Abstract

The international community is grappling with the severe and rapid threat posed by climate change. In response, many international organizations have developed strategies to adapt to climate change and to mitigate its impacts. The energy sector is one of the most important in terms of response. There is concern for protecting worker rights as the world pivots to cleaner green energy. Through a literature search, this paper analyzes the role of how the transition to a green economy might impeded worker rights in both carbon-based sectors and green sectors. It also looks at the history and role of international organizations in protecting those rights.  The overall findings suggest that organizations, policies, frameworks, and interventions can help safeguard worker rights during this transition to a green economy. 

Introduction

               Climate change poses a complex challenge that extends beyond just environmental impacts. Its effects are felt in social, economic, and labor spheres worldwide too. The rise in global temperatures, mainly due to anthropogenic activities, has resulted in shifts in weather patterns, ecosystem stability, and economic resilience. As nations and businesses grapple with climate change, they must transition to greener, low-carbon, resource-efficient, and socially inclusive economies. This transition requires critical consideration regarding the distribution of benefits and burdens associated with this transformation.

            Climate change has positive and negative repercussions on employment. Amidst this paradigm shift towards a green economy, the confluence of climate action and labor rights emerges as a pivotal area of concern. The disruption of traditional industries reliant on fossil fuels raises concerns about the fate of workers in "dirty" sectors and the capacity of labor markets to absorb them into emerging green industries and green jobs that either produce green goods or services or contribute to a more environmentally friendly process (ex. reduced emissions, less water consumption). The International Labour Organization (ILO) and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2012) found that workers in high-emitting sectors' education and professional experience is generally lower than in other sectors, and transitioning into jobs in a new green economy may be more difficult for them. Furthermore, the unequal distribution of educational resources and intellectual property in the context of green technology threatens to exacerbate global inequalities, hindering the prospects of equitable labor transitions in developing regions.

            International organizations like the ILO significantly shape the discourse and policies surrounding climate-related labor transitions. The relevance and intersection of climate change and low-carbon advancement have not always been evident to the ILO. The ILO faces contemporary challenges in adapting its governance structures and mandates to address the complexities of a rapidly evolving global economy. Yet, historical precedents suggest that technocratic approaches and depoliticization strategies, as witnessed during the tenure of Director-General David Morse, offer viable pathways for mitigating geopolitical tensions within international labor governance.

            This paper is dedicated to investigating the crucial intersection of climate change, labor rights, and international governance. Its primary objective is to delve into the limitations and possibilities of organizations such as the ILO in promoting a fair shift towards a green economy. Specifically, the paper aims to answer what measures, policies, frameworks, and interventions can be implemented to ensure that worker rights are protected as the global economy transitions from fossil fuels to a more sustainable and environmentally friendly economy.

Discussion

            Climate change is a complex and pressing global issue. Climate change refers to the long-term alteration of Earth's climate systems, including temperature increases, shifts in overall weather patterns, precipitation patterns, changes, and frequency of extreme weather events. According to the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC 2023, 42) 

Human activities, principally through emissions of greenhouse gases, have unequivocally caused global warming . . . Global greenhouse gas emissions have continued to increase . . . with unequal historical and ongoing contributions arising from unsustainable energy use, land use and land-use change, lifestyles and patterns of consumption and production across regions, between and within countries, and between individuals. Human-caused climate change is already affecting many weather and climate extremes in every region across the globe. This has led to widespread adverse impacts on food and water security, human health and on economies and society and related losses and damages to nature and people.

Understanding the intricacies of climate change and its far-reaching consequences is essential for devising effective strategies to mitigate its effects and build resilience in this global challenge.

            The consequences of climate change are drastic and detrimental to society. The global mean surface temperature is 1.13 to 1.17°C higher than the pre-industrial era (European Environment Agency 2024). The increase in temperature has had disastrous consequences for industry. Between 2000 and 2019, severe drought brought on by climate change has resulted in a 3% annual vegetation productivity loss, resulting in losses for the agricultural sector (European Environment Agency 2024). Between 1980 and 2021, Europe saw economic losses of EUR 560 billion, with EUR 56.6 billion in losses in 2021 alone (European Environment Agency 2024). A significant outcome of COP 28 was language calling for a transition from fossil fuels to enable the world to reach net zero by 2050 (United Nations [UN] 2023a, 5). For these reasons, other businesses and industries are adapting to climate change. 

