The climate risks we face

The first ever European climate risk assessment carried out by the European Environment Agency (EEA) has concluded that Europe is unprepared for what lies in store.

The year 2023 was the warmest year ever. The global average temperature during 2023 has surpassed the threshold of 1.5 degrees Celsius set in the Paris agreement at the 2015 Climate Summit.

Europe is the fastest warming continent. The situation in Southern Europe is even worse. It will face considerably reduced rainfall and more severe droughts.

At this point, none of this is however news. It is already the present. The future may, however, be even worse than that.

In a 425-page report we are told that climate change is a multiplier of risks: existing risks will be aggravated. Climate risks are growing much faster than our preparedness. We are being extremely slow in developing and implementing climate change adaptation strategies.

36 major climate risks for Europe have been identified. They are grouped in five clusters, namely, ecosystems, food, health, infrastructure, and the economy/finance.  

The key findings of this first European climate risk assessment, which I quote verbatim from the EEA report, are:

“Ecosystems: climate change is one of the main drivers of biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation in Europe. Among climate risks related to ecosystems, risks to coastal and marine ecosystems have the highest severity in the current period as well as the greatest urgency to act.

Food: Europe faces multiple challenges to food production and food security, including reducing its environmental impact. Crop production is already facing substantial climate risks in Europe as a whole, and critical risk levels in Southern Europe.

Health: climate change poses major risks to human health systems. Risks related to heat are already at critical levels in southern Europe.

Infrastructure: extreme weather events are posing increasing risks to the built environment and infrastructure in Europe, and the services they provide. Such events can disrupt essential services, including energy supply, water supply and transport networks.

Economy and finance: the European financial system faces critical risks from the impacts of climate change, both within Europe and abroad. Serious sector- and region-specific risks to Europe could catalyse a systemic financial shock.” (page 264: para 18.6 of the report)

This is a wakeup call of the highest order. The European continent is unprepared for the growing extremes of climate. Yet senior politicians at an EU level are more interested in sabotaging specific initiatives which seek to bridge the gap in climate change preparedness. The recent debate (and voting patterns) on the regulatory framework for the restoration of nature is a case in point.

The recent Dutch farmers’ revolt which has shaken the Netherlands’ body politic has its origin in the difficulties encountered in implementing the Nitrates Directive. It has however spread to other regions, motivated by the industrial agricultural lobby’s determination to sabotage the EU Green Deal.

In Germany the centre-right CDU-CSU have just launched their joint EU Parliament electoral manifesto with a pledge to reverse the controversial phase-out of the internal combustion engine. A definite commitment to water-down the EU Green Deal. The CDU-CSU leading candidate is the same person piloting the EU Green Deal, Ursula von der Leyen.

With these attitudes it is inevitable that our preparedness for the climate risks we face will get even worse. This is the future we face. It keeps getting worse until those that matter come to their senses.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday : 17 March 2024

The Climate Emergency: beyond the MCESD circus

On the 22 October 2019 Parliament unanimously accepted what has been obvious to most of us for quite some time: we are in the midst of a climate emergency.

Taking stock of the situation, now, four years down the line, reveals that not much has been done to translate the 2019 Parliamentary consensus into tangible action. It was only as a result of the current dramatic failure of the power distribution network that Robert Abela’s government has woken up from its climatic slumber. With a straight face he stated that the failure of the distribution network is a result of a worsening climate change!

Undoubtedly climate change was one of the contributors to the power distribution network’s failure. Climate change is however not the only culprit. Gross incompetence and lack of long-term planning are the major contributors to the current state of affairs. After ten years in office his party must shoulder the blame.

ADPD-The Green Party has written to the Auditor General specifically to investigate Enemalta’s long-term plans (or the lack of them) and to examine the investments made into the energy distribution network over the last ten years. Those responsible have to be held accountable.

Robert Abela’s MCESD circus, last week, was another exercise in greenwashing. His government had various opportunities since 2019 in order to lay the foundations for a realistic forward looking plan addressing climate change but it has completely opted to turn a Nelson eye.

During July, for example, at the EU Environment Council of Ministers, Malta was one of the countries voting in favour of the EU Commission proposal to restore nature as part of the Green Deal package. A proposal that was substantially watered down from the original Timmermans proposal. If Robert Abela’s government really believes in what he has supported at an EU level he ought to start reflecting this in the decisions he takes at a local level.

How is it possible to be credible in your commitment to restore the depleted natural capital across the EU when you have not been capable of protecting the uptake of agricultural land for development at the peripheries of our towns and villages as a result of the rationalisation exercise? (Robert Abela, you can ask your own Żurrieq constituents on the rape of in-Nigret, currently in hand.)

Or how can you be taken seriously that you have undertaken to protect the urban canopy in the existing green spaces (including large private gardens) in our towns and villages when many of these have been or are still being developed on the altar of greed? Investing €700 million in green open spaces is not enough: it does not even compensate for the damage inflicted by the rationalisation exercise on our countryside. Remember we are speaking of two million square metres.

We need a holistic climate policy that comes to grips with the reality that we are facing year in year out. The heat-wave we have just experienced has the potential of shifting the tourist market northwards during the summer months, away from the Mediterranean shores. We are witnessing the first clear indicators of the tropicalisation of the Mediterranean climate, yet the tourism industry is ecstatic at the current tourism numbers which are fast approaching the 2019 record year.

The Malta International Airport (MIA), Malta Hotels and Restaurants Association (MHRA) and the Malta Tourism Authority (MTA) need to wake up and smell the coffee.  Climate change needs to be anchored in tourism policy before it is too late.

