Updates on Climate Negotiations from a Youth Climate Negotiator
In 2020, when the COP26 climate talks were postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic, 330 young climate activists from 142 countries came together to hold the MOCK COP climate negotiations, and were addressed at the conference by COP26 President Alok Sharma.
They formulated their demands for climate action from the world’s governments in the form of the MOCK COP Treaty, which we at COP26 and beyond helped to draft and you can find half way down this blog, and presented it at the end of their conference to UN High-Level Climate Champion Nigel Topping.
MOCK COP delegates have gone on to do quite extraordinary things in addressing climate change, in their own countries and internationally, and we are following their progress with much interest.
When we heard that they were participating in the UNFCCC climate talks in Bonn, Germany that are part of the preparations for the main Conference of Parties or COP27 in Egypt in November 2022, we thought it was too good an opportunity to miss.
So we tracked down Shreya KC and asked her to tell us a bit about the climate talks in Germany.
This is a report from the real engine room of climate negotiations, and how those negotiations appear to a committed youth climate activist.
Shreya is a passionate climate justice activist from Nepal. She is the contact point of the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) working group of the Youth Constituency of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, (YOUNGO) and a Campaign Coordinator of MOCK COP. She was the national youth delegate of Nepal to the COP 26 climate talks in Glasgow in November 2021, and the Technical and Scientific meeting of the Subsidiary Bodies ‘SB56’ in Bonn Germany in June 2022, and delivered the opening plenary statement on behalf of YOUNGO in SB56.
Shreya KC
We have added some background notes at the bottom of this blog to explain some of the history of climate negotations and the issues that Shreya is discussing.
Shreya KC’s report from the climate talks in Bonn, Germany in June 2022
The 56th session of the Subsidiary Bodies (SB56) session in Bonn took place against the backdrop of visa difficulties for the Global South delegates, climate emergency, lingering impacts of covid 19 pandemic, ongoing war, and a looming food crisis.
Yet, nothing concrete was decided after two weeks of tough negotiations.
SB56, halfway between the past and upcoming climate conferences took place from 6 to 16 June 2022, at the World Convention Center, Bonn, Germany. There were negotiations on critical agenda items, multiple side events, and actions that were meant to set the stage for the upcoming big UN climate conference, COP27 in November.
Global Stocktake
The Global Stocktake is a comprehensive five-yearly assessment of progress on climate action which is meant to inform Parties as they “update and enhance” their pledges, progressively ratcheting up climate action to keep the 1.5°C limits within reach. But global action remains woefully inadequate to avert the worst of the climate crisis. Recent IPCC studies have clearly shown that we are not on track to achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement.
There are three phases of the Global Stocktake. The first is the Information Collection and Preparation (ICP) phase which will run until 2023 and focus on collecting information necessary to do the Stocktake. The second one is the technical assessment which started at SB56 and will end at SB58. The third phase is presenting and discussing the key findings of the technical assessment in COP28 which will be held in the United Arab Emirates at the end of 2023. As such, the first Global Stocktake in 2023 is meant to result in countries preparing revised statements of plans to limit emissions or Nationally Determined Contributions ‘NDCs’ by 2025.
Global Stocktake technical dialogues at Bonn focused on three themes: mitigation, adaptation, and means of implementation and support or finance. The three-day three-hour roundtables on three different topics that ran in parallel in three different rooms provided a unique opportunity for observers and non-party stakeholders to co-design the Global Stocktake process. Observer and vulnerable countries continuously stressed that the urgent phase-out of fossil fuel, just transition, human rights, a gender-responsive approach, integration of loss and damage, ecosystem-based approaches, and intergenerational justice should be reflected in the Global Stocktake process.
As someone who thoroughly followed the Global Stocktake process, I personally liked the world cafe session which allowed the parties, scientists, experts, and non-party stakeholders to come together and discuss and identify possible good practices that could be replicated. At the Global Stocktake opening and closing plenary, it was a good decision of the co-facilitators to give time for observer constituencies to speak alternately to parties. It stressed that our voices are as important as that of parties.
The good thing was loss and damage received attention in the adaptation and means of implementation roundtables. However, in the mitigation roundtable, the need to urgently phase out fossil fuel issues was watered down by countries like Saudi Arabia, pushing for technologies such as carbon capture and storage. There were also receptions and dinners on Global Stocktake which gathered various groups to discuss in an informal way. The expert groups were dominated by male experts and male scientists. Notably, the topics of human rights, gender-based approach, and the roles of and expertise of Indigenous and local peoples were absent from the table. It should also include social indicators and experiences from the ground, beyond the strict technical and economic indicators.
Loss and Damage
“No more blah blah blah, Loss and damage finance now!” was the clear ask of the civil societies and developing countries. One could also hear the chant of “Put loss and damage on the agenda” that echoed in the conference hall and in the streets of Bonn. The Glasgow Dialogue was not the first choice and the only reason vulnerable countries agreed to it at COP26 was under the condition that it will lead to the creation of a loss and damage facility at COP27.
With the climate crisis already pushing the most vulnerable states beyond adaptation, finance for loss and damage has been the key talk for the last three decades.