            The United Nations Research Institute for Social Development (UNRISD) emphasized the importance of employment and social factors in achieving sustainable development. At RIO+20, they argued that policies should shift towards a "social green economy" (van der Ree 2019, 255). UNRISD called for compensatory measures for those negatively impacted by green development, maximizing the co-benefits of green jobs and ensuring their rights (van der Ree 2019, 253). They also identified several environmental investments necessary for a social green economy, including public transportation, schools, energy-efficient housing, and access to green technology and jobs (van der Ree 2019, 253).

            Tackling climate change requires a global effort. The development of a green economy cannot be achieved by individual nations; it must be approached and developed in a global context. It is important that the development of a green economy is fair and equitable to all, especially to the workers who may be at risk as businesses and industries transition to green technologies and economies. As the green revolution progresses, safeguards must be implemented or revised to protect workers. Currently, there are no guarantees that the new green economy will be any more equitable than the existing one. Therefore, it is crucial that several international organizations are at the forefront in ensuring that the new green economy is fair and equitable to all involved.

            The ILO was established after World War I, as a part of the League of Nations. Throughout its history, its primary objective has been to promote social and economic justice by implementing fair and inclusive labor standards for all individuals (Standing 2010). Currently, ILO is affiliated with the United Nations (UN) and has been entrusted with the responsibility of advancing opportunities for decent work in conditions of freedom, equity, security, and human dignity. It collaborates with governments, employers, and workers to devise effective policies. Moreover, ILO is the global organization responsible for creating and overseeing international labor standards, ensuring that these standards are implemented in both principle and practice. It is considered the standard-bearer of labor rights worldwide and is well-equipped to address labor standards as the world transitions towards a green economy.

            However, the ILO is not without its problems. The main problem with the ILO is its outdated and unrepresentative structure. The ILO is governed by a Director-General elected by a Governing Body consisting of 28 government representatives, 14 worker representatives (trade unions), and 14 representatives of employers (International Organisation of Employers) (Standing 2010). Only a small percentage of the world’s workers currently belong to unions, and only a small percentage of the world’s employers are included in the International Organisation of Employers. While workers and employers each have 14 representatives, these representatives do not encompass the majority of the groups they represent, and they are the only ones making policy at the ILO (Standing 2010). Neither workers nor businesses that are directly affected by the members of the Board of Governors have equitable inclusion required to bring about the change needed to protect workers’ rights as the world transitions to a green economy (Standing 2010).

            The ILO avoids forms of collective bargaining that do not fit into the laborism model on which the organization was founded in the 20th century (Standing 2010). For example, what rules should be applied to a group of independent contractors bargaining with a client or government (Standing 2010)? Governed by more modern standard competition rules, the contractors would run into anti-trust provisions (Standing 2010). In contrast, the ILO would grant employees (i.e., the contractors) special status underneath the presumption that representatives of employees are weaker than representatives of capital and a belief in the virtue of dependency (Standing 2010). Overall, the ILO needs to adjust to ensure workers' rights are protected as the world shifts to a green economy. 

            The political nature of the ILO hampers them from taking a significant role in protecting workers' rights as the world moves towards a green economy. For example, the ILO was instrumental in modernizing several former European colonies as they became independent following World War II. They turned to the ILO for practical assistance regarding labor issues and needs (Maul 2009), and while the Governing Body was skeptical of them, American Director-General David Morse was more open (Maul 2009). The emergence of these countries coincided with the Cold War, a time when most of the Governing Body consisted of European countries and unions under an American Director-General (Maul 2009). Director-General Morse had become a Cold War Liberal, and consequently, modernization was done underneath the framework of liberalism and democracy (Maul 2009). Morse politicized the ILO by using its aid to former colonies to blunt communism and the Soviet Union (Maul 2009). This strained the ILO as former colonies increased their influence in the ILO and began to challenge the ILO's approach. Fortunately, Morse was able to institute several changes that allowed for differing opinions within the ILO (Maul 2009). The first was to focus on the technical, non-political aspects of the ILO, an area with solid support and excellent agreement within the ILO (Maul 2009). The second was the application of the ILO's fundamental principles of fair treatment of workers, which was taken out of political debates and into practical applications. Doing so successfully depoliticized the ILO.