The Maltese islands will be severely impacted by the next stages of climate change: the rise in sea level. The coastal areas will be hard hit. Depending on the extent of the sea level rise, they will be wiped out or substantially reduced. This will impact coastal communities as well as all the coastal infrastructure, which includes practically all our tourism facilities. Yet the tourism industry is silent, busy counting today’s euros.

Beyond last week’s MCESD circus the government has a duty to act and make up for lost time. It is a duty towards future generations. Unfortunately, future generations have been consistently written off as they have no vote. Gro Harlem Bundtland had warned us in her seminal 1987 UN Report Our Common Future: “We act as we do because we can get away with it: future generations do not vote; they have no political or financial power; they cannot challenge our decisions.”

Once upon a time we also had a Guardian for Future Generations. His silence on climate change is deafening.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 6 August 2023

The accumulating environmental deficit

The environmental deficit is increasing at a fast rate. We are approaching the point of environmental bankruptcy, from which there is no turning back. This is the whole point of the nature restoration debate currently in hand at the European Parliament. We must act before it is too late.

It is not sufficient to just protect nature. We must also restore it. We must make good the accumulated damage caused to date, primarily by human action. Notwithstanding all the good intentions since the first EU Environmental Action Programme in the early 70s was gradually translated into a developing EU environmental acquis, 81 per cent of protected habitats are in bad state and over 1500 species are threatened with extinction.

It is well known that the European Parliament is split right down the middle with about half of it being in favour of the constructive restoration of nature. The other half can be described as being supportive of the accumulated destruction as they couldn’t be bothered with supporting the required action. Next week, a definite decision could be taken as the EU Parliament is due to decide in plenary on the legislative proposal for nature restoration.

The legislative action being proposed by the EU Commission is not a very strong law. It is however a necessary first step in the long road ahead. It could be improved in the years ahead.

There is quite a lot to do. The havoc we see developing around us can still be reversed, even if it is getting more difficult by the hour.

We need to act within nature’s laws. The universal laws of nature are never amended: they have been consistent throughout the ages. They are not changed on the eve of elections. Nor do they offer a reprieve or probation for first time offenders. The punishment which nature unleashes, is non-discriminatory. In fact, nature rides roughshod over offenders and non-offenders alike!  We have seen this in floods and fires all over the globe. Occasionally, we have local examples too.

There are countless examples which we could list as being among the contributors to the present state of affairs. We read about them on an almost daily basis or watch reference to them on the different news channels.

We would do well if we start acting seriously on a local level about addressing Malta’s own contribution to the accumulating environmental deficit.

The current emphasis on green urban open spaces is good politics: all €700 million projected expenditure could be a positive step. It is however lost in the ocean of government indifference when agricultural land on the periphery of our urban areas keeps being taken up for development. Nor does the siege on Comino’s conservation status tolerated by the Planning Authority and the Environment and Resources Authority lead to any credibility to the open space initiative. Seen together, the green washing is too evident to pass unnoticed.

Unbridled development in our towns and villages, over the years has taken up a substantial chunk of urban green open spaces. Large gardens forming part of the essential urban ecology have been taken up and developed into residential blocks, encouraged by the continuous subsidies dished out to the construction industry as well as by a rationalisation exercise supported by the PLPN.

The conservative European People’s Party (EPP) has aligned itself with the climate-sceptic far-right in opposing nature restoration initiative forming an essential building block of the EU Green Deal. At the time of writing, it is not clear whether the campaign to derail the initiative will be successful. It is essentially down to the wire.

In the meantime, the environmental deficit keeps increasing, making matters worse.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday 9 July 2023

Re-Connecting with nature

The EU Council of Ministers of the Environment, earlier this week, approved a common position on the proposed EU regulations relative to the restoration of nature. Seven EU countries did not support the measure, for a variety of reasons. Poland, the Netherlands, Italy, Finland and Sweden voted against while Belgium and Austria abstained. Malta has supported the measure, a basic legislative initiative in implementation of the Green Deal, honouring commitments undertaken at the 2015 Paris COP 21, the Climate Summit.  

The importance of nature in our life is grossly underestimated. It is unfortunately, generally, taken for granted. Being conscious of the role of nature in our life is not just about the provision of green open spaces for recreational purposes in and around our urban areas. At the end of the day, nature is what makes life itself possible. Without nature and the services that it provides, life on earth would not be possible.

By way of illustration, it is generally emphasised that if the bee were to disappear, the human being would not live more than four years. No bees would mean an end to pollination, no more plants, no more animals and hence little left to eat. Life itself would be practically impossible.

The creation of green open spaces or the maintenance of existing ones is not bad policy. It is however not in any way a substitute to the need to protect biodiversity in its natural setting or, as it is normally described, in its natural habitat. Nor can green open spaces substitute or make good the take-up of agricultural land for development, notwithstanding the quality of the agricultural land earmarked for this development.

The two-million square metre incursion of the development zone into ODZ territory was, and still is, blasphemous. The rationalisation exercise which made this possible in 2006 should be reversed the soonest if environmental sweet talk is to have any significance.

What is the purpose of creating reserves or protected areas, terrestrial or marine? The designation of a status of protection must be followed up with meaningful action to ensure that the protected areas are not only taken care of but also that the accumulated damage is reversed the soonest through restoration.

This is the purpose of the current debate at an EU level on the restoration of nature.

The documentation made available by the European Commission to substantiate the urgency of the required action leading to the rehabilitation of nature throughout EU territory emphasises that 81 per cent of protected habitats are currently in a very poor state.

