Social Security in Crisis Mode (SoSiKri)

Climate Change and Inequality

A Growing Crisis and the Role of Eco-Social Security

Published on the 20th of January 2025

As climate change accelerates more and more, its effects are felt globally, but not uniformly. Rising temperatures, extreme weather events, resource scarcity, and biodiversity loss strain societies, the eco-system and economies, exacerbating inequalities in the process. Climate change is increasingly recognized as a ‘threat multiplier’, amplifying existing social, economic and ecological vulnerabilities.

Inequality is a multidimensional concept. In economic terms, for example, it could refer to disparities in income or the distribution of wealth; in social terms, to differences in opportunities to participate in society; and in political terms, to differences in electoral rights between citizens and non-citizens. This blog post focuses on wealth inequality, as wealth or income has arguably the biggest impact on dealing with the effects of climate change at a societal and individual level. This includes all action taken to counteract the direct and indirect effects of climate change, ranging from compensation, preventive measures to preemptive actions or adaptive measures. At the societal level, economic capacities (and normative goals) determine how elaborate these actions can be, at the individual level, economic capacities determine the range of individual risk management practices.

From a social policy perspective, climate-related crises call for a rethink of how social security systems tackle inequality, since neither the effects of the crises nor the resources to deal with them are uniformly distributed. Classically, social security is broadly defined as the institutional and societal responses to certain pre-defined risks (or contingencies), which have historically evolved and manifested in a society. However, not all risks can be anticipated equally. For example, unemployment, health and work accidents can be unforeseen, yet are still deemed worthy of protection. Thus, by definition, the range of what social security covers can be adjusted or expanded. If ecological risks, which almost always influence the social sphere, are included in social security systems, social security can be advanced to facilitate a more equal society in adaption to modern risks.

The concept of eco-social policy, which combines environmental and social goals, constitutes an emerging approach to addressing these interconnected crises of ecology and inequality by creating resilient and protective systems across all socio-economic levels. Since social security systems are currently designed to protect against life course risks, new reforms are needed to shift their focus to environmental risks and their societal consequences. These dramatic changes can be addressed through eco-social security.

Climate Change as a Perpetuator of Inequality for Vulnerable Groups

In many ways, the effects of climate change exacerbate social divides along the lines of wealth and well-being among many other categories.

First, disparities in vulnerability and exposure vary between regions and individuals. Wealthier populations often have the means to cope with the worst effects of climate change. For example, while rising sea levels and flooding displace low-income families in coastal regions or leave them with nothing, affluent communities may have resources to relocate to less impacted regions and retrofit or protect their properties. In contrast, marginalized communities, particularly those living in high-risk areas with inadequate infrastructure, bear the brunt of climate impacts without the buffer of financial security and therefore the ability to protect themselves and their possessions. Climate-induced migration and displacement influence inequality heavily. Climate-induced migration affects millions, particularly those from low-wealth or low-income regions that lack adaptive and preventive capacity. Migration pressures can strain social services and infrastructure in receiving areas, sometimes fostering social tensions and further marginalizing displaced communities. Wealthier people, though, are more likely to avoid displacement and, when they do relocate, often have the resources to reintegrate successfully.

Second, climate change can heavily influence health. Extreme heat, poor air quality, and increased disease prevalence disproportionately affect lower-wealth populations. Wealthier individuals may have access to air-conditioned environments, medical care, and other resources to alleviate health stressors, while vulnerable groups experience a worsening health crisis, leading to a vicious cycle of poverty and illness without the ability to access critical health services.

Third, economic instability and job loss is one of the main drivers of (wealth) inequality as these provide a foundation for all households. Climate disruptions affect sectors differently, often hitting low-wage jobs the hardest. For instance, agriculture, fishing, and tourism — industries with significant low-income employment — are highly sensitive to environmental changes. Job losses in these fields leave workers who are already vulnerable with limited options for alternative livelihoods, worsening economic disparities. Wealthier individuals, by contrast, are less dependent on these sectors and have access to more stable or diversified income sources.

The Role of Eco-Social Security in Battling Inequality

Given the interconnected nature of environmental and social vulnerabilities, eco-social security can play a critical role in fostering resilience, equality, and sustainability. Eco-social policies seek to integrate social and environmental objectives, aiming to build an equitable response to climate change and its impact. Eco-social security can thus be seen as the implementation of eco-social policies in social security systems.

