project villages in Egypt, and Andhra Pradesh in India. These cases have shown that it is the poorest and those lacking the resources who are most likely to suffer from climate change; a situation that their more well off counterparts do not have to undergo because they have the resources that are needed to survive.