The twelve-part impact assessment published by the EU Commission emphasises that investing in nature restoration pays back considerable dividends. Each euro spend in nature restoration adds between €8 and €38 in economic value due to the resulting enhancement of ecosystem services which support food security, climate, the ecosystem and human health.

Where do we go from here? Malta has joined and is part of the slim majority in the Council of Ministers of the Environment supporting the EU Commission in its endeavours to create a regulatory framework for nature restoration. Cyrus Engerer, the only Maltese MEP forming part of the EU Parliament Environment Committee, supported the EU Commission initiative when it came to a vote in the said Committee thereby contributing to defeating the European People’s Party (EPP) attempted sabotage of the said initiative.

The next steps could be crucial. We need to move forward as a country from verbose declarations in favour of environmental protection to effective measures which stop the accumulating environmental deficit. Only then can we realistically start the rehabilitation and restoration of natural habitats and the eco-system.

We need to reconnect with nature the soonest. No wifi is required.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday : 25 June 2023

Opposizzjoni għar-restawr tan-natura

Il-Parlament Ewropew presentement qiegħed jiddiksuti l-qagħda tal-bijodiversità fl-Unjoni Ewropeja u l-ħtieġa urgenti li din tkun restawrata. Dan qed isir f’kuntest tad-dibattitu li għaddej dwar il-proposta tal-Kummissjoni Ewropeja fuq regolamenti dwar restawr tan-natura, element essenzjali tal-Pjan l-Aħdar (Green Deal) tal-Unjoni Ewropeja.

Il-ħsara akkumulata kkawżata mill-bniedem lin-natura u lill-proċessi naturali hi waħda sostanzjali. Tħares kif tħares lejha, din il-ħsara għandha impatt fuq il-kwalità tal-ħajja tagħna lkoll. Hu impatt fuq dak li hu essenzjali għall-eżistenza tal-ħajja innifisha: fuq il-klima, fuq il-kwalità tal-arja, kif ukoll fuq il-biedja u fuq il-kapaċità li nipproduċu l-ikel.   

Meta in-natura ġġarrab il-ħsara, dan hu rifless ukoll f’impatti ekonomiċi kif jidher ċar fl-istudju dwar l-ekonomija tal-bijodiversità kkordinat mill- Professur Sir Parta Dasgupta mill-Università ta’ Cambridge fl-2021. Il-ħarsien u r-restawr tan-natura hu diġà l-iskop ta’ diversi inizjattivi, mhux biss fuq livell Ewropew. Fuq livell globali hemm il-ħidma li qed issir bħala parti minn xogħol il-Konvenzjoni dwar il-Bijodiversità, iffirmata fl-1992 f’Rio waqt is-Summit ambjentali.

Fis-summit dwar il-bijodiversità li sar f’ Montreal iktar kmieni din is-sena, l-komunità internazzjonali għamlet pass kbir il-quddiem meta ftehmet dwar trattat  fuq il-ħarsien tas-saħħa tal-ibħra, ftehim li dwaru diġa ktibt f’dawn il-paġni (Illum 12 ta’ Marzu 2023: Il-legat ta’ Arvid Pardo: niskopru mill-ġdid il-vokazzjoni marittima.)

F’livell ta’ Unjoni Ewropeja hemm diversi regoli li jservu ta’ gwida għall-istati membri dwar tmexxija sostenibbli f’diversi oqsma. Minkejja dan, il-qagħda tal-bijodiversità qatt ma kienet daqshekk ħażina.

Il-ħarsien tal-bijodiversità hu xogħol kontinwu, li sfortunatament jimxi bil-mod wisq.

L-iskop ta’ dawn ir-regoli għar-restawr tan-natura huwa biex ikunu ndirizzati l-ekosistemi fi stat ta’ degradazzjoni u dan billi jkun hemm koordinazzjoni effettiva ħalli tkun implimentata aħjar legislazzjoni eżistenti. Dan ikun ta’ kontribut biex possibilment ikunu ndirizzati b’mod adegwat il-miri tal-Unjoni Ewropeja dwar it-tibdil fil-klima.

ir-regolamenti proposti jfasslu miri dwar ir-restawr tal-ekosistemi fuq l-art, mal-kosta, fl-ilma ħelu u fl-ibħra. Jimmiraw ukoll dwar il-ħtieġa li ma jintilfux spazji miftuħa ħodor fiż-żona urbana, inkluż li ż-żoni imħaddra fl-ibliet u l-irħula tagħna ma jonqsux.  Il-proposta tindirizza ukoll il-ħarsien tar-riżorsi tal-ilma kif ukoll ir-restawr tal-ekosistemi agrikoli u tad-dakkara (pollinators), bħalissa taħt theddida iktar minn qatt qabel.

Ikun meħtieġ li l-istati membri jħejju pjan nazzjonali li jidentifka l-miżuri meħtieġa għar-restawr ta’ dan kollu b’identifikazzjoni ta’ miri ċari. L-Unjoni Ewropeja qed tippjana li talloka €100 biljun għal dan kollu.

L-abbozz ta’ regolamenti dwar ir-restawr tan-natura li dwaru kien hemm vot fil-Kumitat Parlamentari Ambjentali tal-Parlament Ewropew nhar il-Ħamis bil-kemm ġie approvat. Irnexxielu, għalissa, jsalva kemm kemm minn attakk feroċi ikkoordinat mill-Partit Popolari Ewropew (EPP) appoġġat mill-allejati parlamentari tiegħu fuq il-lemin.  

