Category Archives: UNFCCC

Outcomes COP23: Focusing on Addressing Climate Change in the Developing World

03 Sunday Jun 2018

Posted by in Climate Change, UNFCCC

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

The 23rd Conference of Parties (COP23) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was held in Bonn, Germany from November 6th to 17th, 2017. It was the first COP to be presided by a Small Island Developing State, with Fiji as its presidency, and was politically and technically important due to diverse reasons.

This article will focus on key aspects of the negotiations which present implications on the developing countries, and prioritises on issues such as adaptation, loss and damage and climate finance. It does not discuss in extensive detail the topics related to discussion as many articles published on COP23 focuses primarily on it, and allocates space for issues that have not been widely discussed and would play a role in addressing climate change in the developing world.

The article does not present itself as an exhaustive discussion on all aspects important to developing countries in addressing adverse impacts of climate change. However, it is compiled with the objective of highlighting outcomes that focus on the needs of the developing countries, aspects that will be crucial to regions such as the South Asian region, and the activities that will follow in 2018 to build on these outcomes.

Adaptation

Climate change adaptation plays a crucial role for developing countries, especially those most vulnerable to climate change. While mitigation of CO2 and other Green House Gases is important, countries that are already impacted by climate change need urgent adaptive measures. The discussions on adaptation at the climate change negotiations were focused on many tracks among which are the Nairobi Work Programme (NWP), the Adaptation Committee, the Adaptation Communications, National Adaptation Plans as well as issues relevant to finance for adaptation.

Adaptation Communications could be seen as a tool under the Paris Agreement that will contribute to highlighting the adaptation-related priorities, and support for adaptation. The progress of the discussions on the Adaptation Communications will be important for developing countries as it would highlight the need for reporting on adaptation efforts and support, as well as drawing interlinkages between the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Sendai Framework on Disaster Risk Reduction. However, the negotiations on the topic saw divergences among the developing and developed countries on the inclusion of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, national circumstances, and flexibility on reporting.

In addition to this, the discussions on NAPs was another key element for the developing countries. This is due to the discussions focusing on support provided through the Readiness and Preparatory Programme of the Green Climate Fund (GCF). Under the GCF Readiness Programme, developing countries are allocated up to USD 3 million per country for the formulation of national adaptation plans and/or other adaptation planning processes by NDAs or focal points[1]. The Readiness Programme is aimed to facilitate the development of NAPs with a focus on national priorities in developing adaptation measures to address impacts of climate change.  During the negotiations on NAPs, it was highlighted by developing countries that several hurdles were faced by them in accessing GCF Readiness Support. This included among others the lengthy time needed to get approval for Readiness Support. Further, it was noted that a very low number of approvals have been received for applications, and the importance of fast tracking and facilitating the access to finance for NAP readiness was emphasized, so as to contribute to addressing  the needs of developing countries related to climate change adaptation.

Climate Finance

As expected, climate finance plays a key role in the negotiations, with support for climate action being indispensable for vulnerable countries. The finance discussions could be deemed cross-cutting and featured  under the streams on long-term finance, finance under the NDCs, Transparency Framework and the Global Stocktake, finance through the GCF, GEF and Adaptation Fund, and the negotiations on the Standing Committee on Finance.

One of the key issues to be reiterated in the negotiations on climate finance was the commitment of developed countries to jointly mobilise US$100 billion per year by 2020, which was agreed to in 2009, in Copenhagen. The next round of updated biennial submissions are requested from developed countries and a summary report will be prepared through these submissions. The upcoming intersessions in May, 2018 will see the organizing of an in-session workshop  on the topic whereby a summary report will be prepared for COP 24, and  two assessments on climate finance will be published in 2018 and 2020 to provide further information on the status of climate finance under the process.

Under the negotiations on the GCF, it was reported that the Fund is truly operational and delivering on its mandate. However, it was noted that the accreditation remains a challenge for many entities that have sought to gain accreditation to the GCF. This triggered the review of the accreditation framework, which is considered a challenge by many entities.

Another topic of interest on climate finance are the negotiations on the Adaptation Fund. The Fund has been a cause of divergence in COP22 as well as COP23. The members countries of the Kyoto Protocol agreed in COP23 that the Fund shall serve the Paris Agreement, which removed the doubts on the placement of the Fund. Further, pledges were made to the Fund, which amounted to US $93.3 million, with new pledges from Germany amounting to 50 million. Similar pledges were made to the Least Developed Country Fund (LDCF) during the COP23 as well.

The developments on the climate finance discussions and the workshop to be held in May will be important to see the pathway for support for climate action in the world.

Loss and Damage

Finance for Loss and Damage was not a win that the developing countries received during the last COP. While developing countries see loss and damage as one of the pillars with mitigation and adaptation, at present climate finance does not cover Loss and Damage as does the other two pillars.

However, there were discussions on the Loss and Damage during the COP, and these focused on the work of the Warsaw International Mechanism on Loss and Damage (WIM), the 5 year rolling plan, and the setting up of the expert dialogue on loss and damage. The Suva Expert Dialogue on Loss and Damage will be organized during the upcoming May session, to be held in Bonn. The discussions on the topic would be important to developing countries to understand the ways in which the topic of Loss and Damage could play a key role in climate change actions, and how finance could be mobilized to address the losses and damages felt by the developing countries due to adverse impacts of climate change.

Dealing with Risk Transfer and Launch of InsuRelience Global Partnership

Two key developments that could be linked and marked to adaptation and the Loss and Damage discussions could be deemed as the mode for addressing risk transfer and the ways of insuring vulnerable communities against the impacts of climate change. While insurance for climate change has been a topic debate, and seen as a negative element in cases where the communities are requested to insure themselves which places an additional financial burden on them, the InsuRelience Global Partnership presented a different structure for risk management.

Funded by the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) through a contribution of 110 million euros (US $125 million) the Partnership focuses on disaster risk finance, and provides insurance solutions with the aim of providing affordable insurance for vulnerable groups. Additional contribution to the Partnership was provided by the United Kingdom in the form of   £30 million (US $39 million) as commitment made in July 2017.[2] The  Partnership builds on the InsuResilience initiative founded during the German G7 Presidency in 2015, and aimed to providing insurance for an additional 400 million poor and vulnerable people in developing countries against climate risks by 2020. [3]

COP23 also saw the launch of the  Fiji Clearing House for Risk Transfer, and online resource aimed to provide access to vulnerable countries to  the best available information on affordable insurance and solutions. [4]However, the process contributing directly to vulnerable communities accessing information through the online resource provision remains vague. While a person with access to internet and resources could address one’s questions to the experts on the system, it is unlikely that a marginalized and vulnerable communities will be realistically be able to address their questions to experts and make decisions on how to address risks on climate change. While the launch of the platform is appreciated, for it to be realistically meeting its objective, more work will remain to be done at the ground level.

 

Progress in Agriculture

Agriculture has been a topic of divergence for over many years in the COP process. However, in COP23, the years of deadlock was terminated, with the countries reached an agreement on agriculture which aims to address food security, and impacts felt on agriculture through climate change impacts. This is considered as the first substantive outcome and COP decision in the history of the UNFCCC processes on agriculture.[5]

The agreement on agriculture at COP23 establishes the Koronivia Joint Work on Agriculture which focuses on developing cobenefit based actions on agriculture. This would mean that new actions and strategies will be implemented which focus on both  adaptation and mitigation focusing on both reduction of emissions and building of resilience in the agriculture sector.

