[et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ _builder_version=”4.27.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_row _builder_version=”4.27.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”4.27.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_image src=”https:\/\/naturefulcities.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/ICJ.jpg” title_text=”ICJ” _builder_version=”4.27.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][\/et_pb_image][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.27.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”]<\/p>\n
The International Court of Justice ruled this week that countries are legally obligated<\/em> to limit global warming to 1.5\u00b0C. It\u2019s the strongest statement yet on the climate crisis from the world\u2019s top legal authority \u2014 and it raises a question I can\u2019t stop thinking about.<\/p>\n In times of existential threat, societies have radically restructured themselves before. During the world wars, entire economies were transformed almost overnight. Rationing, mobilisation, repurposing of industries \u2014 nothing was off the table. So why not now? If the climate crisis truly threatens the future of human civilisation (and it does), then why is the global response still so\u2026 incremental? What are we waiting for?<\/p>\n [\/et_pb_text][et_pb_divider _builder_version=”4.27.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][\/et_pb_divider][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.27.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”]<\/p>\n