            Unfortunately, in the 21st century, the ILO has begun to pivot to a more political environment. The current leadership of the ILO presents a significant challenge to protecting labor rights during the transition to a green economy (Standing 2010). Russia and China, both ILO members, are actively courting the developing world through initiatives such as BRICs. This intergovernmental organization seeks to establish its own economic and trade ties, thus counterbalancing Western influence (Imray 2023). China and Russia are splintering off from the ILO, therefore presenting an apparent conflict of interest in the objectives of the ILO in helping guide the world through a global response to climate change. As such, it is unlikely that China or Russia would prefer to go through the ILO to achieve an equitable transition towards a green economy. Ultimately, China and Russia would like to take a direct approach to increase their visibility.

            This type of technocracy can be achieved through effective management and a fair transition to a green economy. The ILO needs to focus on the scientific and practical implications that climate change will have on labor. By doing so, it will prevent ideological debates regarding outcomes by keeping the focus on facts rather than interpretation. Additionally, the ILO needs to find practical solutions to global problems related to the implementation of green energy. Shifting the conversation towards finding solutions transforms the language around climate change from political to practical. Overall, the ILO should adopt a pragmatic, science-based approach to meet the needs of workers impacted by climate change.

            In 2007, the ILO, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), and the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) initiated the Green Jobs initiate to “promote opportunity, equity and a just transition towards a green economy and solutions to defining challenges such as sustainable development and climate change” leading to the creation of a dedicated program within the ILO (ILO 2007). But even this was faced with opposition. Some ILO employer members felt that “green” specific initiatives would disadvantage other sectors and called for more of a sustainability objective across all sectors, while emerging countries did not want initiatives that might be an obstacle to their economic growth; not surprisingly, workers' representatives favored the ILO’s pro-active stance (van der Ree 2019, 264). Despite these differences, the Governing Board did not disagree on the fundamental need to address the impact of climate change on workers and their environment (van der Ree 2019, 264). 

            The ILO launched the Green Initiative in 2013 to better equip the world to understand the opportunities and challenges of green transitioning and the roles that must be assumed going forward. As an outgrowth of the ILO work, the preamble to the 2015 Paris Agreement included the concept of just transition for a green workforce (van der Ree 2019, 264). Parties to the agreement need to take into account the requirements of a just transition of the workforce and the creation of decent work and quality jobs in accordance with nationally defined development priorities. This led to creating a working group focused on the impact of implementing these measures and societal well-being. 

            In the future, the ILO will have to tackle many problems in managing an equitable transition towards a green economy. The first problem is what to do with workers in “dirty” sectors such as oil and gas, industrial chemicals, and mineral extraction. The simple answer would be for these workers to transition to more environmentally friendly positions. According to the ILO (2016), green jobs contribute to “preserve or restore the environment but are in traditional sectors such as manufacturing and construction or in new, emerging green sectors such as renewable energy and energy efficiency. A recent study in the United States (US) found that less than 1% of all workers who leave a dirty job transitioned to a green job (Curtis et al. 2023). In contrast, half of all transfers out of a dirty job are into another dirty job (Curtis et al. 2023). These numbers were even higher for older workers and workers without college degrees (Curtis et al. 2023).

            As previously mentioned, COP 28 included a directive to transition away from fossil fuels to enable the world to reach net zero by 2050 (UN 2023a, 5). Environmental regulation can have positive and negative impacts on job creation and workers. First, they can create green jobs. However, they also impede economic activity or lead to the relocation of people and businesses (Van der Ree 2019, 254). In the second instance, the detriments for workers “must be anticipated and managed through supportive labour market measures and social protection (Van der Ree 2019, 255). Current and expected effects on employment of climate change and green economy policies include the creation of new jobs (modest scale), elimination of jobs (small scale), the substitution of jobs (modest scale), and transformation of jobs (large scale) (Van der Ree 2019, 255).

            The reduction of the fossil fuel industry will significantly impact its workforce. It is crucial to establish a coherent transition program that addresses the retraining of existing workers and the setting up programs in communities affected by these shifts so that social impacts similar to those seen after coal mining was reduced are not seen. In the US, around 750,000 people will be affected, out of which 450,000 are directly related to jobs. A considerable number of these workers, 83%, will be able to retire during the phase-out of fossil fuels (van der Ree 2019, 263). However, the remaining workers will need to be sent to other sectors, including green energy. In 2016, the ITUC established the Just Transition Centre, which advocates for strategies, tools, and dialogue among all stakeholders to ensure a pathway to a just transition. The idea behind this approach is that "all jobs are green and decent, emissions are at net zero, poverty is eradicated, and communities are thriving and resilient" (ITUC 2017, 6).

