The Other Great Divide: Inequality in the Age of Climate Change

The Other Great Divide

Humans love categories. They help us make sense of our complex world — dividing societies into developed and developing, wealthy and poor, educated and uneducated. But these categories also shape the policies, practices, and values that reinforce unequal systems. They fail to represent humanity as a whole.

When it comes to climate change, this tendency toward categorization creates a problem. The human factor — what Burch and Harris (2021, p.139) call societal uncertainty — does not fit neatly into climate models. Because anthropogenic climate change is caused by humans (Farber & Carlarne, 2023, p.27), it will require collective human effort to undo centuries of imbalance in Earth’s natural systems.

The Uneven Cause — and Consequence

The rapid rise in greenhouse gases (GHGs) stems primarily from fossil fuel combustion and land-use changes driven by human activity (Burch & Harris, 2021, p.94). Yet, not all humans share equal responsibility. China emits roughly 14% more GHGs than the United States, but per capita, its emissions remain far lower (Farber & Carlarne, 2023, p.28).

Industrialized nations have contributed most to atmospheric GHGs, but the world’s poorest populations will bear the harshest consequences (Farber & Carlarne, 2023, p.29). Developing countries — often the most exposed to climate impacts — lack the resources and infrastructure to protect themselves. The divide between wealthy and poor nations is mirrored in their ability to adapt and recover.

Planning for a Shared Future

Climate change is a global crisis without borders. Future planning must therefore account for all of humanity. How will society rebuild cities, respond to uncertainty, and protect those at greatest risk? Which predictions will guide us — and which will we ignore?

At the foundation of these questions lie social values (Burch & Harris, 2021, p.143). GHG emissions reflect not just energy use, but cultural, political, and economic priorities. The U.S., for instance, accounts for 13% of global GHGs (Farber & Carlarne, 2023, p.28). Its temporary withdrawal from the 2015 Paris Agreement — followed by its reentry — illustrates shifting national values. Though U.S. CO₂ levels have fallen to 1992 benchmarks, the country remains the world’s second-largest emitter. Progress requires more than incremental policy; it demands a cultural shift away from carbon dependency.

Facing Extremes and Inequality

What is certain about climate change is that extremes will intensify. Events like the 2003 European heatwave — which killed over 52,000 people (Burch & Harris, 2021, p.187) — will become more frequent. The challenge is how humanity will adapt. Economic structures, climate policy, insurance, and infrastructure will all shape mitigation and protection strategies.

Vulnerability is not evenly distributed. It’s tied to poverty, lack of education, and social inequities (Burch & Harris, 2021, p.177). Even within wealthy nations, poorer communities face disproportionate exposure, greater sensitivity to climate events, and fewer adaptive options. From food and water to shelter and clean air, basic human needs are increasingly at risk.

Climate Change: The Great Equalizer

Education is often called “the great equalizer,” yet access to it remains deeply unequal. Climate change, in contrast, will touch every corner of the planet — though not equally, and not fairly. Humanity’s self-made categories have long divided us; now, the climate crisis threatens to unite us through shared vulnerability.

Colonialism and nationalism have shaped inequities for centuries. To confront the climate era ahead, humanity must create a new global framework — one grounded in shared responsibility, resilience, and justice. The divide between rich and poor, developed and developing, must give way to collaboration. Because in the end, the atmosphere does not recognize borders.

References

• Burch, S. L., & Harris, S. E. (2021). Understanding Climate Change: Science, Policy, and Practice (2nd ed.). University of Toronto Press.

• Farber, D. A., & Carlarne, C. P. (2023). Climate Change Law (2nd ed.). Foundation Press.

Glaciers, Water, and Society: Lessons from the Andes

Understanding Change Through a Social–Ecological Lens

Across the Peruvian Andes, glaciers are retreating at an alarming rate, reshaping landscapes, water systems, and livelihoods. Driven by global warming and deforestation, glacier loss disrupts the delicate balance between people and their environment — reducing water supplies, threatening agriculture, energy production, and increasing the risk of glacial lake outburst floods (GLOFs).

At Ursa Pixel Dynamics, we view this not only as a climate story but a spatial and social one. Access to natural resources — especially water — is influenced as much by social institutions, culture, and economics as by physical geography. Using the Social-Ecological Systems (SES) framework, we explore how human and environmental factors interact, adapt, and influence resilience in glacier-dependent communities.

What the Research Shows

• Hydrological Change: Glacier melt alters river flow, affecting irrigation, hydropower, and ecosystems.

• Social Vulnerability: Rural and Indigenous communities face unequal impacts due to limited infrastructure and governance gaps.

• Environmental Hazards: Retreating glaciers increase GLOF risks, demanding adaptive management and early-warning systems.

• Integrated Management: Combining biophysical data with social analysis helps design equitable and sustainable water policies.

Toward Resilience and Adaptation

Sustainable glacier-basin management in the Andes requires a transdisciplinary approach — one that joins geospatial science, community knowledge, and ethical responsibility. Monitoring systems, water-sharing frameworks, and adaptive policies must work together to support both people and ecosystems in a rapidly changing climate.

