IPCC analyses the synergies and trade-offs between preventing climate change and SDGs

On the other hand, when it comes to food security, a single-minded approach to creating a policy solely to reduce global warming may have a negative impact on global food supply. In contradiction to what the World Trade Organisation propagates, the IPCC sites that putting a ‘support price’ in place as a complementary measure would help reduce the trade-off so that populations aren’t put at risk of hunger.

The report hypothesizes that greater policy concerns would like in the area of providing affordable energy, especially for countries like India where there is a major reliance on solid fuels for cooking. One solution may be re-distribution measures where subsidies could be provided on clean fuels and stoves. According to the IPCC, re-distribution methods require a much lower investment than mitigation altogether.

More than energy, water security is where things get tricky, especially with some nations looking to hydropower power and nuclear power as energy alternatives that could potentially compound the problem of water scarcity.

India, in particular, has been making developments in the field of bioenergy. But bioenergy, as per the IPCC, can also result in an increase in the demand for water that could add to the problems of a water-stressed region. And if production of crops for bioenergy is prioritised, it’s a trade-off when it comes to food security.

All in the all, the option is either reducing the effects of climate change now keeping trade-offs mind or letting climate change worsen to increase the detrimental effects on the already at-risk segments of the world. Keeping climate change within the limits of 1.5 degrees Celsius, in addition, will make it easier for to achieve the SDGs for poverty eradication, inclusive economics growth and food security in the long-run.