            The shift towards clean energy requires specialized skills and education specific to each industry. According to a report by the ILO and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2012), workers in high-emitting sectors generally have lower levels of education and professional experience compared to those in other sectors, making it more challenging for them to transition to jobs in a new green economy. In 2011, the ILO and the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training identified a significant gap between the skills required for green jobs and the training and competency standards offered by vocational and tertiary schools. Roman Vakulchuk, from the Climate and Energy Research Group of the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs, highlights that the demand for green skills and workers is growing twice as fast as the supply of these workers (2024). Vakulchuk further emphasizes that only a tiny fraction of the workforce currently possesses the relevant skills to address climate change (2024). Therefore, an intensive focus on training and education both for existing and future workers (those still in school) is essential for achieving an equitable transition towards a green economy. However, there are significant differences in educational access between the developed and developing worlds.

            In developed countries, the average number of years of school completed by adults is 12, while in developing countries, it is only 6.5 (Winthrop 2015). Approximately 50% of schools in sub-Saharan Africa lack basic amenities such as drinking water, electricity, computers, and internet access (UN 2023b). Education, training, and skills shortages must be addressed as fundamental worker rights for a green economy to thrive. The need for skilled workers hinders the progress of green investment and stronger economies. For instance, 80% of technicians required to construct and operate a wind farm in Kenya were recruited from the international market (PAGHC 2017). Inadequate skills, including those needed to create small businesses, limit the expansion of renewable energy investment in Africa, with only 30% of the population having access to electricity (Van der Ree 2019, 258). Without adequate educational infrastructure or opportunities, it may be nearly impossible to transition workers to both public and private green jobs and a green economy. Therefore, the only way to ensure worker equity in a new green economy is to address the current global failure in education equity. 

            Many countries are now considering skills development in their environmental regulations and employment policies, as it has become increasingly important to adapt to the changing needs of the job market (van der Ree 2019, 259). According to the ILO (2018), many countries are addressing anticipated skills needs and adequate training, yet there needs to be more agreement on the skills necessary for green jobs. This has limited skills development policies to be of limited scope and is a shorter-term planning horizon. Those countries with well-established policies and training programs, like Germany and France, have been much more responsive to the world's changing need for green jobs (van der Ree 2019, 259). A large international organization like the UN or some other member of the global community must take the initiative to provide training and education so that workers can transfer into green jobs and the green economy can grow.

            Intellectual property possession is another major issue with the green technology industry and impacts worker rights. Most patents for green technology, about 80%, are owned by corporations registered in wealthier developed countries (Lawson 2023). This has historically resulted in withholding of intellectual information from emerging countries, intentionally or otherwise. Healthcare companies that patent life-saving technology do not always behave altruistically with patents (Lawson 2023), and there is a growing concern that patents hinder access to life-saving drugs in developing countries (Sampat 2009). Governments tend to support these wealthy corporations and not encourage them to share access to technology (Lawson, 2023). 

            Restrictive intellectual property rights are bad for labor rights as they lead to monopolization and may hinder development in underdeveloped countries. During COVID, pharmaceutical companies prevented sharing highly profitable COVID-19 vaccinations, so logically, one might assume that they would not share green technologies with under-developed markets (Lawson 2023). Under the current system, green technology will likely be monopolized by a few firms based in wealthier countries at the expense of smaller countries. This will limit opportunities for work advancement and success in a new green economy. In addition, smaller firms in developing countries will not be able to compete with dominant firms from wealthier countries, raising concerns about neocolonialism.

      Wealthier green energy producers would be encouraged to increase the dependency of the host country on their companies. Many energy companies are sensitive to the nationalization of energy in the developing world due to the 1980s Middle East nationalization of oil and gas resources, which cost private companies operating in the area, such as Exxon Mobile, significant losses (Barnett 2016). Green energy companies will likely remember this and hesitate to build green power plants in developing countries without assurances that nationalization will not happen again. Further, because of the restrictive intellectual and proprietary nature of green energy, there is a decreased likelihood that a company would ever turn over a plant to a foreign entity. Green energy plants will remain in the hands of companies from wealthier countries.

