When world leaders fly into New York City (just think of the CO2 emissions from all the flights!) to hobnob at the annual UN General Assembly, they think and act as many leaders often do: they are seeking top-down solutions to global problems. They will tell us what to do. If we balk, they will offer to pay us to do it. If we do it, then problem(s) solved. 

How is that working out? 

Since 1990, the world has seen a textbook “hockey stick” of growth in emissions. China is now the world’s largest emitter and has increased its CO2 emissions by 450 percent since 1990. The United States, however, largely thanks to the shale gas boom, with some credit due to renewables, has decreased its emissions by 6.1 percent. So what’s the difference? Certainly not who makes the strongest pledges on the global climate stage. 

Real solutions don’t come from the top via meaningless pledges, regulations, and subsidies. If the UN wants to solve climate problems, it should be focused on bringing energy and economic abundance to people around the world, rather than offering them potential climate welfare checks. To give these leaders their due: they mean well. Everyone wants to live in a clean environment. But their approach is all wrong. 

Let’s step back and think of it this way: People can’t focus on big-picture problems until their daily needs are met. You can’t work on a project at the office if your car won’t start or your computer won’t boot up. 

Well, Americans can take cars and computers for granted; they are always there and they (almost) always work. In many places around the globe, people lack access to reliable electricity or fuel to cook food. The World Health Organization admits that, “2.1 billion people still live without access to clean cooking fuels and technologies, with the number remaining largely flat last year.” That number didn’t improve in 2024: for the first time in a decade, it got worse. The WHO adds that such energy poverty contributes to 3.2 million premature deaths each year.

People living this way aren’t concerned about climate change because they can’t afford to be. They simply need to improve their living situation. They need more energy, now. Some call this the “abundance agenda,” and it also points to an “all of the above” approach. The best way to deliver energy is by unleashing the power of the free market. 

“The question is, how can you have cooperation without coercion? If you have a central direction, you inevitably have coercion,” the great economist Milton Friedman said. “The only way that has ever been discovered to have a lot of people cooperate together voluntarily is through the free market.”

The bonus is that free economies are cleaner. Don’t take my word for it. Ask researchers at Yale University. “We find that economic liberalism is positively associated with environmental performance,” they write. “While our results do not give countries carte blanche to pursue laissez-faire economic strategies without regard for the environment, they do cast doubt on the implicit tension between economic development and environmental protection.”

Importantly, freer economies are wealthier. That means they provide more private and public resources for environmental protection, as economically free countries tend to have higher levels of economic growth and more investment. People are wealthier, and poverty rates are lower. Richer countries have more funds to invest in public services such as sanitation, garbage collection, and pollution abatement.

Finally, it is critical to note that economic freedom encourages innovation, and innovation is the way to move forward. We need innovation in everything from battery technology to solar panels to self-driving cars, nuclear energy, geothermal, natural hydrogen, you name it. We need innovation in areas we can’t even imagine today. Economically free countries will drive that innovation. That will lead to cleaner sources of energy, more efficient modes of transportation, and more cost-effective emissions reductions. We’ve seen it in the United States, and we will see it around the world.

Climate Week can be transformed into climate year and climate decade, but only if top-down leaders are willing to relinquish their control and empower their people through economic freedom. That will help humanity create a future that features higher levels of prosperity, fewer pollution-related deaths, and a cleaner planet for all of us.

The views and opinions expressed are those of the author’s and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of C3.