Il-futur ta’ dawn ir-regolamenti dwar ir-restawr tan-natura, f’dan il-punt, huwa xi ftit inċert. Qegħdin viċin wisq tal-elezzjonijiet għall-Parlament Ewropew u forsi mhux l-aħjar żmien għal diskussjoni ta’ din ix-xorta. Il-Corporate Europe Observatory, li jsegwi il-lobbying fuq livell Ewropew, iktar kmieni din il-ġimgħa irrapporta li l-forzi tal-lemin fil-Parlament Ewropew huma determinati li joqtul kull inizjattiva li baqa’ mill-Ftehim l-Aħdar (Green Deal) fi pjan biex jirbħu l-voti tan-negozji u tal-bdiewa fl-elezzjonijiet li ġejjin.

Fl-elezzjonijiet riċenti ġewwa l-Olanda, il-partit ġdid BBB (partit agrarju, lemini u populist) li sar l-ikbar partit fil-pajjiż jidher li kien il-kawża biex il-Partit Popolari Ewropew jintensifika l-opposizzjoni tiegħu għall-miżuri li jirriżultaw mill-Ftehim l-Aħdar (Green Deal).

F’dan il-qasam, il-futur hu mċajpar. Iktar ma ndumu ma niddeċiedu u naġixxu inqas ser ikun hemm ċans li l-ġenerazzjonijiet futuri jirtu dinja li fiha jistgħu jgħixu.  Jeħtieġ li naġixxu biex nirrestawraw u nħarsu l-ftit li baqa’ qabel ma jkun tard wisq.

ippubblikat fuq Illum: 18 ta’ Ġunju 2023

Obstructing the restoration of nature

The European Parliament is currently discussing the state of biodiversity within the European Union and the urgent need for its restoration. This is being done with reference to the proposal by the EU Commission for a regulation on nature restoration, an essential element of the Green Deal framework.

The accumulated damage inflicted by man on nature and natural processes is substantial. Irrespective of the way you look at it, at the end of the day this reflects itself on our quality of life. It is an impact on ecology and on the services which nature provides as an essential prerequisite for the existence of life itself. It is an impact on climate, on air quality and well as on agriculture and food production.

A dilapidated nature also substantially impacts the economy as has been most clearly shown by the independent review of the economics of biodiversity drawn up in February 2021 and led by Professor Sir Parta Dasgupta from the University of Cambridge. The protection and restoration of nature is an objective of various initiatives, not just on a European level, but more so on a global level as is evidenced by the workings of the Convention on Biodiversity signed as part of the agreed Rio  Earth Summit way back in 1992. In a Biodiversity Summit held at Montreal earlier this year, in March, the international community made a breakthrough on a treaty dealing with the health of the oceans in respect of which I have already written in these columns (TMIS 12 March 2023: Arvid Pardo’s legacy: rediscovering a maritime vocation.)

At an EU level there are various policies and regulations which guide member states on the sustainable way forward. Notwithstanding all this regulatory activity, biodiversity is in a worse state than ever.

Protection of biodiversity is works in progress. Unfortunately, it moves at a snail’s pace as it has to combat the resistance of those who do not have a long-term view: those who plot their actions on the basis of electoral polls, and not on what is right and proper.

The specific objective of the EU regulation on nature restoration is to restore degraded ecosystems across the EU through an effective coordination of existing legislation. This will contribute towards a timelier achievement of the climate change mitigation and climate change adaptation objectives of the EU.

The proposed nature restoration legislation sets targets for the restoration of terrestrial, coastal, freshwater and marine ecosystems. It also points to the requirement that there is no net loss of urban green space and of urban tree canopy cover. It addresses issues of water resources as well as the restoration of pollinator populations and agricultural ecosystems.

Member States shall prepare national restoration plans to identify the restoration measures that are necessary to meet these targets and obligations. €100 billion will be allocated by the EU for this measure.

The draft nature restoration regulation, voted upon in the EU Parliament’s Environment Committee on Thursday barely survived an onslaught coordinated by the European People’s Party (EPP) and its right-wing allies in the European Parliament.

The future of the nature restoration regulation is, at this point, uncertain. Being so close to the European Parliament elections, maybe, it is not the right time to debate. Corporate Europe Observatory, the European lobbying monitor, earlier this week reported that right-wing European political parties are determined to kill the remains of the Green Deal in a bid to gain business and farmers’ support in the forthcoming elections.

The recent Dutch election results, which made the brand-new BBB (‘Farmer-Citizen Movement’, an agrarian and right-wing populist party) the biggest political party in the Netherlands has electrified the EPP into opposing with increased intensity the implementation of the proposed Green Deal measures.

The future is definitely very murky. The longer we take to decide and act the less likely that future generations inherit a planet in which they can live. We have to act to restore and protect the little we have left, before it is too late.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 18 June 2023

It-tibdil fil-klima: it-turiżmu mhux ser jeħlisha

Żmien il-biljetti tal-ajru bid-€10 spiċċa, qalilna Michael O’Leary, tar-Ryanair. Dan wara li sirna nafu matul dawn l-aħħar ġimgħat li fl-Unjoni Ewropeja, biex tkun implimentata l-inizjattiva l-ħadra (Green Deal), anke l-avjazzjoni teħtieġ li tagħti s-sehem tagħha billi tibda tinternalizza l-impatti ambjentali. Dan ifisser li l-ispiża riżultat tal-impatti ambjentali tal-avjazzjoni għandha tibda tkun inkluża fil-prezz tal-vjaġġ. Dan hu applikazzjoni diretta u prattika tal-prinċipju ambjentali li min iħammeg jeħtieġ li jħallas (polluter pays principle).

