True climate justice demands a reckoning with colonialism – Al Jazeera

Report on Colonial Legacies, Climate Justice, and Sustainable Development Goals

1.0 Introduction: The Intersection of Reparations and Climate Action

This report examines the linkage between historical colonial actions, contemporary climate change vulnerability, and the pursuit of reparative justice, with a specific focus on its alignment with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The African Union’s declaration of 2025 as the “Year of Justice for Africans and People of African Descent through Reparations” provides the context for an analysis of legal proceedings at the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

2.0 Historical Context and Impact on Sustainable Development

2.1 Case Study: Colonial-Era Ecological Destruction in Madagascar

A critical case illustrating the long-term consequences of colonialism on sustainable development is the French colonial administration’s actions in Madagascar’s Androy region between 1924 and 1929. The deliberate destruction of 40,000 hectares of drought-resilient vegetation has had cascading negative impacts on several SDGs:

• SDG 1 (No Poverty) & SDG 2 (Zero Hunger): The eradication of a primary food source and natural defense against drought has subjected the Antandroy people to generations of recurring mass hunger, displacement, and poverty.
• SDG 15 (Life on Land): The action represents a significant historical case of deforestation and ecosystem destruction, undermining the region’s ecological resilience.

These historical actions have created a state of heightened vulnerability, which is now severely exacerbated by anthropogenic climate change, directly impacting progress towards these fundamental development goals.

3.0 International Legal Frameworks and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions)

3.1 The International Court of Justice (ICJ) Advisory Opinion

In July 2025, the ICJ delivered an advisory opinion on states’ legal obligations regarding climate change. The opinion presented both opportunities and significant limitations for achieving climate justice aligned with SDG 16.

1. Omission of Colonialism: The ICJ opinion failed to explicitly acknowledge the established scientific link, as noted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), between colonialism and heightened climate vulnerability. This omission sidesteps the historical context crucial for addressing SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities).
2. Application of Customary International Law: The Court affirmed that climate obligations stem from customary international law, suggesting that responsibility can extend to ongoing harms from past acts. This provides a potential legal avenue for accountability.
3. High Burden of Proof: The ICJ stipulated that full reparation requires a “sufficiently direct and certain causal link” between the wrongful act and the injury. This high evidentiary standard presents a significant barrier to claims for colonial-era damages, potentially shielding historically high-emitting nations from accountability and undermining the principles of SDG 13 (Climate Action) and SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals).

3.2 The Role of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights

The African Court is currently considering a request for an advisory opinion on climate change obligations. This presents a pivotal opportunity to advance a more holistic approach to justice.

• Integrating Reparative Justice and Climate Action: The Court has the opportunity to explicitly link the fight for climate justice with Africa’s agenda for reparative justice, directly addressing the shortcomings of the ICJ opinion.
• Upholding Regional Justice Mechanisms: By articulating the connection between colonial harms and current climate vulnerability, the Court can strengthen the framework for SDG 16 within the African context, aligning with the African Commission’s 2022 Resolution on Africa’s Reparations Agenda.
• Addressing Systemic Inequalities: A strong opinion would underscore the disproportionate impact of climate change on formerly colonized nations, reinforcing the urgency of SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and demanding greater responsibility from historically high-emitting countries as part of SDG 13 (Climate Action).

4.0 Conclusion: Advancing the 2030 Agenda through Reparative Climate Justice

The pursuit of reparative justice for colonial-era harms is intrinsically linked to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals. The ongoing climate crisis, fueled by historical emissions from colonial powers, continues to exacerbate poverty (SDG 1), hunger (SDG 2), and inequality (SDG 10) while degrading ecosystems (SDG 15). The upcoming advisory opinion from the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights represents a critical moment to fortify international law and provide a pathway for accountability, thereby strengthening institutions (SDG 16) and fostering a more just and sustainable global partnership (SDG 17) for climate action (SDG 13).

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 13: Climate Action

  The article is fundamentally about climate change, discussing its causes (historical emissions), impacts (intensified droughts), and the need for legal and political action. It explicitly mentions the “climate crisis,” “climate effects, such as droughts,” and the “fight for climate justice.”

