Key Takeaways from (9th Nov)
While the Presidency has itself identified that a successful outcome of this COP should be implementation. This will require an ambitious, credible and transparent climate finance package, to accelerate the transitions needed everywhere for a 1.5°C compatible future, Yesterday was the Day of Finance at COP, Slow progress of various aspects of committing of Finance under various mechanisms has mostly been aimed to take attentions away from making strong commitments to phase out Fossil fuels and wedge a divide b/w Developing world.
1. Loss and Damage Finance Facility ( LDFF) The magnitude of public finance needed for climate transitions is $1 trillion per year in external finance will be needed by 2030 for emerging markets and developing countries ( excluding China) he estimated costs of addressing climate impacts (annual adaptation needs are estimated to reach $160-340 billion by 2030 and $315- 565 billion by 2050, while costs to address loss & damage are estimated at $1tn by 2050).With the 1st Week almost near conclusion the political conversations on a new and additional finance facility for Loss and Damage. Seems to be going nowhere. The pledges such as by Canada’s pledge of $24m Ireland (10m EUR to Global Shield), Austria (20m EUR to loss and damage), New Zealand ($20m to loss and damage), Scotland (£5m to loss and damage over 3 years), the UK (£13m to adaptation and loss and damage including funding the Santiago Network, and trebling adaptation finance by 2025 to £1.5bn); and Switzerland ($144m USD for adaptation finance) are not only highly insufficient but want needs to be taken with a pinch of salt and must be tracked while final attributions are made.
2. Adaptation front; the informal conversation b/w parties have started on how to operationalize the global goal on adoption. G 77 highlights the need of an inclusive GGA framework: dimensions and focus areas; sectors; cross-cutting approaches; source of information; indicators, metrics and/or targets as appropriate.
3. Mitigation work Program ( MWG) after three informal consultations a 9-page first draft text was published yesterday for review reflecting diverse views from parties and requiring more deliberations before any final decision text can be agreed (more insights after experts’ reactions on this by today afternoon).
4. New Collective Quantified Goal on Finance (Ministerial) : While Developing countries called for the new goal to be multidimensional (including qualitative and quantitative aspects), and for it to be adopted based on developing country needs, not on what developed countries think they will be able to mobilise or provide. Several interventions from developed countries made references to Article 2.1c and some overly focused on the potential of the private sector to contribute to the new goal including conflicting points like broadening the donor base. In short, the Ministerial on this issue failed to provide the concrete guidance for agenda and work to build up on in 2023.
5. The 2nd Periodic Review of Long-Term Goal: 2nd draft decision is out – 1.5 as long-term goal and all the IPCC messages except the issue of fossil fuels. A number of Developing countries Including India, China, Brazil is going to object to text around 1.5
6. GST (Global StockTake) has started and is even more open than in Bonn – you can be in all meetings even if you don’t have a badge. Recommendations on decarbonisation for highly emitting sectors, and the willingness of many countries to enter into details of what implementation really means, have been encouraging signals.
Key takeaways
At the end of week one there are a lot of draft texts on various important issues such as Article 6.4, 6.8, GGA, MWP, related issues linked with LDFF friction on advisory board for Santiago Network on L& D… Etc, etc, etc remains to be understood and called out. However Despite of this much information floating around there is still negligible progress on the overall political will to discuss and resolve crucial/mandatory issue such as agreement on rolling out the Mitigation work program and the incumbent COP 27 presidency also seems to at lack leadership to break this log jam b/w various negotiating groups. The politics of Divide and Rule used by Developed world negotiating asking some major G 77 + China economies to be part of widening the donor base during LDFF and NCQG are clear indicators that they are only interested to deliver procedural outcomes at this COP and want to delay the Cover decision outcomes on most Important demands on remaining with 1.5 deg carbon budget, removing all FF’s subsides, delivery of LDFF and doubling the Adaptation finance, identify pathway to honour 100 billion commitment and the next financial commitment and a complete phase out all fossil fuels.. Underlining a clear hand in glove that major emitter economies have with fossil fuel companies.
Key Takeaways from Day 6 (11th Nov) on Negotiations
· Loss and Damage Finance Facility (LDFF): Politics is taking centre stage, Developing Countries are trying all delaying tactics, Expectation is that this COP will only agree on Procedural outcomes to pursue this agenda item in the next one year till 2024.
Adaption
· Global Goal on Adaptation; While a day 4, G 77 +China has some solid recommendations on what could be the possible goals, references how monitoring and rules can be set up. From the Developed negotiators there are still differences in understanding these modalities and requests are being made to understand these in detail during the next one year. Delaying delivery on this agenda item to 2024.
· AC report National Adaptation Plans, BTR’s draft texts are prepared but very slow progress.
Mitigation
· Mitigation Work Program there is a draft text is being discussion, No outcomes in sight as of now, targets till 2030 and post 2030; China and Brazil threaten to use Article 16 on 1.5 deg language, on lines with MWG some countries are also pushing for Adaption work program which is completely un-fruitful, Some reference to sectoral approaches in text. which referred to a sectoral approach.
Global StockTake (GST)
· Discussion is happening in the right direct that will go beyond this COP and up to political level in April next year, The only worrying development is the presence of lot of FF’s lobbies Pushing false solutions such as CCS and blue hydrogen
Finance
· Finance System Transformation and Art. 2.1 (Paris agreement): Wider financial system reforms called for by Ghana, South Africa, France, Barbados, However at negotiator level the discussion clouded by lack of trust b/w parties especially lack of honesty shown by developed world in honouring 100 billion USD climate finance goal and developing world is wary of 2.1 being used as a distraction for shedding responsibility on MDB, IFI’s.etc
· NCQG (New Collective and Quantified Goal on Finance): Some progress and clarity on TED work program in 2023; However the issue of widening the donor based asking India and China to foot the climate finance bill; the role of MDB under Art. 2.1 and USA’s rude inclination to able private sector investment as source replacing guaranteed climate finance which is a complete opposite of Paris agreement are some real areas of confrontation.