L-avjazzjoni ilha teħlisha billi kienet eżentata għal żmien twil milli terfa’ l-piż tal-impatti tal-emissjonijiet li tiġġenera. Issa dan ma jistax jibqa’ hekk. Din l-industrija ukoll trid tibda tagħti kont ta’ egħmilha. Bħas-setturi ekonomiċi l-oħra trid terfa’ l-piz tal-impatti ambjentali tagħha.  

Li min iħammeġ iħallas hu prinċipju ambjentali bażiku li jifforma parti integrali mill-liġi Ewropeja. Riżultat ta’ hekk dan iservi ta’ gwida għall-formolazzjoni tal-politika tal-Unjoni Ewropeja.  Sa mill-2004 dan il-prinċipju hu ukoll parti integrali mil-leġislazzjoni ambjentali Maltija. Anke fil-kaz tagħna dan il-prinċipju għandu jagħti direzzjoni ċara fil-formolazzjoni tal-politika Maltija.

Sfortunatament, minkejja li l-Parliament f’Malta approva mozzjoni li biha għaraf l-emerġenza klimatika, din id-dikjarazzjoni baqgħet fuq il-karta.  Ftit li xejn sar biex id-deċiżjonijiet meħtieġa riżultat tal-għarfien ta’ l-eżistenza ta’ din l-emerġenza jittieħdu. Hu diżappuntanti li wieħed minn dawk responsabbli biex mexxa l-quddiem din il-mozzjoni issa qed jgħid li l-azzjoni biex ikunu indirizzati l-impatti klimatiċi tal-avjazzjoni huma kontra l-interess nazzjonali. M’għandux idea x’inhu jgħid.

Ejja nkunu ċari:  bħala arċipelagu f’nofs il- Mediterran, il-gżejjer Maltin inevitabilment ikunu effettwati mill-istadji li jmiss tal-impatti tat-tibdil tal-klima, ċjoe l-għoli fil-livell tal-baħar.  Iz-zoni mal-kosta ilaqqtuha waħda sewwa, possibilment jispiċċaw taħt l-ilma, kollha jew kważi, skond kemm jogħla l-livell tal-baħar.  Dan japplika ukoll għall-infrastruttura kostali li tinkludi l-parti l-kbira tal-faċilitajiet turistiċi.

Hu fl-interess nazzjonali ta’ Malta li l-miri klimatiċi tal-2015 ta’ Pariġi jkun osservati u li jiġu  implimentati l-iktar kmieni possibli. Ma jagħmilx sens li nfittxu li nkunu eżentati. Bla dubju jkun hemm impatti konsiderevoli. Imma l-impatti  jekk naġixxu  biex nindirizzaw it-tibdil fil-klima huma ferm inqas mill-impatti li jkollna nħabbtu wiċċna magħhom jekk nibqgħu nippruvaw nevitaw ir-responsabbiltajiet  tagħna.

Tul is-snin, bla dubju, it-teknologija tkompli titjieb, u probabbilment li din tgħin biex jonqos il-piz tal-impatti.  It-tieni rapport ambjentali dwar l-avjazzjoni Ewropeja ippubblikat fl-2019 jiġbed l-attenzjoni li fiz-zona Ewropeja l-konsum medju tal-fuel fuq it-titjiriet kummerċjali naqas b’ 24 fil-mija bejn l-2005 u l-2017. Imma fl-istess żmien kien hemm żieda ta’ 60 fil-mija fil-kilometraġġ tat-titjiriet kummerċjali!

Din l-istatistika tiġbor fiha l-problema kollha: it-teknoloġija qed tnaqqas l-emissjonijiet għal kull kilometru tat-titjiriet, imma n-numru ta’ kilometri tal-vjaġġi qed jiżdied bil-kbir għax ħafna iktar nies qed jivvjaġġaw bl-ajru.  

Bħalissa għaddej dibattitu dwar taxxa fuq il-fjuwil tal-avjazzjoni. Din hi waħda mill-miżuri essenzjali u meħtieġa biex ikun possibli li sal-2030 u lil hinn il-gassijiet serra jonqsu b’55 fil-mija.  

Din l-inizjattiva għandha twassal biex il-prezz tal-biljett tal-ajru jkun jirrifletti l-ispiza reali, inkluż dik ambjentali ikkawżata mill-emissjonijiet.  Dan jista’ jseħħ jew b’żieda ta’ taxxa mal-prezz tal-biljett tal-ajru inkella billi dak li jkun jagħmel użu minn mezzi alternattivi ta’ transport.

Jekk wieħed jagħmel użu ta’ mezzi alternattivi ta’ transport it-taxxa tkun evitata u dan bil-konsegwenza li jkunu evitati ukoll l-impatti ambjentali tal-ivvjaġġar bl-ajru. Fl-Ewropa kontinentali dan jista’ jseħħ bl-użu tal-ferrovija li bosta drabi  hi alternattiva kemm effiċjenti kif ukoll iktar nadifa. Imma fil-kaz ta’ Malta u gżejjer oħra dan l-użu tal-alternattivi potenzjali hu limitat ħafna.  Dan iwassal għal żieda inevitabbli fl-ispiża biex dak li jkun jivvjaġġa bl-ajru u riżultat ta’ hekk jonqos in-numru kemm ta’ Maltin li jivvjaġġaw kif ukoll ta’ barranin (turisti) li jiġu Malta.

