COP27 optimism intact
The 27th meeting of the Conference of Parties (COP27) of the United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change has finally come to Africa. It is in progress at Sharm el-Sheikh in Egypt, with great expectations from African countries that their turn will come for the fulfilment of promises. The conference had a sombre beginning with UN Secretary General Guterres warning that ‘we are in the fight of our lives… and we are losing’.
Instead of remaining dependent on developed nations, the Global South should rise to deal with issues of immense importance to it.
That 26 conferences have gone by, and yet climate change is a major challenge to the globe indicates a sense of gloomy failure. The effort to restrict global warming to no more than 1.5°C is now evidently a losing battle. Time has passed, but progress is slow. Is the effort to reduce carbon emissions to prevent further erosion of the earth, despite the failure so far, an effort worth making?
Over 100 world leaders have gathered at Sharm el-Sheikh to show that the issue is still important. A number of civil society and NGO delegates are helping to drive the agenda of optimism and emphasising the need for change. Most of the rhetoric and speeches are providing a sense of dissatisfying déjà vu. As Guterres said, ‘The clock is ticking’, but we don’t seem to be making time.
That UK PM Rishi Sunak was persuaded to change his no-show decision to come in person to hand over the chairmanship to Egypt was a positive spark. There was a realisation that three of the most populous countries — China, India and Indonesia — among the leaders of the Global South, were not represented at the summit level. That Indonesia and India are the current and subsequent chairs of the G20, on whose agenda climate issues play a major role, is significant. Without China, India and Indonesia, further achievements on the climate agenda are unlikely.
A significant emphasis at COP27 is on adaptation. Developed countries always insisted on a focus on decarbonisation and mitigation and largely funded those initiatives. Funds for adaptation are lacking. Since the impact of climate change around the world is now more through floods, cyclones, typhoons and drought, the need to build a more resilient world to face climate change is necessary. For this, adaptation is important.
Secondly, efforts to restrict emissions need augmentation to control the large carbon footprint already in the atmosphere. The control of existing carbon, providing support to adaptation and mitigation to prevent more climate change are to be added together. What is now sought is an ‘all of the above’ approach. Critics believe that what we have followed is ‘a none of the above’ approach.
The battle is now no more between just and unjust because the developed and developing countries have come to a modus vivendi where they have decided how the responsibilities will be differentiated. In this, India has a larger commitment than a decade ago, whether it be on adaptation or mitigation. India’s initiatives for the International Solar Alliance (ISA) and the Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure (CDRI) are praiseworthy.
However, new and additional financing of a minimum of $100 billion annually, committed at COP15 in 2015, is yet to be attained by the developed countries. Efforts to push them to reach that level, which is inadequate but symbolic of their commitment to the cause, continue. Alternative financing, whether through impact investments or public-private partnership, also need pursuit so that the target of over $1 trillion annually can be pursued.
India proposed to chase a new collective quantified goal (NCQG) for climate finance, which was promised at COP21 in 2015. India emphasised that it is among the few parties which attained the 2015 goals. Climate justice and sustainable lifestyles through PM Modi’s LIFE —‘lifestyle for environment’ — movement are other Indian priorities.
The Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage associated with Climate Change Impacts was invoked. The COP seeks better appreciation of the recommendations from the Reports of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice and the Subsidiary Body for Implementation.
Scientific evidence and reports on climate impact and damage now are more vocal and clearer. This is not the main contention anymore. What is in contention is how to fulfil commitments on additional financing. The requirements vary from $1 trillion to the IMF figure of $2.5 trillion annually till 2030 to contain climate change and achieve the Sustainable Development Goals that are lagging behind the 2030 target.
Currently, developed countries are encountering economic challenges. Prospects of recession, enhanced energy and food costs, people struggling with increased cost of living and public health are the results of the pandemic, the Ukraine war, sanctions and economic downturn. Amidst this, to what extent can the developed world keep its promise on climate finance for developing countries?
While seeking a just transition for developing countries by regularly financing their mitigation, adaptation and carbon control measures, the developed world is creating dependence on it for financing. While not giving up on their responsibility, the Global South should also show independent fund-raising, however modest. Its aim is to support their regional partners by a new fund under G20 leadership of India, Indonesia, South Africa and Brazil. This expanded IBSA could make a parallel effort to pursue ISA and CDRI objectives and support fellow developing countries with focused leverage from a unique fund of public grants, private guarantees and FDI and impact investment for a better future.
Deglobalisation is a real risk and economic recession looms. The climate will only deteriorate meanwhile. Instead of remaining dependent on the developed world, the Global South should rise to deal with issues of immense importance to it.
