A Europe without private jets

Every European noticed this week: it was hot. A hear wave hit almost all of EuropeThe climate crisis that experts warned us about for decades is now here and is hitting us hard with heat waves, storms, floods and extreme weather which we have never seen before.

To mitigate the damages caused by climate change we must reduce our CO2 urgently. Although important progress in many fields has been made, we are still very far from transitioning to a low-emission economy. In fact, the Paris accords warming limit of 1.5C above the pre-industrial average might have already been reached this year. If it is so clear how we can prevent climate disasters, why is it so hard for societies to actually do it, and why massive climate social movements created only delivered little progress?

This question bothered the German sociologist Niklas Luhmann already in the 80s, as the environmental movement started to gain traction across Europe, leading to the formation of the Green Party in Germany. Luhmann’s system theory of society sees society as the interaction between many independent systems, such as law, economics, science, politics, religion, education etc. Each system operates according to a certain unique “code” and “program”. The code is a binary distinction and entails the structure of each system. The program is the dynamic according to which the system operates.

Luhmann believed that all systems are in principle self-producing. They create their own code and program and cannot be directly changed from outside. They can, however, indirectly be influenced through so-called “irritation” with other systems that takes place due to the complexity of modern society. This irritation creates according to Luhmann resonance, which could eventually influence the program, but never the code.

In order to tackle the climate crisis successfully, cooperation between four such systems - namely, science, economy, politics and law - is necessary. This cooperation is, however, fundamentally tremendously difficult due to the coding of each system: science operates according to a simple true/false code. According to the very overwhelming scientific consensus, it is true that man made climate change is a serious threat and can only be mitigated through reducing emissions, which requires structural economic changes. The economy, however, operates through a profit/loss code. It can therefore only contribute to reducing emissions as long as it is profitable. In contrast to the initial hope of many centrists, it is usually not the case - economic activities, which are harmful for the climate, often generate large profits. Another prospect of climate action is through electing climate-friendly political parties, who may deliver climate-friendly policies through the political system. The political system operates, according to Luhmann, according to an election win/loss code. In democracies, however, where politicians get elected mostly because of short-term achievements and promises, building political power strong enough to enact the necessary climate measures is unlikely. Indeed, the power of green and left parties in Europe, although considerable, is still insufficient. Last but not least can climate action be promoted through legal means, such as suing and punishing individuals, corporations and states which are responsible for significant emissions. The legal system, however, which operates through the legal/illegal code, can only act within the narrow scope limits of the law. Since tracing each emission to its emitter is extremely difficult, the prospects of a legal climate action are nothing but slim.

In other words, effective climate action requires that each said system must be programmed entirely different, in order for the scientific truth regarding the urgent need for climate action to correspond with economic profit, political-electoral win and legality.

This view on society leads Luhmann to criticize the in his time established Green movement, which has developed into modern climate actions movements such as the Extinction Rebellion and the Last Generation. Such movements, according to Luhmann, fail to impact the program of the societal systems as needed. Instead, their moralistic approach, calling for radical changes of society and taking often highly unpopular disruptive actions, such as blocking traffic, does not generate the needed resonance and even causes pushback. Luhmann, unfortunately, does not offer a solution and leaves this issue open. It is therefore up to us to find effective methods for climate action.

Amid the suffocating heat, the world’s elite flocked with over 250 private jets - mostly from across the atlantic - to Venice to attend Jeff Bezos’s wedding. Private jets emit about 5 to 20 times more CO₂ per passenger than commercial airliners. While many Europeans seriously reconsider their climate behaviour and try to minimise their carbon footprint, a tiny group of the ultra-rich continue to fly around in their private jets. This injustice is unacceptable and should not be tolerated.

Unlike other climate demands, whose implementation is immensely difficult due to the structure of societal systems, a private jet ban is a clear, enforceable demand. Luhmann’s aforementioned structures of society could be programmed in a way that could bring them in concert on this issue: with appropriate economic incentives, such as taxation, a private jet ban could be not profitable anymore; supporting it would be helpful for electoral victories, as polls show vast support for it among Europeans; because the ban would be a concrete, easily enforceable measure, it would be fairly easy to identify, prosecute and sanction violators. A private jet ban could therefore lead Europe, and the world, from the climate deadlock in which it finds itself in recent years.

And most importantly, the anti-private jets sentiment is shared, according to polls, by a vast majority of Europeans. Much of the frustration from climate actions and policies arises from the gap between the behavioural changes asked from the general population and the refusal for any behavioural change from the side of political and economic elites. While Europeans are being asked to give up low-cost flights, billionaires are flying around to their luxury vacation homes across Europe. A private jet ban will be in this sense different. Instead of being perceived as out-of-touch moralism, it would be seen as a demand for basic solidarity. Advocating for this demand could have therefore an energizing instead of alienating effect, as seen in the recent protest wave around Italy following the Bezos wedding.

A Europe without private jets would be a better, more sustainable and more just Europe. Aside from long overdue climate actions, a private jet ban could bring unity instead of polarisation, which Europe needs just as much.