Eco-social security influences different spheres of the climate change nexus. Advanced welfare states can provide climate-responsive eco-social security, while aiming at reducing potential inequalities through social redistribution. In some cases, inequalities occur because of the direct effects of climate change. In other cases, inequalities are due to the indirect effects of climate change, including the mitigation, compensation and adaptation measures implemented to combat climate change. Eco-social policy reforms can introduce new targeting mechanisms, new ways of selecting beneficiaries based on the identification of new needs, and institutional changes such as potentially new social security institutions.

To further cushion the blows of an increasing number of ecological crises, these new institutions could be introduced in addition to a wider range of eco-social policies. Eco-social policies that invest in green policies offer a way to protect societies and address economic inequalities. By investing in or securing future generations through institutionalised means, eco-social policies can actively shape a more equal and just society. For example, policies for a "just transition" ensure that, as economies move toward zero transition, low-income workers in high-emission industries receive retraining and job placement support in growing green sectors, such as renewable energy, sustainable agriculture, and conservation. This transition not only reduces emissions but also builds economic resilience for vulnerable communities through our social security institutions – killing two birds with one stone.

Incorporating marginalized voices in policy-making and societal planning is crucial to ensure that climate adaptation is inclusive. Participatory eco-social policies guarantee that low-wealth, low-income and vulnerable communities are considered in decision-making processes around social security – but are also included in preventive measures. For instance, designing social security institutions that not only compensate for the negative effects of climate change-induced flooding, but also invest in prevention measures would support both climate adaptation and social equity. 

While there is a broad spectrum of opportunities for eco-social policy and eco-social security, the resulting effects need to diffuse to all levels of society. Potential policies or institutions could aim at various eco-social risks, many of which have significantly grown in their magnitude or distribution because of climate change. For example, regarding healthcare, universal access to climate-resilient health services could be provided. Climate change magnifies health risks, and equitable access to health services is essential to mitigate this impact. Eco-social security should prioritize universal healthcare access with specific programs focused on climate-vulnerable populations. This could include funding community health centers in at-risk areas, supporting mental health services for climate-affected individuals, and developing public health interventions to address emerging health risks associated with climate change through future-oriented policies. Another example of establishing climate-responsive eco-social security could include cash benefits during extreme weather events, or health interventions targeting climate-related diseases. By integrating climate resilience into social security, governments can buffer vulnerable populations from climate shocks, promoting economic stability and reducing inequality.

To summarise, eco-social security represents a shift from traditional welfare models to adaptive frameworks that account for the interconnectedness of social well-being and ecological stability. Key features address risk protection against ecological hazards that could connect benefits to eco-friendly practices, support a just transition, and show the political and societal will of a future-oriented fight against eco-social risks. By protecting vulnerable populations, promoting equity, and fostering sustainability, eco-social security offers a comprehensive response to 21st century challenges.

Current research shows that eco-social security is not implemented sufficiently, which leads to increasing inequalities through the inaction of politics. This may lead to a vicious circle in which inequality grows dynamically – possibly resulting in an eco-social crisis. A paper on exactly this topic – inequality through inaction – is currently in the making!

Moving Forward: A Call for Integrated Policy Solutions and More Action

The crises wrought by climate change require an integrative, eco-social approach to social security that addresses both immediate vulnerabilities and long-term resilience. Governments, policymakers, and stakeholders must view environmental and social issues not as isolated challenges but as intertwined. The expansion of social security through eco-social policies, eco-social institutions, and a new awareness of future-oriented concepts, such as intergenerational inequalities, can mitigate the cascading effects of climate change on inequality.

How futures are perceived play a major role in designing these eco-social policies. Dr. John Berten wrote a blogpost on ‘How the future impacts the present in social policy’ which dives into the implications of future-oriented concepts for policy making. You can learn more about that here. 

In conclusion, addressing these complex challenges demands proactive engagement from all stakeholders — not just waiting for political solutions. Now is the time to move forward with innovative proposals, develop future-oriented solutions, and introduce fresh ideas that tackle issues of climate change and inequality head-on. By steering the discourse with a commitment to equality, we can shape a more inclusive future and ensure that emerging eco-social solutions are integrated into our (eco-)social security system.