The outcomes of COP23 on agriculture remain of great importance to countries of South Asia, and other developing countries as impacts of climate change are strongly felt on the small holder farmers, that contributes approximately 70% of the food production globally. Impacts felt on these farmers impact food security and increase existing vulnerabilities of communities of the region. Wish support of multiple actors, the small holder farmers of developing countries could build their resilience and face the impacts of climate change.

Wins for the Vulnerable

Gender negotiations in COP23 succeeded in developing a decision to develop a Gender Action Plan (GAP). This is developed with the aim to enhance the participation of women in the UNFCCC process and the implementation of the Paris Agreement.

Among activities that are highlighted under the Gender Action Plan are Activities capacity building, knowledge sharing and communication as well as integrating gender perspectives and enhanced knowledge on gender-responsive policy, planning and programming, gender balance and participation, gender-responsive implementation and means of implementation with improved social and gender-assessments and information, and direct access for grassroots women’s groups, and gender-responsive climate technologies. The GAP aims to integrate gender into the many levels of work in addressing climate change, including monitoring and evaluation of climate action.

The decision remains important to developing countries where women remain vulnerable to climate change, and where at most times their voices and concerns are not reflected in the decision-making processes. In highlighting the need for integrating gender into the climate change processes under the UNFCCC, it provides scope for women to engage more in climate change initiatives to contribute as well as to benefit from the actions taken to address climate change.

In addition to the GAP, the Local Communities and Indigenous Peoples Platform was also a highlight of COP23 providing space for the indigenous communities to share experiences and best practices in addressing climate change.

From COP23 to COP24

2018 marks a key year for climate negotiations. With the Paris Rule Book to be finalized by COP24, negotiations on issues related to setting the framework for Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), reporting of adaptation efforts, transparency and MRV framework, elements of the global stocktake, and monitoring of compliance under the Paris Agreement which remain to be finalized.

In May, in Bonn, and in months leading to the COP24 in Katowice in Poland, the discussions will focus on finalizing the Rule Book, and enhancing and building on the outcomes, as well as the unresolved elements of COP23 such as climate finance discussions focusing on article 9.5 of the Paris Agreement, relating to developed countries reporting on their climate finance flows to developing countries which was left unresolved in COP23.

In order to benefit from these negotiations, it will be important for developing countries, to stay focused on the national and global priorities needed to address the sustainable development of their populations. It will be equally important for the developing countries to find avenues for integrating climate change and negotiations on climate change at the global level to the sustainable development priorities at the national and local level so as to prioritise on the needs of the vulnerable communities who are most affected by the impacts of climate change.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[1] GCF Readiness Support, Retrieved from: https://www.greenclimate.fund/gcf101/empowering-countries/readiness-support

[2] $125 Million Announced for New Global Partnership to Provide Financial Protection against Climate Risks, Retrieved from: https://cop23.com.fj/125-million-announced-new-global-partnership-provide-financial-protection-climate-risks/

[3] Ibid

[4] Key Achievements from COP23, Retrieved from: https://cop23.com.fj/key-achievements-cop23/

[5] Countries Reach Historic Outcome on Agriculture, Retrieved from: https://cop23.com.fj/countries-reach-historic-agreement-agriculture/

Regional Cooperation for the Successful Implementation of the Paris Climate Agreement in South Asia

06 Sunday Nov 2016

Posted by in Climate Change, Development, Environment, Paris Agreement, Sustainable Development, Uncategorized, UNFCCC

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

16194695709_401c04d02e_z-1

(Photo credits: Biodiversity International via Creative Commons)

The fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (AR5 IPCC) published on regional impacts from climate change has provided that in South Asia, the climate is changing and the impacts are already being felt. It further highlights that climate change impacts will pose challenges to growth and development of the region. It points out to the need for international cooperation to address these impacts and states that, “International cooperation is vital to avert dangerous climate change impacts and South Asian governments can promote ambitious global action,”[1].

Among key areas that the Report points as being priority for the South Asia region are adaptation and low carbon development. It provides that “Adaptation will bring immediate benefits and reduce the impacts of climate change in South Asia.”[2] It also adds that adaptation is fundamental to risk management, and that South Asia has many adaptation options.

While adaptation actions are prioritized, the Report also indicates that low carbon development will also benefit the region, and the merging of adaptation and mitigation actions will lead to South Asia’s path to address climate change and its impacts. According to the Report, “South Asia stands to benefit from integrated climate adaptation, mitigation, and development approaches.”

Impacts of Climate Change on South Asia

Globally, sea levels have risen faster than at any time during the previous two millennia – and the effects are felt in South Asia.[3] Changing patterns of rainfall or melting snow and ice are altering freshwater systems, affecting the quantity and quality of water available in many regions, including South Asia.[4] Climate change will have widespread impacts on South Asian society and South Asians’ interaction with the natural environment.[5]

The AR5 highlights that, “The impacts of climate change will influence flooding of settlements and infrastructure, heat-related deaths, and food and water shortages in South Asia.” [6] It further points to impacts such as temperature extremes (high confidence)[7] which is reflected through the numbers of cold days and nights that have decreased and the numbers of warm days and nights that have increased across most of Asia since about 1950.

Further South Asia is victim to change in rainfall trends. These trends, including extremes, are characterised by strong variability, with both increasing and decreasing trends observed in different parts of Asia. Observations also show that there have been more extreme rainfall events and fewer weak rainfall events in the central Indian region.[8]

In addition to this, the region also experiences sea level rise. Changes of sea level in the Indian Ocean have emerged since the 1960s, driven by changing wind patterns.[9]

Effects of these impacts are already felt, threatening lives, food security, health and wellbeing across many parts of South Asia. Evidence show that there are clear signs that the impacts of climate change are already being felt.[10]

Need for International Cooperation

Given the interdependence among countries in today’s world, the impacts of climate change on resources or commodities in one place will have far-reaching effects on prices, supply chains, trade, investment and political relations in other places. Climate change will progressively threaten economic growth[11] and human security in complex ways, in this region and across the world.[12]

Further transboundary impacts of climate change are felt across the globe, to which actions need to be taken. While impacts are felt, and actions are needed, further needs for cooperation is highlighted by the state of countries in their economic and technical capacity whereby support from those that have a higher level with regard to both will be needed. In South Asia, the capabilities and vulnerabilities are diverse, and cooperation on climate action is needed, with attention to these elements. The political processes at the regional and international level must reflect these needs, in order to implement concrete and effective climate actions.

The AR5 of the IPCC provides that, “South Asian leaders have an important part to play – with all other international leaders – in forging this solution. Cooperating, recognising that everyone must share the effort, and making financial resources available for investment in adaptation programmes and low-emissions infrastructure are important in reaching global agreement.”.

Paris Agreement & Regional Cooperation

The Paris Agreement which entered into force on 4th November 2016, was signed by Parties to the UNFCCC at the 21st Conference of Parties held in Paris, in December 2015. In an unprecedented outcome, the Agreement for the first time brings together all countries under a common cause of addressing impacts of climate change, with all parties taking up contribution towards it. It builds on the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC,) and has as its objective to strengthen the global response to climate change impacts, and keeping the global temperature rise this century to well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase even further to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

Decision 1/CP1 of the Paris Agreement highlights the need for regional cooperation in addressing climate change impacts when it states, “recognizing that climate change represents an urgent and potentially irreversible threat to human societies and the planet and thus requires the widest possible cooperation by all countries, and their participation in an effective and appropriate international response, with a view to accelerating the reduction of global greenhouse gas emissions.”