            Ultimately, the untrained and uneducated workers in underdeveloped countries stand to lose the most from this situation. At this time, it is unlikely that green companies will invest in developing countries. They will only do so if firms see economic gain from providing the developing world with green technology. Furthermore, green technology will not be developed in politically unstable countries. This would lead to a scenario where wealthy countries hoard green technology. During the COVID-19 pandemic, wealthier countries hoarded vaccines for themselves, forcing India, on behalf of over 100 countries, to file a complaint with the International Trade Organization calling for a suspension of intellectual property laws regarding treatment and testing for COVID-19 (Lawson 2023). Their motion was defeated in international arbitration as wealthier countries sided with their firms. There is nothing to prevent this from occurring with green economy development. Companies cannot be forced to develop where they do not want to. The shift to a green economy will not translate to improved jobs in most countries.

            According to recent estimates, climate change will force around 122 million people into extreme poverty by 2030 (Vetter 2022). If wealthy nations decide to hoard green technology, developing countries will continue to rely on fossil fuel consumption, which will have adverse effects on both the environment and human health. As the wealthy become more affluent, the poor become less well-off because of the continued use of fossil fuels and their adverse impacts on human health and the environment. Fossil fuel emissions are known to lead to early death, heart attacks, respiratory disorders, stroke, asthma, and absenteeism (Harvard n.d.). The research concluded that more than 8 million people died in 2018 from fossil fuel pollution, meaning that air pollution from burning fossil fuels like coal and diesel was responsible for about 1 in 5 deaths worldwide (Karn 2021). Fossil fuel operations contaminate water supplies, leading to disease increases (Vetter 2022). 

            Climate change is a health crisis in and of itself within developing countries and developed countries. Between 1921 and 2021, the length of the transmission season for malaria increased by 31.3% in the highlands of the Americas and 13.8% in the highlands of Africa (Romanello et al., 2022). Raising temperatures have made coastal waters more suitable for transmitting Vibrio pathogens (Romanello et al., 2022). The truth is climate change has had an adverse impact on several vector-borne, food-borne, and waterborne diseases (Romanello et al. 2022). The change in transmittable diseases will further strain countries' public healthcare systems. Additional health issues will only further overburden underdeveloped countries' healthcare systems. These underdeveloped countries must be included in the global green economic growth and implementation to ensure that workers in developing countries are not excluded from the benefits of a cleaner environment.

            The raw reality is that workers' rights are tied to a country's healthcare system. As was previously mentioned, wealthier people are generally healthier than those who are poor due to better access to healthcare, nutrition, and education (Mabaso et al. 2014). Without proper systems in place to ensure that each worker has a living wage and access to healthcare, health amongst poor workers will only decrease. Synergistically, worse health has been demonstrated to have adverse effects on income. Poor health limits educational opportunities, and a worker's ability to work reduces opportunities for economic advancement and can cause financial ruin. Research has demonstrated an increase in extreme poverty by 115 million people due to COVID-19, including direct health-related and indirect global economic effects (Ramos and Lara 2022). The bottom line is that health and worker's rights are linked together.

            The UN recognizes the crucial role that health plays in human and economic development, particularly in the fight against poverty and in ensuring sustainable development. It views it as a central building block in fighting poverty and ensuring sustainable development (Kickbusch 2011). The World Health Organization (WHO), the UN's specialized agency for health, has also taken steps to strengthen healthcare and healthcare worker's rights in developing countries. In 2010, WHO member states adopted the Global Code of Practice on the International Recruitment of Health Personnel (Kickbusch 2011). The International Recruitment of Health Personnel established a framework that prevented wealthier countries from poaching healthcare professionals from developing countries with fragile healthcare systems (Kickbusch 2011). Implementing the International Recruitment of Health Personnel was the first time in 30 years the constitutional authority of the Organization was used to establish a code (Kickbusch 2011).