Why Resilience Thinking Matters in a Changing World

Resilience Thinking: Navigating Change in a Dynamic World

In the face of accelerating environmental and social change, resilience thinking has emerged as one of the most influential frameworks for understanding how humanity can adapt, persist, and even thrive amid uncertainty. It bridges disciplines—from ecology and geography to economics and policy—by focusing on how systems respond to shocks, evolve through crises, and transform when necessary.

At its core, resilience thinking explores how societies can sustain development despite both expected and unexpected change. It recognizes that development is not linear—there are multiple potential pathways, thresholds, and tipping points. Rather than striving for static equilibrium, resilience emphasizes learning to live with change and leveraging it for renewal.

The Rise of Resilience Research

Over the past two decades, interest in resilience has exploded. What began as a niche concept in ecology has evolved into a transdisciplinary paradigm. Scientific publications mentioning resilience have grown from just a few hundred in the early 1990s to thousands each year today. Beyond academia, resilience now shapes public policy, corporate strategy, and community development worldwide—from disaster risk management and climate adaptation to sustainable urban planning and poverty alleviation.

This widespread adoption reflects a shift in how we view our relationship with the environment. Resilience is no longer just about bouncing back; it’s about bouncing forward—adapting and transforming to meet the challenges of a changing planet.

From Ecosystems to Social-Ecological Systems

The modern concept of resilience stems from the pioneering work of ecologist C.S. “Buzz” Holling, who in 1973 challenged the dominant idea that ecosystems naturally return to a single stable state after disturbance. Holling proposed that ecosystems can exist in multiple “basins of attraction”—different stable states maintained by internal feedbacks. His insight—that systems can persist through change without losing their essential structure—laid the foundation for resilience science.

As resilience thinking matured, it expanded beyond ecology to encompass social-ecological systems—the intertwined networks of people, institutions, and ecosystems that sustain life. This integration acknowledges humanity’s embeddedness within the biosphere: we are not outside nature, but part of it. Our actions ripple through ecosystems and, in turn, shape our own social futures.

Resilience, Adaptability, and Transformability

Resilience operates on a spectrum.

• Adaptability refers to a system’s ability to adjust, learn, and innovate within existing frameworks.

• Transformability, on the other hand, describes the capacity to shift into entirely new pathways when old ones become unsustainable.

In some cases, maintaining the status quo—persisting within current systems—is vital. In others, especially when systems become rigid or degraded, transformation is necessary to open space for renewal. Successful resilience requires knowing when to adapt and when to transform.

Managing Complexity: The Science of Surprise

Resilience thinking recognizes that the world is complex, nonlinear, and unpredictable. Small changes can trigger large effects, leading to surprises—unexpected outcomes that defy prediction. Rather than seeking total control, resilience advocates for adaptive management: a flexible approach where learning and experimentation are built into decision-making.

This approach accepts uncertainty as inevitable. It promotes safe-to-fail experiments—testing new strategies, learning from failure, and scaling up what works. It encourages diversity, redundancy, and decentralized governance—features that make systems robust yet flexible in the face of change.

Building General and Specified Resilience

Resilience scholars often distinguish between two types of resilience:

• Specified resilience focuses on a particular disturbance or risk—for instance, how a community prepares for flooding or drought.

• General resilience looks more broadly at a system’s capacity to deal with unknown or unexpected shocks.

While specified resilience helps target immediate threats, general resilience builds the deeper capacity for adaptation and transformation across scales. It’s about maintaining diversity, nurturing innovation, and cultivating social learning to handle whatever surprises may come.

Resilience in the Anthropocene

In the Anthropocene—our current era where human influence dominates Earth’s systems—resilience has taken on new urgency. Globalization and technological advancement have created tightly interconnected systems where shocks can cascade rapidly across the planet. Urbanization, in particular, has redefined humanity’s relationship with the biosphere: while cities concentrate innovation and opportunity, they also disconnect people from the ecological foundations that sustain them.

Resilience thinking offers a way to bridge that gap. Urban resilience research, for instance, explores how green infrastructure, ecosystem services, and community stewardship can reconnect city dwellers with nature while improving quality of life. From restoring wetlands to reimagining food systems, resilience strategies aim to align human well-being with planetary health.

Stewardship and Governance for a Resilient Future

True resilience requires more than technical fixes—it calls for stewardship. This involves recognizing our shared responsibility for the biosphere and creating governance systems that are adaptive, inclusive, and polycentric. Indigenous and local knowledge systems play a critical role here, offering time-tested insights into managing ecosystems in ways that sustain both people and nature.

Scenario planning, participatory governance, and ecosystem-based management are among the tools that support resilience-building. By envisioning multiple futures and fostering dialogue among diverse stakeholders, societies can prepare for uncertainty while nurturing innovation and equity.

Why Resilience Thinking Matters

Ultimately, resilience thinking is about cultivating the capacity to sustain life in a dynamic world. It invites us to embrace complexity, learn from change, and design systems that thrive amid uncertainty. Whether applied to climate adaptation, sustainable cities, or social innovation, resilience thinking helps bridge disciplines, connect scales, and align human development with the resilience of the biosphere itself.

In a world defined by volatility, resilience is not just a scientific concept—it’s a way of seeing, learning, and living. It challenges us to move beyond the illusion of control and to build futures that are adaptive, just, and sustainable for generations to come.