It further adds, “agreeing to uphold and promote regional and international cooperation in order to mobilise stronger and more ambitious climate action by all Parties and non-Party stakeholders, including civil society, the private sector, financial institutions, cities and other subnational authorities, local communities, and indigenous peoples,” which focuses on the need for cooperation not only of State actors but also multiple-stakeholders for effective climate actions.

  • Adaptation & Regional Cooperation

The Agreement highlights several areas where regional cooperation is key. However this paper will focus mainly on adaptation and the elements that revolve in facilitating the implementation of the adaptation actions, as based on the climate change impacts assessment of the AR5 IPCCC it is provided as the most important element to the South Asian region.

In the Paris Agreement, Article 7 is the key section which addresses adaptation, and it includes the understanding of adaptation actions needing to have a regional dimension given the climate change impacts faced at different levels.  Under Article 7 (2) of the Paris Agreement, “Parties recognize that adaptation is a global challenge faced by all with local, subnational, national, regional and international dimensions, and that it is a key component of and makes a contribution to the long-term global response to climate change to protect people, livelihoods and ecosystems, taking into account the urgent and immediate needs of those developing country Parties that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change.”

The challenges that arise in cooperation in actions at the international level are at times the issues that pertain to sovereignty and the decision-making power of countries through regional and international decision making. In order to address this challenge which might arise, whereby resistance to adaptation actions could develop, the Agreement further provides that it will not be impacting the country’s decision making processes.

Under Article 7 (5) the Parties “acknowledge that adaptation action should follow a country-driven, gender-responsive, participatory and fully transparent approach, taking into consideration vulnerable groups, communities and ecosystems, and should be based on and guided by the best available science and, as appropriate, traditional knowledge, knowledge of indigenous peoples and local knowledge systems, with a view to integrating adaptation into relevant socioeconomic and environmental policies and actions, where appropriate,” which highlights that the countries will be making the decisions on adaptation processes.

Another mention on cooperation which is on adaptation is through the reference to the Cancun Adaptation Framework where it states that, “Parties should strengthen their cooperation on enhancing action on adaptation, taking into account the Cancun Adaptation Framework, including with regard to:

  • Sharing information, good practices, experiences and lessons learned, including, as appropriate, as these relate to science, planning, policies and implementation in relation to adaptation actions;
  • Strengthening institutional arrangements, including those under the Convention that serve this Agreement, to support the synthesis of relevant information and knowledge, and the provision of technical support and guidance to Parties;
  • Strengthening scientific knowledge on climate, including research, systematic observation of the climate system and early warning systems, in a manner that informs climate services and supports decision-making;
  • Assisting developing country Parties in identifying effective adaptation practices, adaptation needs, priorities, support provided and received for adaptation actions and efforts, and challenges and gaps, in a manner consistent with encouraging good practices; and
  • Improving the effectiveness and durability of adaptation actions.

Such cooperation on knowledge sharing, and providing technical support is vital in understanding best ways for adaptation. Despite certain diversity, there are also common needs and vulnerabilities that the South Asian region faces. While some countries are different from others, they are also similar in impacts faced, vulnerabilities as well as capacities. Given this,  collaboration within SAARC on adaptation actions is important to addressing climate change in an effective manner.

  • Strengthening Regional Cooperation

The Paris Agreement and its decisions request Parties to strengthen regional cooperation on adaptation where appropriate and, where necessary, establish regional centres and networks, in particular in developing countries, taking into account decision 1/CP.16, paragraph. This includes “facilitating the sharing of good practices, experiences and lessons learned; Identifying actions that could significantly enhance the implementation of adaptation actions, including actions that could enhance economic diversification and have mitigation co-benefits; Promoting cooperative action on adaptation;”[13]

In addition to this SBT44 held in 2016,  Partie agreed on a number of activities under the “Nairobi Work Programme under the UNFCCC focusing on adaptation to inform adaptation planning and actions at the regional, national and subnational levels, particularly in relation to, inter alia, ecosystems, human settlements, water resources and health.”

In addition to the specific sections that refer to adaptation, the sections on capacity building also refer to the need for “Fostering global, regional, national and subnational cooperation; Identifying opportunities to strengthen capacity at the national, regional and subnational level.”

Further Article 10 on technology transfer and support provides under sub section 6 that “Support, including financial support, shall be provided to developing country Parties for the implementation of this Article, including for strengthening cooperative action on technology development and transfer at different stages of the technology cycle, with a view to achieving a balance between support for mitigation and adaptation.”

The element of support is crucial for regional cooperation in the context of South Asia as mentioned above, given that while there are similarities, there are also differences that highlight the need for benefitting from one country’s capacities to help the other country adapt to climate change. In doing this, as previously it is important that the countries’ sovereignty is respected and that actions are taken in a manner that the capacity of countries are developed through technical and financial support, as well as resilience being built.

Conclusion

With climate change impacts being felt in the region of South Asia at a higher level each day, and the economic and social vulnerabilities of people of the region rendering them more vulnerable to these impacts, it is important that South Asia as a region takes initiatives to address climate change.

The Paris Agreement entering into force in November 2016, highlights regional cooperation on adaptation as an important element. And it is time for regional actors such as the South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation (SAARC) to take a pro-active role in making climate policy discussed in Nepal in 2014 at the SAARC gathering – where many aspects of climate change and regional cooperation were discussed – be invested into concrete actions. This will in turn contribute to building bridges to address common issues of the region, as well as create/facilitate the creation of links between countries for collaborative actions to address issues related to climate change, through regional cooperation which in turn will (hopefully) lead to a more unified and peaceful South Asia.

 

[1] The Fifth Assessment Report of the IPCC: What’s in it for South Asia? Executive Summary, (2014)

[2]  Ibid

[3] “The rate of sea level rise has been greater than the mean rate during the previous two millennia (high confidence).” IPCC (2013). Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Summary for Policymakers (p11)

[4] IPCC (2014). Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Summary for Policymakers (p4)

[5] Ibid

[6] IPCC (2014). Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Summary for Policymakers (Box SPM.2 Table 1, p21)

[7] IPCC (2014). Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Chapter 24 (p3)

[8] IPCC (2014). Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Chapter 24 (p6).

[9] IPCC (2014). Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Chapter 24 (p6)

[10] IPCC (2014). Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Chapter 18.

[11] IPCC (2014). Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Chapter 10 (p4)

[12] IPCC (2014). Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Chapter 12 (p2)

[13] Decision 1/CP16 UNFCCC

Paris Agreement on Climate Change, and the Need for Domestic Actions

19 Saturday Dec 2015

Posted by in ADP 2015, Climate Change, COP21, Environment, UNFCCC

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

,

COP21

(C) Creative Commons 

 

The Paris Agreement focusing on climate change and ways to address its adverse impacts was adopted on the 12th December 2015. It provides both binding and voluntary measures to address the objective of limiting the rise of global temperatures “well below” 2°C above pre-industrial levels, with the background target being 1.5°C”. The Agreement will be legally binding upon ratification by at least 55 countries that represents 55% of global greenhouse gas emissions, and will be the basis for the work ahead on climate change. While needing further development in the coming years through domestic actions, and further decisions to be developed within the process, the Agreement will be addressing its objective of addressing climate change at the global level, and highlights issues such as food security, human rights and climate justice, as well as livelihood quality jobs.