            As the UN General Assembly recognizes that health is an investment in both human and economic development and climate change threatens health, they should acknowledge climate change as a threat to human and economic growth. To a certain degree, the UN’s General Assembly is acting in this regard. In 2023, the UN’s General Assembly passed a resolution entitled Requesting the International Court of Justice Provide Advisory Opinion on States’ Obligations Concerning Climate Change (The UN General Assembly 2023). The Resolution put forth multiple questions to the Court to help better define states’ obligations under international law concerning ensuring the protection of the climate system from anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases. They also asked the Court to define legal consequences under these obligations for States that cause significant harm to the climate system and other parts of the environment. The Resolution expresses specific concerns for small islands, developing States, and people of present and future generations (The UN General Assembly 2023). The submission of this Resolution is an essential step in establishing accountability concerning climate justice. 

             However, the passage of the Resolution was not without its dissenters. The US disagreed that the Resolution was the best way to reach the shared goals of combating climate change. They argued that going through the judiciary is not conducive to diplomacy and that climate change issues are best negotiated and handled through diplomatic and not legal channels (The UN General Assembly 2023). This demonstrates a clear break from how developing and developed countries such as the US view climate action.

            Developed countries favor diplomatic efforts, whereas emerging countries favor direct action through obligations. Part of this is due to the vulnerability of emerging countries to climate change. For example, Sierra Leone’s delegate noted the coastal regions of Sierra Leone have become increasingly subjected to torrential rain, mudslides, and flooding as a direct result of climate change (The UN General Assembly 2023). Sierra Leone does not possess resources to mitigate damage in the same way that the US might, so the impact of climate change is felt more greatly in Sierra Leone than in the US. As a result, Sierra Leone prioritizes a direct approach to fighting climate change.

            Another reason why the developed countries do not take a more active stance on climate change globally is their profitable relationships with foreign economies. In 2023, the US exported 10.15 million b/d of petroleum to 173 countries and imported 8.51 million barrels per day (b/d) of oil from 86 countries (US Energy Information Administration 2023), incentivizing them to keep these countries dependent on fossil fuels. It is good business for the US to maintain the status quo and its position in the global economy. Shifting to a green economy might compromise US economic dominance as countries become less dependent on US oil. Internally, until the US stops using fossil fuels, there is no incentive to stop providing it domestically.  

           What this means in terms of labor rights is multifaceted. Emerging countries with oil often do not have the legal framework to ensure regulation and protection of worker’s rights making them susceptible to well-establish outside foreign oil companies. Guyana is currently experiencing this issue. The Guyana Department of Energy, founded in 2018, seemingly lacks the organizational expertise and framework to manage the complexities of the oil industry and workers' rights (Cahill 2020). Compared to existing oil and gas companies, developing companies often lack the expertise to scrutinize contracts (Cahill 2020). Ultimately, the discovery of oil in a country can led to the perfect storm for economic exploitation by large industries, including exploitation of workers. 

            Ultimately, developing economies with newly discovered resources should not have to deal with the gluttony of wealthy oil companies. It would be fruitful to have an international body of experts that help developing countries negotiate fair terms for their natural resources. This program may be run through the World Trade Organization, which already provides a forum for liberalizing trade relations. It would not be unprecedented if developing countries could seek their help to ensure that the oil trade is conducted ethically and fairly. This practice should be upheld as countries transition to a green economy.

      The fossil fuel industry has always been one of exploitation. The transition to green energy provides a global opportunity, not a global challenge. For the first time in generations, there is an opportunity to restructure the economy and learn from past mistakes. The ILO’s Just Transition promises to do precisely that. According to the ILO, a Just Transition is the greening of the economy while addressing social, environmental, and economic concerns of a sustainable transition in a fair and inclusive manner (Dzebo et al. 2023). At the same time, a Just Transition will create decent work opportunities for all and leave no one behind (Dzebo et al., 2023). In the end, this opportunity can only be seized by an engaged and committed global community, which is why cooperation and commitment are important. 

Conclusion

            The challenge of climate change is a global matter that demanded immediate and concerted action to safeguard the global environment and the rights of workers worldwide. As the world shifts toward a green economy, it is crucial to address the plethora of multifaceted issues that arise from direct labor rights to equitable access to green technologies and the protection of vulnerable communities. International organizations must truly commit to reducing carbon emissions and developing green sectors, jobs, and economies. Non-binding agreements can longer be acceptable. Commitments must come with timeframes, funds, and enforcement consequences. Worker rights must be factored into all decision-making.