Għalkemm eventwalment jista’ jkun hemm xi konċessjonijiet raġjonevoli għal dawk li jgħixu fil-periferiji/gżejjer, it-turiżmu ma jistax jibqa’ jevita li jerfa’ l-piz tal-impatti tiegħu: dan hu meħtieġ biex isseħħ ġustizzja, kemm soċjali kif ukoll ambjentali!  Hu fl-interess ta’ Malta li l-impatt ambjentali tat-turiżmu, b’mod partikolari dak tal-massa, jkun indirizzat u ikkontrollat qabel ma jkun tard wisq. L-industrija tal-avjazzjoni teħtieġ li tkun imċaqalqa bi strumenti ekonomiċi bħat-taxxa ambjentali biex tirristruttura ruħha. Ejja niftakru li bħall-gżejjer kollha, Malta, flimkien mal-komunitajiet kostali, tkun minn tal-ewwel li ssofri l-agħar konsegwenzi tat-tibdil tal-klima: l-għoli fil-livell tal-baħar. It-turiżmu ma jeħlisiex. Il-klima mhux ser tikkunsidra l-posizzjoni partikolari ta’ Malta jew l-impatt fuq l-ekonomija: in-natura ma tiddiskriminax, tibqa’ għaddejja minn fuqna bħalma għamlet bnadi l-oħra fejn kaxkret kull ma sabet fin-nofs!

It-turiżmu qiegħed f’salib it-toroq. Jeħtieġ li b’mod urġenti jaddatta ruħu u jaddatta għall-impatti tat-tibdil fil-klima. Dan hu l-futur reali tat-turiżmu, mhux l-eżenzjoni mit-taxxi.

ippubblikat fuq Illum: 14 t’Awwissu 2022

Climate change: tourism will not be spared

The era of €10 air fares is over, warned Michael O’Leary, Ryanair boss. This follows the news in the past weeks that within the European Union, in order to implement the Green Deal, aviation must do its part by internalising its environmental costs. That is, environmental costs must be incorporated in the price of air fares. This is a direct and practical application of the polluter pays principle.

Aviation has been a free rider for quite some time, being exempted from shouldering the impacts of the emissions which it generates. The holiday is now over and as a direct result the tourism industry must take stock of the situation. Like all other economic sectors, it must factor in its costings the environmental impacts which it generates.

The polluter pays principle is a basic environmental principle which forms an integral part of the EU acquis: it guides EU policy. Since 2004 it also forms an integral part of Malta’s environmental legislation and consequently it should also guide the formulation of Maltese policy.

Unfortunately, notwithstanding the approval by Parliament of a motion declaring recognition of the climate emergency, this declaration is still a paper declaration. The necessary policies required to face this emergency have never been discussed, approved and acted upon. It is disappointing that a prime mover behind the climate emergency motion is now equating the required action to address aviation’s climate change impacts as being contrary to the national interest. He has no idea on the matter!

Let us be clear:  as an archipelago in the centre of the Mediterranean, the Maltese islands will be severely impacted by the next stages of climate change impacts, that is the rise in sea level. The coastal areas will be hard hit, possibly they will be wiped out or substantially reduced, depending on the extent of the sea level rise. This is also applicable for all the coastal infrastructure, which includes practically all tourism facilities.

It is in Malta’s national interest that the 2015 Paris climate goals are adhered to and implemented the soonest. Seeking exemptions is not on.  Obviously there will be considerable impacts. The impacts of acting to address climate change will however be substantially less if we act than if we continue avoiding our responsibilities. 

Over the years technology will undoubtedly improve, possibly reducing the burden. The second European Aviation Environment Report drawn up in 2019 by the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), the European Environment Agency (EEA) and Eurocontrol points out that within the European area, the average fuel consumption of commercial flights has decreased by 24 per cent over the period 2005-2017. However, over the same time frame there has been a 60 per cent increase in the kilometres flown by commercial flights!

This statistic frames the issue: technology is driving down the emissions per passenger kilometre, however the number of passenger kilometres has been on an exponential increase as more people are travelling by air.

Currently there is an ongoing debate regarding a tax on aviation fuel. This is one of the essential measures needed to enable the reduction of 55 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 and beyond.

This initiative is aimed to ensure that the price of an air flight includes all costs, including the environmental costs caused by the resulting emissions. This can be carried out either by a tax on air travel or else through the use of alternative means of transport, as a result of which the tax can be avoided legally, with the resultant decrease of the environmental impacts. In mainland Europe the use of trains is many a time a good alternative for air travel not just due to its efficiency but also in generating less environmental impacts. In the case of Malta and other islands the potential use of alternatives is very limited. This leads to an inevitable increase in the cost of air travel and the consequential decrease in air travelling, both incoming and outgoing.

Although there may eventually be some reasonable concessions for those who live on isolated islands, tourism cannot keep avoiding its own environmental impacts: this is what social and environmental justice demands! It is in Malta’s interest that the environmental impacts of tourism, particularly mass tourism, is contained before it is too late. The aviation industry must be prodded through economic means, such as environmental taxation, to restructure itself. Let us all remember that like all islands, Malta, together with coastal communities, will be the first to suffer some of the worsts repercussions of climate change: the increase in sea level. Tourism will not be spared. The climate will not consider our special situation or our economic considerations – nature does not discriminate: it will roll over us as it did elsewhere!

Tourism is at a crossroad. It needs to urgently adapt to the impacts of climate change. This is tourism’s future, not tax exemptions.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday : 14 August 2022

It-turiżmu wara l-pandemija

It-turiżmu kien wieħed mis-setturi li l-iktar intlaqat bħala riżultat tal-pandemija Covid-19. Tul is-snin in-numri tat-turisti li ġew iżuruna żdied kull meta tjiebet il-konnettività: min-naħa l-oħra hekk kif il-konnettività naqset u eventwalment waqfet kompletament, ġara bil-maqlub.