Key Features of the Agreement

The Agreement is considered by many as providing hope and means to address the impacts of climate change, having gained the support of 195 countries for its adoption. In its purpose, which is formed with a sense of aspiration, the countries are provided with self-differentiation on its responsibilities. (The historic responsibility based method not in its rigid form as wished by many). The common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities defined under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) though not completely abandoned, could also be interpreted as not present in its strongest form in the Paris Agreement. This being one of the reasons as to why some groups feel that the outcome of the Paris negotiations on climate change is not cause for euphoria. Among other aspects criticised being the lack of financial commitments, and the non-inclusion of liability and compensation for loss and damage.

  • Mitigation:

On mitigation, the system is “bottom-up” (the countries needing to take actions, than being bound at the international level to prescribed to take actions) and the mitigation obligations for countries is through the communication of national determined contributions every five years. The countries are required to “pursue” domestic actions to achieve the objective of achieving the contributions listed in their intended nationally determined contributions (INDCs) which were submitted to the UNFCCC as their voluntary contributions to bring down the global emission levels of greenhouse gases causing climate change. A sign that if the world is to achieve the objective of keeping the global temperature increase to 1.5 C, then the countries will need to take more ambitious actions at the national level to reduce their emission levels.

  • Adaptation:

Adaptation, the way to address the already existing impacts of climate change by adjusting to them and changes made to exist with those impacts is one of the key elements for countries vulnerable to climate change. Under the UNFCCC, the developed countries had agreed to support the adaptation efforts of developing countries. This includes financial and technical support to developing countries for appropriate actions, and efforts to adapt to the impacts felt in their countries. The Paris Agreement though providing for the continuation of obligation by developed countries to provide financial and technical support to developing countries does not provide for clear and predictable financial support by the developed countries.

  • Loss and Damage:

Addressing the losses and damages caused by climate change in developing countries has been one of the key issues of the Paris negotiations. There has been a strong call for the recognition of loss and damage, separately from adaptation and as a separate element of the Agreement from developing countries. While the Agreement was successful in identifying loss and damage as a separate element from adaptation, the question on liability and compensation for loss and damage remains not answered. Further, there is an exclusion for compensation and liability which through the decision of the Paris outcome. The Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) which was set up to address loss and damage, at the 19th conference of parties (COP) of the UNFCCC will further operate under the Paris Agreement. In order to address climate induced displacement, the Executive Board of the WIM is to establish a task force tasked with developing recommendations and approaches to address this issue.

  • Compliance:

The inclusion of compliance as part of the Agreement has survived. However in a non-punitive, non-judicial way, despite the call for setting up a climate justice tribunal by some parties. Compliance is intended to be facilitative and linked with the obligation under the section on transparency which is on all Parties to report their mitigation efforts, and for developed country parties to report on support for finance, capacity building and technology transfer, the word compliance is found for a mechanism to facilitate implementation and promote compliance. In order to ensure that compliance remains an important element of the Agreement, more time will need to be invested in developing the ways for its effective implementation.

Paris Agreement and Sri Lanka

Sri Lanka as an island state is vulnerable to impacts of climate change. Adverse impacts of climate change are already felt in the country, and with the potential for temperature increase, if concrete actions are not taken to reduce emission levels of greenhouse gases, the country will be at a more vulnerable stage to these adverse impacts. This heightens the importance of the Paris Agreement, and the need for ambitious actions of Parties to it.

Sri Lanka at the climate negotiations has been negotiating as part of the G77 and China, as well as the Like Minded Developing Countries. The country has submitted it INDCs prior to the negotiations, and the contributions include both mitigation and adaptation ones, also highlights the need to address loss and damage. Sri Lanka has also developed its National Adaptation Plan which is to be launched, and will be the basis for measures to be taken on adapting to climate change. With the Presidential manifesto highlighting the need for a shift to renewable energy, which falls in line with the efforts on climate change mitigation, it will be important to see how the actions will be taken to achieve the domestic targets in a participatory manner, through a multi-stake holder driven transparent and accountable process.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

National Adaptation Plans: Cancun to Paris, a Move Forward/ Step Back?

24 Tuesday Nov 2015

Posted by in ADP 2015, Climate Change, COP21, Uncategorized, UNFCCC

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, ,

In 2010, at the 16th session of the Conference of Parties, the Cancun Adaptation Framework  (CAF) affirmed that adaptation and mitigation need to be addressed with the same level of priority.  The objective of the CAF provides for the enhancement of adaptation action, through international cooperation, and coherent consideration of matters relating to adaptation under the Convention. The ultimate objective of this being the reduction of vulnerability of communities to the impacts of climate change, and building resilience in developing countries especially those that are most vulnerable to climate change.

CAF & NAPs

CAF further introduced the national adaptation plans (NAPs), a key element to address adaptation at national level, as part of the five clusters introduced by the CAF. NAPs was introduced as a process to enable LDC Parties to formulate and implement adaptation actions at the national level. The CAF also invited other developing country Parties to employ modalities developed to support the NAPs.

Since Cancun, the NAPs further evolved through subsequent COP decisions. The adaptation actions are to be undertaken in accordance with the Convention, follow a country-driven, gender-sensitive, participatory and fully transparent approach, taking into consideration vulnerable groups, communities and ecosystems. They are also to be based on and guided by the best available science and, as appropriate, traditional and indigenous knowledge; and be undertaken with a view to integrating adaptation into relevant social, economic and environmental policies and actions. Finance for NAPs for LDCs was requested to be through the Least Developed Countries Fund, and for developing countries to be through the Special Climate Change Fund and the Green Climate Fund, based on country driven, and any preparatory efforts that exist in the country to implement the NAPs.

The question that remains is what role or importance is allocated to NAPs by the Draft Texts for Paris, and what outcomes could be expected for them, based on the documents proposed for negotiations. For the purpose of this article, the choice of language for commitment towards adaptation and NAPs have been considered as binding, and the “best-case” choice of text – using the “shall” bracketed options is considered.

 

COP21 Draft Text for the Agreement

 

Adaptation is included in Article 4 of the negotiating text. Among choices to be made that have grabbed the attention of many is the choice between global goal and long-term vision for adaptation. While agreeing that the global goal on adaptation is important, and that it needs to reflect the level of temperature based on the mitigation targets, and link that to the associated level of adaptation that would be needed, what remains missing in importance seems to be the NAPs in the text. While certain elements to be highlighted in NAPs, such as those of livelihoods, gender equality, economic diversification, ecosystems are reflected through options to be decided on, the direct reference to NAPs remain minute, and not reflecting the amount of time invested in the five years since Cancun to ensure that the formulation, and more importantly the implementation, of NAPs would be a key element in the progress of adaptation actions in countries.

 

The text of Article 4 provides for the need to support “national adaptation plans and other adaptation actions, in accordance with the provisions of Article 4 of the Convention,” and the option is left for Parties to decide whether it should be a binding commitment or non-mandatory. If one were to pick the option “shall” among those options proposed in the bracketed text, as mentioned above if assuming the most optimistic choice of language,  then the Least Developed Countries and the Small Island Developing Countries will be able to hold the developed countries responsible for the provision of support for the NAPs and adaptation actions in their countries.