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  The core of the article revolves around seeking justice through international legal institutions. It details the roles, actions, and shortcomings of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights in addressing climate change and historical injustices like colonialism.

• SDG 1: No Poverty & SDG 2: Zero Hunger

  The article directly links the historical destruction of a vital ecosystem in Madagascar to “recurring mass hunger, displacement, and death whenever drought strikes.” This illustrates how climate vulnerability exacerbates poverty and food insecurity for communities like the Antandroy people.

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

  The narrative highlights the deep inequality between historically high-emitting former colonial powers (like France) and formerly colonized nations (like Madagascar and Vanuatu) that bear the brunt of climate impacts despite minimal historical responsibility. The call for “reparative justice” is a call to address this inequality.

• SDG 15: Life on Land

  The article provides a specific example of ecosystem destruction: the deliberate eradication of “40,000 hectares (98,850 acres) of a drought-resilient vegetation” in Madagascar during the French colonial era. This act destroyed a “vital natural defence system” and degraded the land, increasing vulnerability to drought.

• SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

  The article discusses international cooperation and global partnerships in the context of climate justice. It describes how nations like Vanuatu rallied the UN General Assembly and how African states are using the African Court to push for a collective agenda on reparations and climate obligations, demonstrating the use of global partnerships to achieve justice.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. SDG 13: Climate Action

   • Target 13.1: Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all countries. The article demonstrates a failure to meet this target by describing how the colonial administration’s actions destroyed the natural resilience of the Antandroy people, leaving them “exposed to recurring mass hunger, displacement, and death whenever drought strikes.”
   • Target 13.a: Implement the commitment undertaken by developed-country parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The article’s discussion of “financing strategies” and the “historic responsibility” of high-emitting countries directly relates to the need for developed nations to fulfill their financial commitments to help developing nations with mitigation and adaptation.

2. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

   • Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all. The entire article is an analysis of this target in action, as formerly colonized nations seek “clarity and accountability through a world court” (the ICJ and the African Court) to address climate injustices.

3. SDG 1: No Poverty

   • Target 1.5: By 2030, build the resilience of the poor and those in vulnerable situations and reduce their exposure and vulnerability to climate-related extreme events and other economic, social and environmental shocks and disasters. The situation of the Antandroy people, who lost their “natural defence against recurring droughts” and were left vulnerable, is a direct case study related to this target.

4. SDG 2: Zero Hunger

   • Target 2.4: By 2030, ensure sustainable food production systems and implement resilient agricultural practices… that help maintain ecosystems. The article describes the opposite: the destruction of a natural ecosystem that “had sustained the Antandroy people for generations, providing food,” leading to “recurring mass hunger.”

5. SDG 15: Life on Land

   • Target 15.3: By 2030, combat desertification, restore degraded land and soil, including land affected by desertification, drought and floods, and strive to achieve a land degradation-neutral world. The article details a historical event of land degradation—the destruction of “drought-resilient vegetation”—which directly contributes to the problems this target aims to solve.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

While the article does not cite specific SDG indicators, it mentions or implies several qualitative and quantitative measures that could serve as indicators:

• Legal and Institutional Indicators (SDG 16)

  The primary implied indicators are legal rulings and institutional actions. Progress could be measured by:

  • The issuance of advisory opinions by international courts (ICJ, African Court) that explicitly link colonialism to climate vulnerability. The article notes the ICJ’s failure (“glaring omission”) and the opportunity for the African Court to succeed.
  • The establishment of legal frameworks for reparations, such as the African Union’s “Year of Justice for Africans… through Reparations” and the “Africa’s Reparations Agenda.”

• Environmental Indicators (SDG 15)

  A quantitative indicator is explicitly mentioned:

  • Area of land degraded: The article states that “40,000 hectares (98,850 acres)” of vegetation were destroyed. This serves as a baseline measure of historical ecosystem damage.

• Human Impact Indicators (SDG 1, SDG 2)

  The article implies indicators related to human well-being and vulnerability:

  • Frequency and severity of hunger events: The mention of “recurring mass hunger” suggests that tracking the number of people affected by food shortages during droughts would be a key indicator of vulnerability.
  • Number of people displaced by climate events: The article mentions “displacement” as a consequence of drought, implying this is a measurable outcome of climate vulnerability.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: aljazeera.com