            In transitioning to a green economy, access to necessities such as water, electricity, and computers must be prioritized in emerging countries. Education and skills training are essential in these countries so that they might benefit from a newer, green world. In developed countries, workers must be treated fairly as they transition out of carbon-intensive industries. Ensuring these workers have opportunities to succeed in cleaner sectors through training and re-education is imperative for their economic stability and well-being. As many workers will retire during the phase-in of green technologies and jobs, there must be a focus on providing the near future workforce with sustainable green skills and education. Any displacement of communities or people caused by a shift to green industry must be considered and addressed as a societal impact.

            The unequal distribution of intellectual property and patent rights poses significant challenges to global equity. Patents primarily held by developed countries may hinder access to essential innovations in cleaner energy solutions, disadvantaging workers and businesses in developing nations. This monopolization could perpetuate economic disparities and impede the widespread adoption of sustainable practices.

            Climate change impacts human health and public health systems and exacerbates inequalities in healthcare access. Death and health-related illnesses fall disproportionately on vulnerable populations in developing countries, were limited resources strain already fragile healthcare systems. Strengthening international cooperation and investment in healthcare infrastructure is vital to mitigate these effects and safeguard workers' health.

            In international diplomacy, differing approaches between developed and developing nations underscore the urgent need for collaborative action. While some nations advocate for legal frameworks to address climate change, others prioritize diplomatic efforts, reflecting divergent interests and capacities to combat this global crisis. Bridging these gaps is essential to ensure equitable outcomes for all nations and their populations.

            Addressing these intertwined challenges requires a holistic approach that integrates labor rights, education, equitable technology access, and healthcare provisions within the broader framework of climate action. Global cooperation and a shared commitment to sustainable development are essential to navigate this transition effectively and protect the well-being of workers worldwide. By fostering inclusive policies and leveraging international mechanisms, the world can strive towards a green economy that prioritizes environmental sustainability and social justice.

Reference List

Barnett, Andrew, Jason French and Summer Said. 2016. “Aramco: How the World’s Most Important Energy Company Works.” The Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/graphics/what-is-aramco/.

Cahill, Ben. 2020. “Guyana: Oil, Politics, and Great Expectations.” CSIS. https://www.csis.org/analysis/guyana-oil-politics-and-great-expectations?ref=hir.harvard.edu.

Curtis, E. Mark, Layla O’Kane, and R. Jisung Park. 2023. “Workers and the Green-Energy Transition: Evidence from 300 Million Job Transitions.” National Bureau of Economic Research. https://www.nber.org/papers/w31539.

Dzebo, Adis, Richard Klein, and Frida Lager. 2023. “A Just Transition for Climate Adaptation.” Stockholm Environment Institute. https://www.sei.org/perspectives/a-just-transition-for-climate-adaptation/.

European Environment Agency. 2024. “Climate Change Impacts, Risks and Adaptation.” European Environment Agency. https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/topics/in-depth/climate-change-impacts-risks-and-adaptation?activeTab=fa515f0c-9ab0-493c-b4cd-58a32dfaae0a.

Harvard University. n.d. “Fossil Fuels and Health.” Harvard University T.H. Chan School of Medicine. https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/c-change/subtopics/fossil-fuels-health/#:~:text=But%20burning%20them%20creates%20climate,spectrum%20disorder%20and%20Alzheimer's%20disease.

ILO. 2007. “ILO at a Glance” International Labour Organization. https://webapps.ilo.org/public/english/download/glance.pdf

ILO . 2011. “Skills for Green Jobs: A Global View” International Labour Organization. https://www.ilo.org/ wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/---dcomm/---publ/documents/publication/ wcms_159585.pdf

ILO . 2016. What is a Green Job?” International Labour Organization http://www.ilo.org/global/topics/green-jobs/news/WCMS_220248/lang--en/index.htm 

ILO and OECD. 2012. “Sustainable Development, Green Growth and Quality Employment” Realizing the potential for Mutually Reinforcing Policies, Background paper for the Meeting of G20 Labour and Employment Ministers, Guadalajara, Mexico.” International Labour Organization and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Developmen). http://www .oecd.org/employment/emp/50318559.pdf

Imray, Gerald. 2023.“Russia, China Look to Advance Agendas at BRICS Summit of Developing Countries in South Africa.” Voice of America. https://www.voanews.com/a/russia-china-look-to-advance-agendas-at-brics-summit-of-developing-countries-in-south-africa/7233548.html.