 

Article 4.6 of the Draft Text caters again (with options as usual, and many a bracket) to mentioning the NAPs. However the previous text on NAPs, the reference to NAPs is listed as an option among others which do not necessarily include the “implementation” aspect that the NAPs include, once again allowing it to be left out of the Agreement. The text provides for the following:  “Each Party, in accordance with [Article 4, paragraph 1, of the Convention and] its national circumstances and priorities (shall) engage in [a] [national] adaptation planning [process], [including national adaptation plans,] and enhance other relevant plans, policies, actions and/or contributions.”

 

A simple analysis of the above option provides that:

  1. a) Engaging in NAPs, and support thereof, is not deemed to be a country commitment
  2. b) “Plans” is a word to be questioned as it would produce a “product”, which makes it likely that a commitment of support for its contents would be sought, as opposed to a more vague wording such as “planning”
  3. c) The word “including adaptations plans” gives Parties the belief that they could pick whether to embark on formulating a NAP or not, and that the choice is somehow for their own benefit, and that a NAP is not considered with sufficient importance that it needs to be allocated.
  4. d) There is also the option of not developing a NAP, but to continue planning, or enhancing plans and policies and other options that exist for Parties to address adaptation needs of the country.

 

Financing NAPs

 

The next mention of NAPs in the Draft Text is through the option on financing for adaptation under Article 4.  The text conspicuously lacks a mandate for international support to be provided by the UNFCCC’s financial mechanism.  Rather, it refers to bilateral support which is neither accountable to the COP nor of which additionality is fully traceable by the Parties.  Additionally, the text merely mentions “plans”, which need not specifically be understood to refer to the actual COP-endorsed NAPs:

 

“[Developed country Parties shall provide developing country Parties, taking into account the needs of those that are particularly vulnerable, with long-term, scaled-up, predictable, new and additional finance, technology and capacity- building, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Convention, to implement urgent, short-, medium- and long-term adaptation actions, plans, programmes and projects at the local, national, subregional and regional levels, in and across different economic and social sectors and ecosystems][Developed countries [shall][should] transfer technology, in particular for early warning systems through United Nations mechanisms in order to make it accessible for all].”

 

Not only do the options not explicitly mention NAPs, they also provide for it to be merged through wording provided and picked out from. It remains doubtful as to whether the intention of the textual proposal encompasses the objective of seeking finance for NAPs including their formulation for all developing countries, or whether the intention is to preserve the ambiguity that leads for finance needs for developing NAPs for all developing Parties to be left outside the commitments on finance by developed countries; the advantage of the wording being that finance for adaptation actions is provided may be interpreted to include and not be limited to NAPs, whereas the disadvantage being that it prevents countries from developing comparable products – plans that are holistic, and covering the needs at national level, based on the already-agreed COP guidelines, that would inevitably facilitate better adaptation which is inclusive, participatory, transparent and accountable.

 

The draft decision text requests the Adaptation Committee to take into account of the aggregate temperature level based on the mitigation section of the Agreement, and to refer to the impacts it would have on national adaptation planning in countries. It further emphasises the need for support for LDCs for implementing their NAPs, and the request to the GCF to expedite the process for accessing finance. The question thereby remains for those developing countries that wish to access adaptation finance, and not provided with support for formulating a NAP, or technical support for it. Would the assumption be that all countries are required to develop adaptation policies, and have undertakings under their Intended Nationally Determined Contributions, and thereby not provided additional funding for developing them, in turn making it not the issue of providing support for all developing countries to formulate and implement NAPs?

 

NAPs in Paris: A Step Back?

 

In Cancun and in subsequent decisions, NAPs evolved as a means for identifying country driven solutions for adaptation, as well as a way of accessing finance for adaptation for LDCs, as well as other developing countries including SIDS. Decision 3/CP.20 “recognizes that the process to formulate and implement national adaptation plans is fundamental for building adaptive capacity and reducing vulnerability to the impacts of climate change,” which is different to what is mentioned on NAPs in the COP21 texts.

 

It further adds that NAPs to be “continuous, iterative and long-term nature of the national adaptation plan process, and that … can serve as an important tool for ensuring a common understanding and for communicating progress made towards both reducing vulnerability and integrating climate change adaptation into national and development planning.”

 

In addition to this, in Lima the Parties decided that “there is a need to enhance the reporting on the process to formulate and implement the national adaptation plan,” and also noted “that there is a need to strengthen the existing reporting related to the process to formulate and implement national adaptation plans under the Convention.” An aspect that has been put to question in the COP21 texts, where NAPs are not emphasised, and nor seen as a key focus for reporting on adaptation. The negotiating process seems to be developing selective amnesia where previous gains on adaptation planning and implementation are concerned and is, accordingly, starting the same discussion from scratch, yet ironically with less aspiration than what had already been previously accomplished.

 

The same applies for financing NAPs. If the process is to be in accordance with the Lima Decision on NAPs as agreed by Parties, then the needs for financing of NAPs in LDCs as well as all developing countries need to be addressed. The decision in Lima provided that “the Adaptation Committee and the Least Developed Countries Expert Group, in collaboration with the Green Climate Fund, as an operating entity of the Financial Mechanism, consider how to best support developing country Parties in accessing funding from the Green Climate Fund for the process to formulate and implement national adaptation plans, and to report thereon to the Subsidiary Body for Implementation at its forty-second session.” The COP21 texts reverse this progress by narrowing this provision of finance only to the LDCs.

 

Where to in Paris?

 

In Paris, countries need to ensure that NAPs are a key element of the adaptation planning and processes of countries, and that the developing country Parties are all supported, specifically by the financial mechanism of the convention, to not only formulate NAPs, but also to implement them in a country driven manner which prioritises the developmental needs as well as increasing the resilience of communities of those countries. The NAPs should not be limited to the LDCs, and/or the SIDS (while special attention may very well need to be allocated to them due to their vulnerabilities) but to all developing countries as a step building on and consistent with the provisions of the Cancun Adaptation Framework. If this is not recognised, then the work on NAPs and adaptation will be moving 5 years behind, as opposed to moving to solve the global needs for adaptation through the Paris Agreement.

 

NAP

 

(c) Creative Commons

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Adaptation and Inclusive Development: Ensuring That Nobody’s Left Behind

29 Sunday Mar 2015

Posted by in Climate Change, Sustainable Development, UNFCCC

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , ,

As the impacts of climate change increase in severity, and are felt on a daily basis, adapting to climate change has become one of the main aspects of addressing the adverse effects of climate change. Coordinator for the Adaptation Programme at the UNFCCC, Youssef Nassef, shared his views on why adaptation is vital when speaking of solutions to climate change, and how working on it is of great importance.

youssef

Addressing Climate Adaptation

Mitigation has been, and is still in many states, the key focus over decades at the climate change negotiations as well as the actions on the ground. This is due to the fact that in order to maintain the increase of world’s temperature at a level that is healthy for its ecosystems’ survival, cutting down of fossil fuel emissions is pivotal. However some effects of climate change are irreversible, and we need to find other means of addressing them.