Iktar kmieni din il-ġimgħa bdew jaslu l-ewwel turisti fil-port u l-ajruport tagħna. Bil-mod qed terġa’ tiġi stabilita l-konnettività li twassal biex it-turiżmu jibda jirpilja bil-mod. Il-Ministru tat-Turiżmu Julia Farrugia-Portelli f’dawn il-ġranet ħabbret il-mira tal-Gvern: 700,000 turist sal-aħħar tas-sena. Iktar kmieni t-tmexxija tal-Ajruport Internazzjonali ta’ Malta kienet emfasizzat li jeħtieġ madwar sentejn biex il-wasla tal-passiġġiera tirkupra u naslu fejn konna qabel ma faqqgħet il-pandemija.

Jista’ t-turiżmu qatt jilħaq il-livelli ta’ qabel il-pandemija?

Jeżistu stimi diversi dwar il-kontribut tat-turiżmu lejn l-ekonomija. Stima minnhom tipponta lejn kontribut dirett ta’ 5 fil-mija tal-ekonomija. Imma, bħala riżultat tal-impatt fuq setturi oħra dan is-sehem jitla għal madwar 12 fil-mija. Barijiet, restoranti, ħwienet li jbiegħu bl-imnut, attivitajiet pubbliċi, l-industrija tad-divertiment u t-trasport (in partikolari l-kiri tal-karozzi) huma dipendenti fuq it-turiżmu. Setturi partikolari bħat-tagħlim tal-Ingliż u ċ-ċentri tal-għaddasa huma meqjusa bħala parti integrali mill-ekonomija turistika.

Intqal ħafna dwar l-impatt tal-pandemija fuq il-lukandi. Imma anke dawk li jipprovdu sodod turistiċi barra mil-lukandi ġarrew fuq spallejhom impatt sostanzjali avolja ftit li xejn issemmew fid-dibattitu konness mal-impatti tal-pandemija. Dan huwa settur li jinvolvi negozjanti żgħar u dawk li nirreferu għalihom bħala micro-businesses li kull wieħed minnhom jimpjega inqas minn għaxar persuni.

UNCTAD, l-Aġenzija tal-Ġnus Magħquda dwar il-Kummerċ u l-Iżvilupp, iktar kmieni din il-ġimgħa ħabbret li l-iġġammjar tat-turiżmu minħabba l-pandemija ser jiswa’ lill-industrija globali tat-turiżmu madwar $1.2 triljun . Din l-istima tista’ tirdoppja skond kif tiżviluppa t-tieni mewġa tal-pandemija.

Il-Ġamajka tista’ titlef madwar 11 fil-mija tal-Prodott Gross Domestiku, t-Tajlandja 9 fil-mija, l-Italja 5 fil-mija. Fl-Unjoni Ewropeja l-agħar impatti huma mal-kosta Mediterranja fejn l-ekonomija hi dipendenti ħafna fuq it-turiżmu. Minbarra Malta hemm l-Italja, l-Kroazja, is-Slovenja, Cipru u l-Greċja li kollha ntlaqtu sew. It-Turkija u t-Tunesija, parteċipanti Mediterranji fl-industrija turistika ukoll iġġammjaw, wara li gawdew minn żidiet sostanzjali fin-numri ta’ turisti tul is-snin.

Jagħmel sens li l-Gvern, f’dan il-waqt, permezz tal-Awtorità Maltija tat-Turiżmu, qiegħed jiffoka fuq li jġib lill-industrija tat-turiżmu lura fuq saqajha. Dan imma, mhux biżżejjed. Jeħtieġ li nibdew naħsbu dwar il-futur tal-industrija u dan billi neżaminaw fid-dettall dak li l-industrja teħtieġ li tiffaċċja fit-tul.

Fi tmiem is-sena li għaddiet, l-2019, ilħaqna in-numru ta’ 2.8 miljun turista iżuruna. Il-punt hu jekk dawn in-numri humiex sostenibbli. Dan hu argument ta’ dejjem li ilu għaddej sa minnmeta n-numri kienu ferm iżgħar. Id-dibattitu kien, u għandu jibqa’ jkun dwar jekk għandniex niffukaw iktar fuq il-kwalità milli fuq il-kwantità.

Il-miġja fostna tal-linji tal-ajru low-cost bħala parti essenzjali mill-politika tat-turiżmu illum tpoġġi emfasi ikbar fuq in-numri. Din hi għażla politika li saret u li teħtieġ li tkun eżaminata u analizzata fil-fond. L-impatti ekonomiċi għandhom jitqiesu fl-istess ħin mal-impatti ambjentali. Irridu niftakru kontinwament li t-turiżmu jiġġenera bosta impatti ambjentali.

Wasal iż-żmien li nirrealizzaw li d-dibattitu meħtieġ dwar il-futur tat-turiżmu jeħtieġ li jsir fl-isfond tal-Patt l-Aħdar: The Green Deal.

L-emissjonijiet tal-ajruplani ser ikollhom ikunu indirizzati fil-futur qarib. Hu inevitabbli li jiddaħħlu taxxi dwar dawn l-emissjonijiet (carbon taxes) fi żmien mhux il-bogħod. Jekk mhux ser jittieħdu passi immedjati dwar dawn l-emissjonijiet ser ikun ħafna iktar diffiċli, biex ma ngħidx impossibli, biex ikunu ndirizzati l-konklużjonijiet tas-Summit Klimatiku ta’ Pariġi tal-2015. Summit li Malta ħarġet tiftaħar li kienet wieħed mill-ewwel pajjiżi li rratifikatu. F’dak il-mument (jekk nibqgħu ma nieħdux passi) mhux biss it-turiżmu jaqla’ daqqa kbira oħra imma tkun il-kwalità tal-ħajja tagħna lkoll li tieħu daqqa l-isfel.