IPCC. 2023: “Current Status and Trends.” In: Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. [Core Writing Team, H. Lee and J. Romero (eds.)]. IPCC. Geneva, Switzerland, pp. 35-115, doi: 10.59327/IPCC/AR6-9789291691647

ITUC. 2017. “Just Transition – Where Are We Now and What’s Next? A Guide to National Policies and International Climate Governance, Climate Justice Frontline Briefing.” International Trade Union Confederation. https://www.ituc-csi.org/IMG/pdf/ ituc_climate_justice_frontline_briefing_2017.pdf (accessed on 20 August 2018).

Karn Vohra, Alina Vodonos, Joel Schwartz, Eloise A. Marais, Melissa P. Sulprizio, and Loretta J. Mickley. 2021. “Global Mortality From Outdoor Fine Particle Pollution Generated by Fossil Fuel Consumption: Results from GEOS-Chem.” Environmental Research, Volume 195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2021.110754.

Lawson, Max. 2023. “Treating Green Tech like Covid Vaccines Will Only Benefit the Rich.” POLITICO. https://www.politico.eu/article/treating-green-tech-transfer-covid-19-vaccines-will-only-benefit-the-rich-cop-28-dubai-climate-change-oxfam-un/.

Mabaso, Musawenkosi H L, Thoko Ndaba, and Zilungile L Mkhize-Kwitshana. 2014. “Overview of Maternal, Neonatal and Child Deaths in South Africa: Challenges, Opportunities, Progress and Future Prospects.” International Journal of MCH and AIDS. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4948143/.

Maul, Daniel. 2009. "“Help Them Move the ILO Way”: The International Labor Organization and the Modernization Discourse in the Era of Decolonization and the Cold War." Diplomatic History 33, no. 3: 387-404.

PAGHC. 2017. “Advancing Green Human Capital, A Framework for Policy Analysis and Guidance.” Platform for Advancing Green Human Capital. https://unevoc .unesco.org/up/Policy_Paper_PAGHC_draft_6Nov20176255.pdf (accessed on 17 August 2018). Pociovălișteanu

Ramos, Fabian Mendez, and Jaime Lara. 2022. “Covid-19 and Poverty Vulnerability.” Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/covid-19-and-poverty-vulnerability/.

Romanello, Marina, Claudia Di Napoli, Paul Drummond, Carole Green, Harry Kennard, Pete Lampard, Daniel Scamman et al. 2022. "The 2022 Report of the Lancet Countdown on Health and Glimate Vhange: hHalth at the Mercy of Fossil Fuels." The Lancet 400, no. 10363 (2022): 1619-1654.

Sampat B. N. 2009. Academic Patents and Access to Medicines in Developing Countries. American journal of public health, 99(1), 9–17. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2007.128769

Standing, Guy. 2010. "The International Labour Organization." New Political Economy 15, no. 2: 307-318.

United Nations General Assembly. 2023. “General Assembly Adopts Resolution Requesting International Court of Justice Provide Advisory Opinion on States’ Obligations Concerning Climate Change.” United Nations. https://press.un.org/en/2023/ga12497.doc.htm#:~:text=The%20General%20Assembly%20today%20adopted,long%20struggle%20for%20climate%20justice.

United Nations. 2023a. “Outcome of the First Global Stocktake.” United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cma2023_L17_adv.pdf

United Nations. 2023b. “Education - United Nations Sustainable Development.” United Nations. https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/education/.

United States Energy Information Administration. 2023. “How Much Petroleum Does the United States Import and Export?” U.S. Energy Information Administration. https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=727&t=6#:~:text=In%202023%2C%20the%20United%20States%20exported%20about%2010.15%20million%20b,total%20U.S.%20gross%20petroleum%20exports.

Vakulchuck, Roman. 2024. “The Geen Skills Gap: Educational Reform in Favour of Renewable Energy is Now Urgent.” World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2024/04/green-skills-gap-educational-reform-renewable-energy/

Vetter, David. 2022. “Fossil Fuels Are ‘Weapons of Mass Destruction’ Preventing Economic Development, New Report Finds.” Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidrvetter/2022/06/01/fossil-fuels-are-weapons-of-mass-destruction-preventing-economic-development-new-report-finds/?sh=84f8ac66b897.

Winthrop, Rebecca. 2015. “The Global 100 Year Gap in Education Standards.” Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-global-100-year-gap-in-education-standards/