Speaking on the concept of adaptation and its importance, Mr Nassef said, “Climate change is bound to affect people’s lives, livelihoods and assets. Adaptation is the means by which people can fend off the potential damage arising from the adverse effects of climate change, and can take advantage of any opportunities afforded by these changes.  The countries that have realised its importance the most are those who are already suffering from extreme climatic events or those whose population has experienced observed changes within their lifetime that are attributable to climate change.”

He also highlighted the element of resilience and the way in which people’s vulnerability impacts their ability to adapt to climate change impacts.

“The capacity to adapt is very much linked to the level of human development of a society.  Fortunately, the international community has developed mechanisms, such as the National Adaptation Plan (NAP) process, that provide frameworks for all countries to be able to rigorously assess their vulnerabilities and identify and prioritize their adaptive responses,” he said.

Working on NAPs

Established under the Cancun Adaptation Framework, the NAP process enables Parties to formulate and implement NAPs as a means of identifying medium- and long-term adaptation needs, and developing and implementing strategies and programmes to address those needs.

“The NAP process is picking up nicely in different parts of the world. The process is generic enough to accommodate different approaches that countries may wish to undertake, or have already undertaken even prior to the establishment of the NAP process.  There are a few Least Developed Countries  that are close to finalising the formulation of their NAPs, and a few non-LDCs that are also progressing well, with the mainstreaming of adaptation into planning processes being placed at the center of their efforts,” explained Mr Nassef.

He also explained that the NAP process is a country driven process which allows for it to respond to the needs of each country. While the process envisages efforts to support countries in the development of NAPs, it remains the decision of each country how it wishes to embark on the process.

“Given its longer term outlook and its link to the development goals of each country, the NAP process is by default a very country-driven process, and so there is little room for direct replication across contexts,” he added.

UNFCCC has received National Adaptation Programme of Actions (NAPAs) from 50 countries among which are the South Asian countries Bangladesh, Bhutan, Nepal and Maldives. Out of the countries in the region, Sri Lanka has commenced the preparation of its National Adaptation Plan for climate change, which is titled National Climate Change Adaptation Plan (NCCAP) which is due to be released for validation in April 2015.

Speaking on sharing of knowledge among countries, Mr. Nassef added that the UNFCCC is hopeful that the LDC Expert Group will be in a position to share good practices and lessons learned soon, once a critical mass of feedback has been received from countries that have made sufficient progress in their NAP process.

Overcoming Challenges & “Adapting Forward”

Mr. Nassef spoke also on what he sees as the most challenging aspect of addressing adaptation and responded that it is the framing adaptation in a manner that is forward looking that creates the challenge.

“What is most challenging to adaptation is framing it in a context of “adapting forward” to a desired future state of development.  Unlike mitigation where a country may strive to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to past levels, countries should visualize adaptation as one of the components that support their achievement of their future developmental vision,” he said.

He further elaborated that when a catastrophe happens and assets are damaged, one does not rebuild them in the same way as in the past – with the same vulnerabilities that rendered them liable to such damage; one rebuilds them incorporating a level of resilience commensurate with a conscious vision of the future environment and aspirations.

“This is not just applicable to physical assets, but also to policies, livelihoods, productivity and other aspects of development which may feature in a country’s future vision,” he added.

UNFCCC and Its Role in Adaptation

The UNFCCC process catalyses adaptation and provides overall guidance to its assessment, planning and implementation.  This has generated a number of supportive mechanisms. These include a knowledge hub for adaptation known as the Nairobi Work Programme. The work of the UNFCCC further involves a process for the identification and implementation by Least Developed Countries (LDCs) of their urgent and immediate adaptation needs – the NAPA process, and a process for the formulation and implementation of National Adaptation Plans.

Explaining further the role of the UNFCCC, Mr Nassef added, “The UNFCCC process also mandated the establishment of a number of funds under its financial mechanism, as well as a set of provisions to support the development and transfer of technology. This allows the provision of a comprehensive framework that supports the whole life cycle of adaptation.”

Multi-stakeholder Involvement in Addressing Adaptation

Multi-stakeholder involvement in the framing of policies and actions on adaptation is vital for pro-poor and pro-vulnerable adaptation policies.

Speaking on the inclusivity of stakeholders in the work on adaptation supported by the UNFCCC Secreatariat, Mr Nassef said, “The UNFCCC secretariat engages a wide range of stakeholders in support of the adaptation regime.”

He also sees the engagement of stakeholders as a challenging task while also an opportunity to create ownership for actions and policies on adaptation.

“Stakeholder involvement is indeed a challenge, but also a great opportunity for collaborative work.  It is a challenge because ministries in governments are usually divided by sector, but adaptation is a multi-sectorial concept. It is at the same time a great opportunity because, as a result of the climate change discourse, countries are being enabled to develop processes and methods by which such interdisciplinary work is elevated to a new level.”

Mr Nassef further stressed the benefits of broader representation to ensure that it is an inclusive process.

“The multiple stakeholders involved in the adaptation process need not be just government entities, but actually representatives of each and every segment of society and of its livelihoods. The need for broad representation of all segments of society makes the engagement of civil society organizations paramount.”

“The role of this comprehensive and balanced set of engaged stakeholders is to ensure that all aspects of vulnerability, whether associated with gender, demography, sector, region, ecosystem, industry, or otherwise, is taken into account in planning for adaptation.  It is an integrative process which teaches us a lot about inclusive development planning under which nobody is left behind,” he concluded.

US-India Collaboration & Obama’s Climate Crusade

26 Monday Jan 2015

Posted by in Climate Change, Environment, Features, UNFCCC

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

(C) Creative Commons

(C) Creative Commons

Following a successful visit to China in November that resulted in the US-China joint statement on climate change, President Obama is India. On Sunday, he achieved further success through bilateral cooperation between India and the US countries that focused on addressing climate change and energy issues. Both countries concluded negotiations on a five-year MoU on energy security, clean energy and climate change and an agreement to this effect expected as early as possible at a mutually agreed date.

India Not Pressurised by the US-China Agreement

Prime Minister of India negated the assumption that US- China statement on climate change pressurised India to collaborate with the US. While refuting the assumption he also added that his country’s decision to collaborate with US as a rightful duty to the future generations, bringing the focus back to the famous and India’s (probably) favourite element of climate negotiations for India – equity. In this case inter-generational equity.

He also pointed that the need for a global deal on climate change as the reason to move onto a collaboration with US. The PM of India at a news conference on Sunday said, “When we think about the future generations and what kind of a world we are going to give them, then there is pressure”. “Global warming is a huge pressure,” he added.

For a Global Deal on Climate Change

A key element of collaboration between the two countries is bilateral climate change cooperation. This includes not only US and India working together, but also working with other countries on climate change. This in turn would give hope that the expectation is to cooperate closely this year to achieve a successful and ambitious agreement in Paris.

Speaking on the Paris climate talks, the President of the US highlighted the need for India’s voice to be raised in a positive manner if a global deal is to be achieved in 2015. During the Conference to be held in Paris 196 countries will meet and negotiate on a course to address climate change. If urgent and ambitious actions are not made the global average temperature will be on track to levels that will be threatening for human survival on the planet. Given these reasons, the negotiations in Paris will play a decisive moment for all, especially for the most vulnerable states and communities of the world.

