Humanity can improve living standards, reduce inequality, and keep global warming within a 2°C rise, according to a broad vision for the planet’s survival.
The report from the World Inequality Lab (WIL) aims to be the most thorough effort yet to address the polycrisis pushing the world toward climate breakdown, political extremism, and growing economic and social tensions.
It proposes a set of bold policies, including heavy wealth taxes on billionaires, major cuts to working hours, changes in diet, and shifting investment from material-heavy sectors like industry and mining toward education and health.
If these and other measures are adopted, the report says, the incomes of 89% of the world’s population would double by 2100, and global heating would stay below 2°C above pre-industrial levels.
The authors say their vision offers a positive alternative to the grim forecasts from far-right techno-extractivists, nationalists, and billionaires who claim the future will inevitably bring more fossil fuels, climate disruption, and inequality.
“There’s a huge cultural, intellectual, and political battle going on. And we all have a role to play,” said Thomas Piketty, co-director of the WIL and a professor at the Paris School of Economics.
“The ideology we see with [Donald] Trump and all the little Trumps across Europe and the world simply won’t deliver. In the end, we’ll have to move toward this kind of cooperative redistribution of resources and power, because the alternative will lead to disastrous outcomes—for the environment, the climate, and society.”
The Global Justice Report, published on Thursday, aims to address the shortcomings of mainstream approaches to the polycrisis. These include the overly materialistic focus of traditional leftist parties, the questionable effectiveness of the economic degrowth proposed by many ecologists, and the lack of social impact studies by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
The report tries to fix these gaps by combining inequality research, climate science, and proposals for building a political coalition capable of reforming the world’s financial system.
This “plan for equality and prosperity within planetary limits” is the work of 45 authors, based on databases compiled by over 200 researchers from around the world.
At its core is the idea of sufficiency—that people can live prosperous, healthy lives without constantly striving to consume or accumulate more material goods that harm the natural world we all depend on.
To achieve this, the authors outline three steps: cut average working time by more than half, from 2,100 hours a year to 1,000 hours—roughly a two-and-a-half-day workweek; encourage people to eat less red meat, a major driver of deforestation and ecological damage; and shift the economy toward low-consumption activities by more than doubling education spending to €8,400 (£7,250) per person and healthcare spending to €14,400.
Piketty said: “One extra euro of GDP in education and health has three to four times less material footprint and energy consumption than one extra euro of GDP in manufacturing. That’s why these sectoral shifts are hugely important.”
Tackling inequality is a central goal. Under the plan, the average per capita gross national income across theBy the end of the century, the world would see a monthly income of €5,000 for almost everyone, with the biggest gains in the global south. The exception would be the ultra-wealthy, who would face high taxes because they are most responsible for the climate crisis. Billionaires, who make up just 0.001% of the global population, would see their share of world wealth drop from 6% to 0.05%. Meanwhile, the bottom 50% would see their share rise from 2% to 30%.
Another key goal is reducing climate risks by cutting emissions as close to zero as possible. The report takes three mid-century scenarios for decarbonization from the International Energy Agency and projects them to 2100. Under the most ambitious plan, money would be redirected from the world’s richest people and invested in wind, solar, and other renewable technologies. This would speed up the full decarbonization and electrification of energy supplies by 2050. Further emissions cuts would come from reducing working hours and changing diets and economic activity.
This approach is expected to keep global temperature rise to 1.8°C by the end of the century. That’s much lower than the catastrophic 4°C to 4.5°C predicted under scenarios of slow decarbonization and ever-growing demand for material goods. It’s also better than the 1.9°C projected under a scenario of overall economic degrowth.
One of the key practical steps needed to achieve the report’s goals would be creating a global justice fund. This fund would finance the energy transition and help increase spending on education and healthcare to 38% of world GDP, up from 13% today. This work would be supported by a world sovereign fund, which would rebalance global holdings of public and private wealth closer to levels last seen in 1970.
“A habitable, equal 21st century is materially possible,” the report concludes. “What stands in the way is not technical impossibility but political choice and the hard but crucial work of building a coalition behind it.”
Cornelia Mohren, a co-author and environmental coordinator at the WIL, admitted the report was “visionary and maybe utopian” but said this was necessary to show that other paths are possible.
“It is good to know we can combine an equal world with staying within carbon budgets,” she said. “That is a very helpful result. It makes me feel hopeful. We saw what’s possible and we also see how hard it is with this political reality, which can be depressing.”
Piketty said recent history shows the report’s goals are achievable. Countries like Sweden and Norway were once extremely divided economically but made rapid progress in reducing inequality through government policies and a shift in investment toward education and health. Meanwhile, working hours in Europe have halved since the 19th century, which aligns with the report’s goals.
The key, Piketty added, is to address inequality and planetary habitability together. Without this dual approach, he said, governments risk repeating the mistakes that led to the gilets jaunes (yellow vest) protests in France against a carbon tax that would have hit working and middle-class people harder than the rich.
“If you don’t put this at the center of your analysis and if you talk about green policies, environment, in the abstract, this is simply not going to work,” he said.
The report will be unveiled and discussed at the World Inequality Conference from June 4-6 in Paris. Speakers include Ha-Joon Chang, Jean Drèze, Jayati Ghosh, Mariana Mazzucato, Branko Milanović, Lea Ypi, and Gabriel Zucman.
Jason Hickel, a professor at the Autonomous University of Barcelona and a visiting senior fellow at the London School of Economics, is among the contributors.LSE said: “This is an important and timely move. All of this is technically possible — we can live well while staying within the planet’s limits — but it will take organized political effort to make it happen.”
Frequently Asked Questions
Here is a list of FAQs based on the topic An equal and habitable world is possible academics outline a bold vision for the survival of our planet
BeginnerLevel Questions
1 What is this bold vision all about in simple terms
Its a plan from a group of academics saying we can have a world that is both fair for everyone and safe for the planet They argue we dont have to choose between economic growth and saving the environmentwe can redesign society to do both
2 Why do they say an equal world is necessary for the planets survival
Because the current systemwhere a tiny elite consumes most resourcesdrives climate change and pollution The academics argue that extreme inequality forces people to overconsume or degrade nature to survive Sharing resources more fairly reduces overall pressure on the planet
3 Doesnt saving the planet mean we have to give up our modern lifestyle
Not according to this vision It says we can keep a good quality of lifelike healthcare education and leisurebut we need to shift away from endless consumption fossil fuels and overwork The goal is a good life for everyone not just survival
4 Is this just a dream or do they have a real plan
They have a specific framework called The Earth System Justice model It includes concrete steps like capping extreme wealth investing in public services and democratizing the economy Its ambitious but based on existing research
Advanced Questions
5 How does this vision address the tension between economic growth and environmental limits
The academics reject green growththe idea that we can grow GDP forever while becoming cleaner Instead they propose a postgrowth or steadystate economy This means focusing on wellbeing rather than just GDP while using fewer materials and energy overall
6 What specific policy changes does the vision recommend
Key policies include
A global wealth cap
A universal basic dividend
Breaking up monopolies in energy food and tech
Shifting from carcentric cities to
