By: Prof. Joy Singarayer
It is broadly acknowledged that colonialism and imperialism hold much responsibility in the causes of the climate crisis. The aggressive and unsustainable extraction of resources from colonized regions laid the ground for today’s economic reliance on fossil fuels and general overconsumption. It is also widely recognised that the industrialized nations responsible for the majority of historical carbon emissions, benefited most from colonial exploitation, while the Global South now bears the brunt of climate impacts (Evans et al., 2023). Further, the power imbalances and political structures that emerged from colonialism continue to sideline the most vulnerable nations in current climate policies.
Exploring the impacts of Empire is something that is interesting to me from a personal point of view, as I can directly reach out and touch that history through my father, who grew up under colonial rule in Sri Lanka (then Ceylon1). I’ve also had many and varied conversations with colleagues in relation to ‘decolonising the curriculum’ or inequalities in climate change impacts, but far fewer about colonialism and research itself. This gap is echoed in the IPCC assessment reports. In the sixth set of reports, Working Group II (Impacts, Vulnerability, and Adaptation) outlines how colonial histories have shaped current vulnerabilities and gives attention to indigenous knowledge in adaptation strategies. Working Group III (Mitigation) acknowledges inequalities in responsibility and the need to consider equity in mitigation. However, the Working Group I report (The Physical Science Basis) does not engage with these themes apart from tangentially in reference to differences in regional data availability.
Two colleagues, climate dynamicist Ted Shepherd and historian Rohan Deb Roy, and I are seeking to address questions of the links between colonialism and climate science. How does colonialism, past and present, shape contemporary practices in climate science? What are the ways in which scientific institutions both perpetuate and challenge these practices? To that end we started by convening historians of science, geographers, and climate scientists, at a symposium in May this year to promote an exchange of knowledge centred on critically examining the methodologies and institutional frameworks within climate science.
Several recurring themes became evident during the symposium, though the breadth of topics discussed far exceeded what can be covered here. One significant theme concerns who is included and recognized for their contributions to climate science. The dominant narrative in the literature, including in the latest IPCC reports, still often centres on individual scientists (mostly white, male) advancing the field with solitary efforts. However, this narrative neglects the invisible labour performed by enslaved or indentured labourers, and indigenous peoples. These individuals frequently possessed skills and knowledge that European scientists relied on, all while their knowledge systems and contributions were systematically erased. The incorporation of indigenous knowledge, which is often portrayed as a recent development, has a long history intertwined with the evolution of climate science (Mercer and Simpson, 2023). For example, during his tenure in India, Sir Gilbert Walker relied heavily on the labour and knowledge of Indian clerks, assistants, and local observers. Yet, local knowledge was rarely acknowledged in publications or recognized in the careers of those who contributed to it.
Similar issues persist today with practices such as ‘helicopter research’, where scientists from the privileged and powerful countries undertake research in low-income countries with little involvement from local researchers and communities in the research or publication thereof. This contributes to underrepresentation of authors from the Global South in scientific papers. For example, of the top 100 climate science papers over five years up to 2021, less than 1% of authors were based in Africa (Tandon, 2021; Figure 1).
Fig. 1 The percentage of authors from the Top 100 most-cited climate science papers during 2016-20, from each continent. Modified from Carbon Brief (Tandon, 2021).
The lack of access to data, models, and exorbitant journal publication fees further exacerbates these challenges, perpetuating the exclusion of Global South scientists from key areas like mitigation scenario modelling for the IPCC WGI report. This exclusion has led to future scenarios derived using Integrated Assessment Models where the Global South bears the burden of land conversion for emissions mitigation, while the Global North is not asked to make comparable sacrifices in lifestyle (Ketchum, 2021). This dynamic reflects the enduring colonial power structures within climate science. Indeed, colonial regions have historically served as testing grounds for engineering climate “improvements” (Mahoney and Endfield, 2018), a pattern that continues today with climate geoengineering projects across Africa, often initiated and funded by the US and Europe.
Another critical theme discussed is the subjectivity inherent in the collection of observational data. Colonial powers historically gathered meteorological data that served their specific interests such as ensuring safe and fast shipping routes and later air routes, and for agricultural needs in the colonies. In this sense meteorological measurement developed very much as part of the tools of Empire. As a result, the length and consistency of climate and weather records vary greatly by region, leading to significant implications for the present. This disparity affects the ability to attribute current climate changes and extreme events, contributing to uncertainty and, consequently, potentially influencing access to funding for damage or adaptation. This represents a continuing injustice, as the historical biases in data collection can directly impact modern decisions and resources. Moreover, the areas of focus in climate science and the questions that researchers pursue are likely influenced by these historical data biases. It is important to reflect critically on the distribution of new data and the spatial scales we consider, particularly regarding where, why, and for whose benefit.
Reflecting on the symposium discussions, in current climate science there are clear parallels with, and legacies of, colonial approaches. As I imagine is common especially in the UK, my experience of higher education contained little exposure to the history of the subject. With the small amount I have learned over the last couple of months, I feel compelled to take time to absorb more of the history of our discipline, to reflect on my own research practice, engage in more interdisciplinary conversations with colleagues and students, and organise future events. For anyone else interested in reading work of much more knowledgeable scholars, I have included a short reading list below.
1 Ceylon gained independence in 1948, when my father was already in his twenties.
Reading:
Bhambra, G. K., and Newell, P., 2023. More than a metaphor: ‘climate colonialism’ in perspective. Global Social Challenges Journal, 2(2), 179-187. Retrieved May 27, 2024, from https://doi.org/10.1332/EIEM6688
Coen, D.R., 2018. Climate in Motion: Science, Empire, and the problem of scale. The University of Chicago Press.
Evans S. et al., 2023. Revealed: how colonial rule radically shifts historical responsibility for climate change. At https://www.carbonbrief.org/revealed-how-colonial-rule-radically-shifts-historical-responsibility-for-climate-change/ (Accessed 1/9/2024)
Ketchum, C., 2022. How scientists from the ‘Global South’ are sidelined at the IPCC. At: https://theintercept.com/2022/11/17/climate-un-ipcc-inequality/ (Accessed 27/5/2024).
Mahony, M., 2021, Meteorology and Empire. The Routledge Handbook of Science and Empire. Goss, A. (ed.). Routledge, p. 47-58 12 p.
Mahoney, M., and Endfield, G, 2018. Climate and Colonialism. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 9:e510, https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.510
Mercer, H. and Simpson T., 2023. Imperialism, colonialism, and climate science. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 14:e851, https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.851
Rodrigues, R.R. and Shepherd, T.G., 2022. Small is beautiful: climate-change science as if people mattered, PNAS Nexus, 1, pgac009, https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgac009
Tchekwie Deranger, E., Sinclair, R., Gray, B., McGregor, D., Gobby, J., 2022. Decolonizing Climate Research and Policy: making space to tell our own stories, in our own ways, Community Development Journal, 57(1), Pages 52-73, https://doi.org/10.1093/cdj/bsab050
Tandon, A., 2021. Analysis: the lack of diversity in climate-science research. At: https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-the-lack-of-diversity-in-climate-science-research/ (Accessed 27/5/2024).