Collaborating on Climate and Clean Energy Goals

India and USA also pledged to enhance cooperation on the energy sector. While welcoming India’s intention to increase the share of renewable energy in electricity generation consistent with its intended goal to increase India’s solar capacity to 100 GW by 2022, USA intends to support India’s goal by enhancing cooperation in clean energy and climate change. The two countries already has a U.S.-India Partnership to Advance Clean Energy (PACE) umbrella program, and highlighted its willingness to expand policy dialogues and technical work on clean energy and low greenhouse gas emissions technologies. US-India deal also provides for the expansion of Partnership to Advance Clean Energy Research (PACE-R) a $125 million program jointly funded by the U.S. and Indian governments and private sector. The renewal includes extending funding for three existing research tracks of solar energy, building energy efficiency, and advanced biofuels for five years and launching a new track on smart grid and grid storage technology. Further, this includes accelerating Clean Energy Finance.

The US will also work on demonstrating clean energy initiatives on the ground including additional pilot programs and other collaborative projects, as well as developing an innovative renewable energy storage project and hosting a smart grid workshop. However this collaboration is not restricted to energy, but also includes fields of science, technology, innovation and agriculture.

Developing India, Polluting India

A developing country, India is also world’s 3rd largest emitter of green house gases. Although the need for cutting down emissions remains vital, the need for economic growth and reduction or poverty also plays a key role in India’s economy. In order to address the issues of development, while putting the country on a low carbon emitting trajectory, India needs to move for a rapid expansion of renewable energy. In this venture, the country needs investment and technology, and improving energy efficiency. It is to fill this gap that further US will provide financial support for India’s solar program.

“We very much support India’s ambitious goal for solar energy and stand ready to speed this advancement with additional financing,” said President Obama at a news conference in Hyderabad.

For developing countries, a fact that remains important in the shift to a low carbon trajectory is the price of renewable energy. This would be the reason as to why one of the requests from the Indian PM to Obama has been to ensure that renewable energy more accessible and affordable.

PM Modi has shown interest in the expansion of renewable energy as a way to mitigate country’s large-scale emissions. This shift could be seen as a sign that India is becoming positive towards achieving a global climate deal in Paris, end of 2015.The Prime Minister is reported stating that his nation along with all others has an obligation to act on reducing the fossil-fuel emissions blamed for damaging the climate.

US-India Nuclear Deal

The two countries also succeeded in forming a pact on nuclear energy allowing American companies to supply India with civilian nuclear technology. The nuclear deal which was held up for six years amid concerns over the liability for any nuclear accident has been finalised by setting up a large insurance pool allowing the deal to move forward without further need for legislation.

In the words of PM Modi, this marks a “new journey” of co-operation, with stronger defence and trade ties between US and India. The question is whether shifting to clean energy could be interpreted as a shift to nuclear energy, which is without carbon emissions yet equally dangerous as an energy source due to threats that it poses. If the assumption that cutting down emissions and shifting to renewable energy equals introducing nuclear energy as the solution, and other countries take heed and adopt the trend, it will not be a solution to the threats posed by climate change but another situation that needs to be dealt with caution.

LDP Fellows: A Christmas Wish!

27 Friday Dec 2013

Posted by in Random Moments of Life, UNFCCC

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

I met them at different times. Lama when she woke me up by walking into the room. She looks at me, and says “You are so beautiful! Where are you from?” Being the woman I am, and the instincts functioning the same way that any woman’s does, a long term friendship was born instantaneously.  Over the numerous times I fell over because I stepped on her shoes, and the numerous times I would order pizza at 2am or go for a walk for sheesha, we had developed a friendship which has put Lebanon on my mind’s map for my whole life time.

Sixbert, I met while waiting for a cab with Wael, and Lama, to head to the QNCC where COP18 negotiations happened. He was holding his briefcase, if I am not mistaken, and introduced himself to me. He later tells me that he thought I was a “sophisticated” person on first seeing me. To date, I have not come to understand what the hell he meant by that expression. But in him, I found openings for projects, where I could contribute. Hearing his stories of Tanzania, and how education costs so little, but man cannot afford it, made me realise that there is a lot we could do to help out.  Today we speak of his new work, his lectures in university, and his Phd studies. Or we don’t speak at all, since he would have said something to piss me off, and I would take my own time to cool off, but I know I have a friend in Africa, who would not find my plans for a better world to be nonsensical, and would actually want to help me implement them.

Ange, I forget when I first met. I think years back, and then again in Doha. He is the guy who would speak French, and speak of the Francophone in the UNFCCC process. Ivory Coast, human rights, his life, and my child we discussed. He would be part of the program, and briefly out of it, to return again. We speak of issues on gender, different perceptions on life and work, and how the world sees us, how the colour of the skin plays or does not play a role. Most importantly   how he could develop a CAN node in his country, so that climate change work would have more focus. Sincerity be the protocol, and Ange respects it at all times. Another friend for life earned, when he and Sixbert put their negotiation tracking on hold to come say good bye to me. I hope I see you soon, in some corner of the world!

Imelda, aka Henrietta, my Kebab buddy, and salad shopping buddy.  Hailing from Indonesia she is seen around the UNFCCC corridors with her backpack, fully equipped to live a day or two in the venue if needed, and with tons of knowledge that would be distributed at any time upon request. One of the hardest working women I have ever met, and one of the most knowledgeable, and one I know I could count on to answer any of my questions related to policy. The number of times I would have bugged her on gaining a simplification on something related to Climate Finance or Mitigation is a little too large to keep count of. But what I would not forget is her support with all my stupid ventures including the intellectual, while holding a basket full of groceries while I chat to a cute super market worker.  Every day she surprises me with some random fact, the last I remember would be about how she blew up a lab facility in the Shell office in Amsterdam. Long live Imelda!

Andrey was the scientist among us. He would talk of Ukrainian power plants, and nuclear energy. I would get explanations on hot air and Belarus and Ukraine based policies. He would entertain me with walks when I am bored, with his long hair blowing in the wind, and talk about how women wear cute shoes in Germany as opposed to other places.  One with his priorities properly set, he knows what he wants, and abides by it. I am amazed at times by your capacity to keep focus!

And there was also Enrique from Argentina, the guy who had all the energy after a full day of sessions to find where be it a venue for Latin dancing. Everyone knows him, his reputation precedes him, and my words not sufficient to describe him. Where did I meet him first? Surprisingly Sri Lanka!

A year’s fellowship has come to an end. But it seems that I have gained friends for a life time, and built bridges across the world to make good work come true!  It has certainly put Lebanon, Tanzania, Ivory Coast, Indonesia and Ukraine on my map of the world.

Here’s to many climate projects, humanitarian projects, or just nonsensical projects! For all those we are part of, will definitely succeed to change the world for the best!

You guys rock!

From a Pinch of Salt to “Pinches” of Gender

30 Friday Nov 2012

Posted by in COP18 Doha, UNFCCC

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

One speaks of gender rights and environmental rights. Speaking of them in combined mode, and that too on the UNFCCC track can be a challenge, but not necessarily one that is over burdening given its due importance.

Women play a key role in day to day life, and are those who are most burdened by issues pertaining to climate change. Nevertheless it be seen that it is on women that the focus remains lacking. In Decision 36 of COP 7 in 2001, the need to focus on gender and women has already been highlighted. On referring to the Beijing Declaration of 1995, the Decision goes to lay down the importance of the inclusion of women delegates in the UNFCCC process, and other form of entities that take action on climate change. This is based on the need for effective communication of women’s needs which can be most clearly stated by those who are affected due to their absence.

