Past and present leaders of wealthy nations, including the UK and Germany, have argued that their countries' actions on climate change are insignificant because they contribute only a small percentage of global emissions.
On first hearing, this position sounds reasonable.
>>> High-Intensity Workouts Linked to Rise in Exertional Rhabdomyolysis Cases
In 2023, then-UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak asked: "When our share of global emissions is less than 1%, how can it be right that British citizens are now being told to sacrifice even more than others?"
Sunak is not alone.
In 2019, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison cited his country's 1.3% share to reject suggestions that Australia was not doing its part.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz pointed to Germany's 2% share in July while supporting loopholes in European climate targets.
Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni later flagged the EU's 6% share.
Former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, who has consulted for petrostates, used the UK's 1% share to urge abandoning clean economy targets.
These arguments often contrast small emitters with the US, China, and India, which together produce just over half of carbon pollution.
The claim suggests that small but wealthy countries cannot stop worsening extreme weather events.
Merz said last summer: "Even if we were all climate neutral in Germany tomorrow, not a single natural disaster would be prevented anywhere in the world."
Historical Emissions and Per Capita Responsibility
Climate scientists point out that the metric that matters most for global heating is historical emissions, where wealthy countries have a much larger share.
