Climate strategy requires ambition and realism

An effective and efficient climate policy demands an unusual combination of realism and ambition: the realism starts from the existing situation, but is unable to break away from it sufficiently; the ambition focuses on what is needed, but without realism will turn out to be nothing more than building castles in the air.

There has been no lack of ambition in the past decade. The European Union (EU) has taken the lead by formulating its 2°C target. Achieving this target means that, according to current insights, net global emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGS) must be so low by around 2050 that the stock of GHGS in the atmosphere stabilises at around 550 ppmv CO2 equivalents by the end of the century. This report shows that it is in principle possible to opt for global emission reduction routes which realise the required ambition. That is the good news.

However, the 2°C target is also an exceptionally demanding one. An assessment of which global strategy can actually be realised requires a sober assessment of the interests and policy priorities of all countries, and above all of a limited number of large polluters with different preferences from the eu, and certainly from the Netherlands. In the Council's view, the combination of high ambition and low realism could very easily drive up the costs without underpinning the global efficacy – and that is the only thing that matters for the climate. Simply waiting without ambition until other countries demonstrate leadership is neither in Dutch long-term interests nor in line with the evident preferences of the Dutch population.

The Council is concerned about both the efficacy and efficiency of Dutch climate policy. If we look at climate policy in the light of all manner of other important social objectives (such as health care, education, reducing world poverty and securing energy supplies), the situation becomes more complex. It then becomes necessary to make choices between, say, investing a euro now or in ten years’ time in education in poor countries or spending that same euro on climate policy. These are difficult judgments to make given the great uncertainties. And the precautionary principle cannot replace those judgments. In other words, it would smack of tunnel vision if the ambitions and efforts in relation to climate policy were not placed in this broad social context.