Climate change is often framed as a global problem caused by all of us (in many ways it is). But a new study published in Nature Climate Change says otherwise: it turns out, the richest 10% of the world’s population are responsible for a whopping two-thirds of global warming since 1990. Not only that, but their emissions are directly linked to some of the world’s worst heatwaves and droughts.

For the study, the research team used a cutting-edge model that combined economic data with climate simulations to track how different income groups contribute to specific climate extremes—think once-in-a-century heatwaves, or droughts that ravage the Amazon.

“Our study shows that extreme climate impacts are not just the result of abstract global emissions,” says lead author Sarah Schöngart.“Instead we can directly link them to our lifestyle and investment choices, which in turn are linked to wealth.”

Strikingly, the top 1% of earners globally were responsible for:

• 26 times the global average contribution to rare, extreme heat
• 17 times the global average contribution to Amazon droughts

These aren’t just big numbers—they’re direct links between wealth concentration and climate harm, especially in regions that are least responsible for emissions in the first place. Tropical areas like the Amazon, Southeast Asia, and southern Africa are getting hit the hardest, despite contributing the least to the problem.

Who’s Really Heating Up the Planet?

The study points out that if everyone on Earth emitted like the bottom 50%, global warming since 1990 would have been minimal.

“If everyone had emitted like the bottom 50% of the global population,” explains co-author Carl-Friedrich Schleussner.

Instead, emissions from the wealthiest individuals—especially in high-income countries like the U.S. and China—have caused a two- to three-fold increase in extreme heat across some of the planet’s most fragile ecosystems.

And this isn’t just about what rich people are buying. The study emphasizes emissions from investments, not just consumption. In other words, it’s not just private jets and mega-mansions—it’s also how wealth is deployed through portfolios and financial systems that fund polluting industries.

“Climate action that doesn’t address the outsize responsibilities of the wealthiest members of society,” Schleussner warns,“risks missing one of the most powerful levers we have to reduce future harm.”

The researchers argue that climate policies aimed at high emitters could make a real difference—not just in curbing emissions, but in building broader support for climate action. That might mean taxes on high-carbon investments, climate-linked wealth levies, or stricter regulations on luxury emissions.

“We found that wealthy emitters play a major role in driving climate extremes,” Schöngart says.“Which provides strong support for climate policies that target the reduction of their emissions.”

They also make the case that this isn’t just about fairness—it’s also about effectiveness. If we want to cut emissions fast, it makes sense to start with the biggest contributors.

The message isn’t that individual actions don’t matter—they do. But this study makes clear that climate inequality is systemically real and measurable, and ignoring it risks undermining efforts to protect the planet.

Targeting high emitters—both through lifestyle and financial practices—could deliver big climate wins for the everyday person. And it might just make the fight against global warming feel a more just.

Ultimately, this also comes down to how much is enough. Not to take away the hard work of many rich people, but at one point we have to ask is why do we let a sense of emptiness inside of us think it can be filled with more and more stuff? Because this endless chase to fulfill an insatiable want to nowhere is harming everyone.

S Schongart et al. High-income groups disproportionately contribute to climate extremes worldwide. Nature Climate Change (2025). DOI: 10.1038/s41558-025-02325-x