Furthermore articles 3,4,5, 15 and 16 of the Beijing Declaration stress on the need of women’s inclusion in development and equal treatment of men and women in development. In addition article 27 of the same provides that in the development of developing countries, the inclusion of the women in the process is needed, and highlights the need for participatory development where women are not side-lined by their male counter-part.

If one wonders what the relevance of all this is to “climate talks” or the UNFCCC process as one may call at one’s choice, the relevance lies in the fact that women are key victims of the impacts of climate change. They are the most vulnerable and are affected by climate disasters. Furthermore in agricultural communities affected by climate change, women walk for many kilometres in search of water. In Africa and certain parts of South Asia, in regions hit by droughts, women not only suffer to find water, but also combat the scarcity of food in feeding their children. Maternity makes those vulnerable more vulnerable to climate change, health-wise as well as financial wise. In many coastal communities livelihoods are affected, agricultural communities are impacted with loss of crops due to sudden changes in the climate. The mother of the family bears all of it, while struggling to adapt to changes in circumstance, while at a loss of livelihood through harsh changes in the climate.

Not only the aforementioned, the lack of awareness and lack of education among women regarding the impacts of climate change does affect their ability to react to what they are in the process of confronting. The seasons may change, the crops may be damaged, and the rains may fall harsher, but the lack of knowledge on what impacts their life, makes the woman unable to adapt to the situation as appropriate. Hence the need for more focus on Article 6 and education. Girls in societies where they are deprived of access to education render them vulnerable, and deprive knowledge to forth coming generations, where mothers would play a key role in shaping the lives of the children. As chichŽ as it may sound, that be the reality, and one can do but to acknowledge , if needs to be taken sane that education of a woman is the educating of a generation.

So what is needed? More inclusion of gender (I do see many women in the process of the UNFCCC, so may be focussing on highlighting the cause of women and their rights in combating climate change could be the next step for those who walk the corridors of UNFCCC – including the writer, that being me of course). So time to suit up, buckle up, and call for climate justice, several “pinches” of gender included.

President of COP17, H.E Maite Nkoana-Mashabane Speaks to Youth

02 Friday Dec 2011

Posted by in UNFCCC

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , , , , ,

A youth briefing with the President of COP17, H.E Maite Nkoana-Mashabane was held at 6pm, in Mopane Meeting room in the ICC on the 2nd of December 2011. Speaking to the youth, the President noted the need for the leadership to take action and provided information on the development of negotiations on the green climate fund. Some of the extracts of her discussion with youth is mentioned below.

“We need leadership in action..It must take us a few steps forward and not back..We should not also be only talking about the second commitment..we need to start discussion of the legal work of the future framework. The work needs to start in Durban..There is a need for us to operationalize”

She added that the green climate fund as one of the main issues that needs to be of focus in Durban. “The delegation in that plenary..there is not one saying we do not want the green climate fund..they say that it needs to be operationalised in Durban…We do not waste time, we move to the sources of funding, ..here tomorrow”

She also highlighted that “we need more inputs..so that by the time we adopt this, it will really take us forward..For small islands and developing countries they are saying this is not about adaptation but about survival..on adaptation the approach has been fragmented.” Thus she stressed further the need to concentrate on how can we make the mechanisms are well coordinated while differentiating technology mechanisms from technology transfer. She stated “technology mechanisms are not same as technology transfer”

Highlighting that language plays a key role in the UN negotiations she added further, “I have also learnt that in UN language, language makes a difference. If we let it lose, then all of us have to wait passive.”

Following her speech the President of COP 17, was willing to answer questions of youth. The questions posed to her were mainly centred on the green climate fund, gender and female negotiators in delegations, and the inputting of youth recommendations to the process.

“Q1. Much of what you spoke about was how will we fill the green fund how do we fill it..what is your opinion on innovative financing, and financial tax?

“ Q2. How have the informal talks been going on climate fund and its operation?”

“Q3. How do you ensure the involvement of more female negotiators and youth delegates in the negotiations?”

“Q4. What will happen if Kyoto Protocol fails in Durban?”

“Q5. Civil society submissions and their expectation, we never received an appreciation of it, we want to make sure that the document is useful somewhere”

Answering the questions collectively, H.E Maite Nkoana-Mashabane stated that the document sent by the youth constituency had been received and that the suggestions and the recommendations will be taken into account.
“The document has been received. We have appointed a senior government official to listen to the civil society needs. The Ambassador of South Africa will be working with the civil society till we appoint a new team.”
“Why am I not responding? I will be cheating if I sit here and start drafting outcomes.. I have to take your inputs to the that plenary..so that that outcomes what come from Durban will be influenced in making those decisions.”

“Globally women are a majority in all of the populations” but she added that the inclusion of women “is a struggle that we need to keep fighting for. No society strives by only using one hand. a society that needs to be dynamic needs to use both hands.” She also stressed on the role of youth in ensuring that there be accountability and inclusion of all parties in the delegations.

If KP fails..” these delegates, the leadership here needs to take the responsibility..what I hear from the delegates is that KP alone is not a solution to the problems we have, we need to work on the future framework.”

“CDMs are linked to the KP. There are many other elements that have developed with KP. We cannot be talking about KP and KP alone. We need to look at how we can advance this.. we need to work on elevating the ambition against of mitigating against climate change.”

She also added “because we are here..I am taking photos of you guys for memory”

“On the female negotiations I agree with you. We don’t need female only delegations but it needs to be balanced. And the language in the process makes it difficult for people to relate to the day to day realities.”

“We have no delegation saying that the Green Climate Fund should not happen. By the time the Ministers and Presidents arrive they will see that our negotiators have made a lot of progress. I must say that I have been quite heartened by the progress the negotiators are making. It has been difficult but there has been progress”

“There is no one saying that it must not happen now. We want to start hearing commitments..even with the global economic meltdown..how do we start pledging..I have had some delegations say that we should be up and about and running..we should start talking about the sources of funding..what we are trying to do is not to put cart before the horse.”

“The more we get more overwhelmed the more we get into darker alleys we do not know. We need to provide leadership in action..We should be finding solutions through green mechanisms and CDMs and those that do not undermine our future”

To conclude she added “I know and I prey that we should start getting pledges, and by March if things go well we should start housing this green climate fund..in this gloomy financial situation this leadership in Durban has a responsibility to provide leadership in action.”

Photo credits : Thishya Weragoda

Ice Cream Party at the UNFCCC Negotiations!

07 Thursday Apr 2011

Posted by in UNFCCC

≈ 2 Comments

Despite the lack in numbers YOUNGO in Bangkok UNFCCC sessions has been able to grab the attention of those who are present.

Organising an “Ice Cream Party” the Nepalese youth with other youth present in Bangkok distributed ice cream at the entrance to the UNFCCC sessions to signify the melting ice caps of the Himalayas, due to global warming. They were backed by the negotiator trackers and the GCCA.

It was pleasant to see many of the negotiators and the party delegates stopping and accepting the ice cream offered to them by the youth. Guess the message was sent to those who speak for those outside the negotiations.

A job well done to all youth and others who supported the activity!