Il-gżejjer Maltin, bħall-parti l-kbira tal-gżejjer imxerrda mal-ibħra, ikunu minn tal-ewwel biex jaqilgħu ġo fihom l-impatti tat-tibdil fil-klima. Il-kosta tkun effettwat bl-għoli tal-livell tal-baħar. Tajjeb li niftakru li l-infrastruttura tat-turiżmu qegħda kważi kollha mal-kosta! Iktar ma ninjoraw dan il-fatt bażiku ikbar tkun id-daqqa li naqilgħu.

S’issa naħseb li kulħadd irrealizza kemm l-industrija tat-turiżmu hi waħda fraġli. Kull xokk li l-industrija issofri jista’ jwassal għal tnaqqis kbir fl-impiegi f’din l-industrija. It-turiżmu għadu staġjonali wisq u dan minnu innifsu jwassal għal kundizzjonijiet tax-xogħol ta’ natura prekarja.

Jeħtieġ li nippjanaw iżjed billi nħarsu il-bogħod u fuq medda twila ta’ żmien: naħsbu u nippjanaw sewwa dwar l-impatti soċjali, ambjentali u ekonomiċi ta’ kull deċiżjoni. Dan wara kollox hu l-proċess li jwassal għal żvilupp sostenibbli. Hu l-unika mod kif nistgħu nassiguraw li l-impatti negattivi tal-industrija tat-turiżmu nistgħu nindirizzawhom illum qabel għada.

Ippubblikat fuq Illum : il-Ħadd 5 ta’ Lulju 2020

Post-Covid Tourism

Tourism is understandably one of the hardest hit sectors as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic. Over the years, tourism numbers increased substantially as a result of an increased connectivity: the reverse happened the moment that connectivity was restricted or became practically inexistent.

Earlier this week saw the first arrivals at our air and seaports. Slowly, connectivity is being restored. It is expected that tourism will now start a slow recovery. Tourism Minister Julia Farrugia-Portelli is on record with a 700,000-tourist target for year end. Malta International Airport CEO had earlier opined that it will take at least two years to recover to pre-pandemic level airport movements.

Will tourism ever recover to the pre-pandemic levels?

There are various estimates of the contribution of tourism to the economy. One such estimate points at a direct contribution of around 5 percent of our economy. However, as a result of its impacts on other sectors the overall contribution rises to around 12 percent. Bars, restaurants, retail trade, events, entertainment and transport (in particular car hire), are heavily dependent on tourism. Specific sectors such as the English language school sector as well as diving are important sectors in the tourism economy.

Much has been stated on the impact of the pandemic on the hotel industry. The providers of non-hotel beds, however, have also been heavily impacted by the pandemic, but they have not featured much in the post-Covid-19 debate. This is a sector which involves a number of small-scale investors and micro-businesses each employing less than ten employees.

UNCTAD, the UN Trade and Development Agency, earlier this week stated that the four-month standstill of the tourism industry due to the pandemic Covid-19 could cost the industry around $1.2 trillion. This estimated cost could more than double, depending on the severity and spread of a second wave of the pandemic.

Jamaica could lose as much as 11 percent of its GDP, Thailand 9 percent, Italy 5 percent. In the EU, the worst impacts are along the Mediterranean coast where the economy is heavily dependent on tourism. In addition to Malta, Italy, Croatia, Slovenia, Cyprus and Greece are also heavily impacted. Turkey and Tunisia, Mediterranean players in the tourism industry have also been almost at a standstill, after experiencing a substantial expansion of their tourism industry throughout the years.

It is understandable that government through the Malta Tourism Authority is currently focused on getting tourism back on its feet. This is however not enough. We must start discussing a long-term view of the tourism industry.

At the end of 2019 the 2.8 million mark of tourists visiting the Maltese islands had been attained. The point at issue is whether this is sustainable in the long-term. This has been a perennial issue in tourism politics since the days when the numbers were much lower. The debate was and should be whether we should focus more on quality than on quantity.

The advent of low-cost carriers as an essential part of the tourism equation places more emphasis on numbers than on quality. It is a choice which may need to be analysed and revisited. Economic impacts have to be viewed concurrently with environmental impacts. We must remember that tourism has a considerable environmental impact. It is about time that the tourism debate is carried out within the parameters of the Green Deal.

Aeroplane emissions will at some point in time in the near future have to be addressed. Carbon taxes will sooner or later come into play. Unless they are addressed immediately it will be more difficult, if not practically impossible, to address the Paris Climate Change conclusions to which Malta has adhered. At that point it will not be just the tourism industry but our whole lifestyle which will be in for the chop.

The Maltese archipelago, like all islands, will bear the brunt of climate change impacts. The coastline will be severely hit by a sea level rise. It may be pertinent to remember that the coast houses practically all of the tourism infrastructure. The longer we ignore this basic fact, the more severe will the impacts be.

By now all of us are aware that Tourism is a very volatile industry: any shock will result in mass redundancies. Tourism is currently way too seasonal, and consequently it only serves to create precarious working conditions.

It is the time to plan ahead: thinking carefully of the social, environmental and economic impacts of all decisions. This is what sustainable development is, after all, about. It is the only way to ensure that the negative impacts of the tourism industry are addressed by us sooner rather than later.

 

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday : 5 July 2020