Article 6
· The Role of false solutions labelled as removals under Art. 6.4 is Problematic; however growing consensus among countries to send these recommendations for a review mechanism.
· Confidentiality clause under Art. 6.2 is a non-starter and can lead to the whole process being unfruitful.
Following up on the slow and rather discouraging progress of week one here at Shar El sheikh the week two started with some respite for all climate activists, when Indian negotiators retraite their position from COP 26 to not just include the Coal but “All fossil fuels should be phased down” in order to keep the world under 1.5 deg of global warming. However, despite the fact that we have very little time left to build consensus on an ambitious and implementable cover decision, the diversionary tactics and divide and rule approach by Industrialized/ Developed countries have now moved from negotiators to ministerial level. The fight over inclusion of 1.5 deg achievement language in line with the spirit of Paris agreement have become the new flash point b/w developed and developing world where negotiating blocks like (G 77 + China) are opposing this issue of supplementing only the language around 1.5 deg. and highlights the urgent need that there should be a proper workplan that ensures the developed countries WALK THE TALK keeping the principles of equity and fair share alive and mandates timely , transparent and quantifiable delivery of on Climate finance ( 100 billion USD, Adaption Finance 50 % and NCQG) here at Sharm EL Sheikh.
In addition to ongoing COP 27 Climate negotiations, another space for us to watch is Bali (Indonesia) where the leaders of all major developed and developing economies are meeting today and tomorrow (15th -16th Nov). Happening in the background of Russia’s war on Ukraine the least expected issue is the reiteration of the Rome declaration to put ambitious targets in line with the 1.5 deg goal, complete phase out of fossil fuels subsidies by all G 20 counters. A solid political message at leaders’ level will surely have its positive impact on Ministerial level dialogues happening here at COP 27.
Key Takeaways: (Week 1 Summary) and Agenda/ Updates from Day 9 of Week 2
Loss and Damage Finance Facility (LDFF): New Text came out yesterday; not good at all, it delivers a mosaic of options but does not talk about he the need to deliver a loss and damage finance facility here at COP 27; Words like “liability and “Compensation” which were at top in the agenda are now only mentioned in the footnotes. In line with the indicators that we got last week this text delivers only procedural outcomes about the need to talk, talk and only talk of loss and damage finance. Expectantly negotiating groups like AOSIS and LDC’s have reacted very sharply on the draft text and demand it to be sent for revision and reconsideration by negotiators.
Not Sure how effective and useful would be global shield ( Is it a distraction tech to not deliver LDFF?) : Led by German Govt. and supported by Vulnerable group of countries (V 20) saw the launch of Global Shield; which is initiators terms is a umbrella mechanism to cover various aspects of permanent loss and damage via. Tools like insurance; The Civil society demands to know whether (How does this initiative goes beyond Insurance to address the vast impact of loss and damage? What is the proportion of Grant based finance being allocated under insurances and other measures? Has insurance worked in the Developing world? Some impacts and Climate events are Uninsurable such as high risk of desertification ( slow onset events) in some regions, What is your solution to tackle these problems? Do you think Global Shield can foot the bill for long term finance needs for people facing loss and damage? How will this cover vulnerable communists in countries that are not part of the V 20 group?
Adaption
· GGA: Parties are still discussing whether or not we should have a framework and if yes what should be the overall structure of this framework that will be used for reporting by parties to GST in 2023. In short negotiations on delivery of GGA rollout by 2028 are stuck until new updates come in.
Mitigation
· Mitigation Work Program: Negotiations and party dialogues are ongoing and things are stuck again around the issues of physical activity to operationalize 1.5 deg goals and ways to achieve that.
Finance
· International Financial reforms (System Transformation) and Art. 2.1 (Paris agreement): The role of International and Multilateral institutes in providing finance to tackle climate change must not undermine the Equity and fair share principles and the negotiators have a deadline by Wednesday to resolve all standing issues.
· NCQG (New Collective and Quantified Goal on Finance): No new updates at end, the friction point is the demand by developed world to widen the donor base (including China and India, identifying who pays first) the developing nations are holding especially G 77 + China are holding their forte tight; saying that nations must honour the principles of Equity, Fair share and historical emissions and demands like this will open both the Glasgow declaration and Paris agreement wide open.
Article 6: Art.6.2 – limited and slow progress on 6.2, with disagreements about how to proceed. Similarly on Art. 6.4 more work is needed from the Supervisory Group on the removal’s recommendations. Several countries suggested that in-depth consultations should be carried out, more resources provided to the SB, and that more alignment is needed between the removal’s recommendations and the methodologies the SB is drafting. The Wednesday deadline set by the Presidency for new text to be submitted leaves little time to iron out the agenda items left on Article 6.
GST : In a high-level meeting co-hosted by Egypt and the UAE on the GST; UAE formally expressed their interest in putting the GST at the centre of their Presidency for COP28.For more information on our demands and key actions to follow up today, please find attached the copy of CAN International ECO newsletter for your reference,
Daily Program: Please find the UNFCCC daily programme here.
Live CCTV Schedule: follow this link
