“Planet hotter than my boyfriend,” “I’ve seen smarter cabinets at IKEA,” “It’s getting hot in here, so take off all your coals” — these are just some of the many protest signs carried by a mobilization of tens of thousands of students worldwide demanding action to prevent climate change. With strikes in Australia, Belgium, Canada, Colombia, France, Germany, Japan, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Uganda, the United Kingdom, and the United States, the “School Strike for Climate” is a growing international movement. A movement that can count on support from the international human rights framework and its mechanisms, most notably in recent work of the Committee on the Rights of the Child.
The most famous protest sign, however, would be that of 16-year-old Greta Thunberg, whose sign “Skolstrejk för Klimatet” (School Strike for Climate) ignited the movement. She started her school strike in the summer of 2018 when Sweden was struck by heatwaves and wildfires, protesting on the steps of the Swedish Parliament. Her demand? That the Swedish government reduce its carbon emissions. Her action received global attention and inspired the worldwide school strikes that are prominently featured in our news today.
Children’s rights and views are essential when considering how to confront climate change. Children are among the most vulnerable to the effects of climate change. As an example, they’re more susceptible to heat-related health risks and more vulnerable to the effects of air pollution because of their underdeveloped respiratory system. But even further, they’re also the first generation to have lived under its threat their entire life. This is the generation that will bear the consequences of past, current, and future policy choices. It’s therefore vital that their rights are advanced and reflected in policies today. Yet since they’re not allowed to vote, their ability to influence those policies is limited. To remedy this predicament, youth are seeking to advance their rights. An increasing number of youth-led climate lawsuits reveal the growing sentiment among youth and children that their rights and their futures are at stake.
And numerous international agreements have something to say about just that. The preamble of the Paris Agreement says that countries “should, when taking action to address climate change, respect, promote and consider… the rights of children.” Another treaty, the Convention on the Rights of the Child (ICRC), specifically aims to protect children’s best interests. Under the ICRC, countries must guarantee children’s participation in decisions that affect them and protect their right to health from environmental pollution. On top of this, the ICRC is the most widely ratified human rights treaty (191 out of 195 countries).
With such strong international recognition for the importance of children’s rights, you might expect that the needs and views of children are front and center in climate policy-making. Yet, national policies don’t align. Our youth are asking for more ambitious climate action to protect their health, food, water, housing, and livelihoods by staying under 1.5°C of global warming. However, countries aren’t pursuing the ambitious policies that will get us there.
And that’s why children around the world are taking to the streets and the courts. We see it in the ongoing school strikes, in a historic ruling by the Colombian Supreme Court of Justice in favor of youth’s rights to life and a healthy environment, and in the prominent Youth v. Gov case challenging the US government’s continuing actions that contribute to climate change.
The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) is tasked with monitoring whether countries are implementing their obligations under the ICRC. Through this monitoring process, the Committee has recognized the impacts that climate change has on various children’s rights, including the right to life and health. They’ve done so by identifying countries’ obligations in the context of climate change. Examples of these obligations include:
- Taking into account the special needs of children and their views when developing climate policies,
- Incorporating climate change in the school curriculum of children, and
- Taking more ambitious mitigation action to prevent violations of children’s rights.
And these are only the tip of the iceberg: CIEL has compiled all the obligations of countries as defined by the CRC up to 2018. (For the full report on countries’ human rights obligations related to climate change, click here.) Later this month, we’ll publish an update to this report, focusing on the work of the CRC and other human rights treaty bodies in the climate context over the past year.
Building on this momentum, the CRC adopted some of its strongest language on climate change yet in its recommendations to Belgium and Japan during its 80th session earlier this year:
Youth from Belgium have been at the forefront of the climate strikes. Since January, they’ve already organized seven strikes, each one demanding more ambitious climate policies. This demand is not surprising: Belgium has committed to reduce its emissions by only 15% by 2020 (way below the 25%-40% needed to reach the Paris Agreement goals), and emissions from Belgium’s transport sector have only increased over the last few years. The CRC’s recommendations support the youth’s calls for more ambitious climate action: They requested that Belgium create a comprehensive national plan to reduce emissions. And this plan must ensure that children’s rights and views are taken into account.
In Japan, youth have also taken to the streets, demanding their views be heard and incorporated into climate action. And Japan’s climate policies leave plenty of room for improvement. Japan is lagging in its emission reductions, showing a 4% increase in emissions between 1990 and 2015. Not only is Japan impacting children’s rights by failing to reduce emissions, but they’ve invested heavily in coal-fired power plants in other countries, adding to the impacts of emissions on children abroad. The Committee addressed these concerns by calling for Japan to reduce its emissions in line with its international commitments and to reconsider its funding of coal-fired power plants.
And Belgium and Japan aren’t alone. The CRC has been active in calling attention to children’s rights in the climate context in other countries as well. For example, in its most recent session, the CRC posed questions to Australia, South Korea, and Luxemburg asking about the inclusion of children’s rights and perspectives in their respective climate policies.
It’s time climate policies start reflecting children’s demands. As Greta Thunberg so accurately said in response to adults who say that young people are the ones who will save the planet: “I think it would be helpful if you could help us just a little bit.” Even as adults begin to listen to children’s voices, this needs to be converted into inclusive, effective climate action. The CRC is helping by spelling out countries’ legally binding human rights obligations with respect to climate change. Now it’s time for governments to incorporate these concerns: It’s not only the right thing to do, but it’s required under international human rights law.
By Jolein Holtz, Geneva-based intern
Originally posted on March 8, 2019
Citations from the February 2019 session of the Committee on the Rights of the Child
Concluding Observations to Belgium
Environmental health and climate change
35. The Committee notes a high level of air pollution, particularly from road transport, in the State party and its negative impact on climate and children’s health, contributing to an increase in asthma and respiratory diseases while their exact prevalence remains unknown. Taking note of targets 3.9 and 13.5 of the Sustainable Development Goals, the Committee recommends that the State party:
(a) Conduct an assessment of air pollution on children’s health and a study on the prevalence of asthma and respiratory diseases in children as a basis for designing a well-resourced strategy to remedy the situation, and regulate the maximum concentrations of air-pollutant emissions, including from road transport;
(b) Develop a comprehensive national plan for reducing the level of greenhouse emissions to prevent dangerous climate impact, while ensuring that the special vulnerabilities and needs of children, as well as their views, are taken into account;
(c) Strengthen awareness-raising of environmental health and climate change among children, with active participation of schools.
Concluding Observations to Japan
37. The Committee draws attention to target 13.5 of the Sustainable Development Goals. In particular, it recommends that the State party:
(a) Ensure that the special vulnerabilities and needs of children, as well as their views, are taken into account in developing policies or programmes addressing the issues of climate change and disaster risk management;
(b) Increase children’s awareness and preparedness for climate change and natural disasters by incorporating it into the school curriculum and teachers’ training programmes;
(c) Collect disaggregated data identifying the types of risk faced by children to the occurrence of a variety of disasters in order to formulate international, regional and national policies, frameworks and agreements accordingly;
(d) Ensure that climate mitigation policies are compatible with the Convention, including by reducing its emissions of greenhouse gases in line with its international commitments to avoid a level of climate change threatening the enjoyment of children’s rights, particularly the right to health, food and adequate standard of living;
(e) Reconsider the State party’s funding of coal-fired power plants in other countries and ensure that they are gradually replaced by power plants using sustainable energy;
(f) Seek bi-lateral, multi-lateral, regional and international cooperation in implementing these recommendations.