Despite wide disappointments in COP26, mass protest, and demonstrations in Bonn, loss and damage are still not included in the formal negotiating agenda, instead, it is noted just as critical asks of the developing country parties. Some countries, such as the US and EU, continue to block the proposal of financing loss and damage, instead arguing to increase funding in the existing sources such as the Green Climate Fund (GCF).
But the ask of developing country parties is clear, funding must be new and additional other than mitigation and adaptation funds to compensate for loss and damage. The issue of loss and damage will again be a prominent ask in the COP27. Without the agreement on the financial facility of loss and damage, it compromises the success of COP27 which will convene in Egypt at the end of 2022.
Glasgow Climate Pact
Glasgow Climate Pact was the key outcome of the COP26 in 2021. It requested countries to “revisit and strengthen” their climate pledges by the end of 2022, calling for a “phasedown” of coal. It also “urges” developed country parties to at least double their collective provision of climate finance for adaptation and sets up processes towards finance for loss and damage.
Despite all this, no countries have submitted updated NDCs (Nationally Determined Contributions after) Glasgow which largely questions the hope of keeping 1.5 degrees alive. So far, only Australia has committed to reducing emissions by 43% below 2005 levels by 2030, which is a 15 percentage point increase on Australia’s previous 2030 target. Without ambitious action by the major emitter countries, global temperatures may still increase by up to 2.4 degrees Celsius by 2100 even if all the countries meet every target of their climate action plans.
The topic of climate finance continued with the discussion on a new collective quantified goal on finance to increase the current $100bn annual target by 2020 which still has not seen fruition from the developed countries parties. The mitigation work program was another hot issue in Bonn and there were strong debates on its time frame, whether it should include the sector-wise emission, and countries were extremely cautious if it would add a new burden on their economies. Small Island Developing States (SIDS) wanted to make it till 2030 and beyond but countries like China pushed to make it a one-year program leaving doubts that if it would be sufficient for sustained emission cuts. Countries especially the US, strongly emphasized the stronger emission cuts from the higher emitter developing countries including China who pushed back explaining it will not make the developed countries with historical responsibility accountable. It signals that the negotiations may start from scratch in COP27.
COP26 agreed to Glasgow-Sharm el-Sheikh work programme on the global goal on adaptation, a two-year program that will conclude at COP28. It was not initially included in the formal agenda until the request of Bolivia on behalf of LMDCs (Liked Minded Developing Countries). The technical workshops will continue in COP27.
Mock COP treaty and Youth
The same blame and the discrepancy between the pledges and action of the leaders have elongated the climate conversations since the first COP in 1995 without much progress on the ground.
Rather the impacts of the climate crisis are far more visible now than in the past. When COP26 was postponed in 2020, young people gathered at Mock COP and prepared the 18 policy asks known as the global Mock COP treaty.
All of the treaty asks are still valid, however substantive progress has been made in recent years, especially by the lobbying works of the youth delegates in different parts of the world.
One of our main demands was mandatory and integrated climate education, which gathered pace in COP26 with the Education and Environment Ministers Summit where leaders from more than 20 countries pledged to include climate in the curriculum and invest in capacity building of teachers. This year also we will be working with young people from different parts of the world to lobby for our treaty with the policymakers and deliver an ambitious realistic commitment to climate education at COP27.
This was my first time attending the meeting of the Subsidiary Bodies and I honestly found it calmer than COP. As the crowd of delegates and the number of side events were less, it gave more space and time for interacting and preparing for interventions, bilateral meetings, and side events. Young people coordinated through YOUNGO, the youth and children constituency of the UNFCCC. Every day at 9 am we used to meet in the Nairobi hall and plan for the rest of the day. We mainly engaged in meeting leaders through bilateral sessions and shared our demands for climate justice, followed specific agenda items and delivered interventions, feed-in youth needs and urgency in the slow-moving negotiations, conducted side events and learned from different stakeholders, and organized action events inside and outside the venue.
SB56 couldn’t be any different- developed countries blocking the substantive outcome on finance to address loss and damage and promoting false mitigation solutions rather than urgently phasing out fossil fuels. There were lots of talks, meetings, and sharing of ideas but without a clear vision of how it will serve for COP27 signals, the discussion may have to start from scratch in COP27.
With COP27 being hosted in Africa i.e., Egypt in November, there is high hope that it will deliver on the needs of the countries most vulnerable to the climate crisis and lead the world on the trajectory to achieving 1.5 degrees.
BACKGROUND
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change ‘UNFCCC’ decides on future climate actions by the state parties at periodic Conferences of the Parties or COPs. The last of these, COP26, took place in Glasgow in November 2021, and resulted in the Glasgow Climate Pact. This went some of the way to keeping alive the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5oC, as promised by parties to the Paris Agreement on Climate Change in 2015, and it addressed and made progress with the machinery for delivery of the Paris Agreement.
Our guide to the Paris Agreement can be found here.
However, in the view of many participants it did not go far enough, and many of the crucial questions for the delegates to the next COP, COP27 in Egypt in November 2022 will concern whether countries are yet committed to delivering on their promises made in Glasgow.
The meeting for climate talks in Bonn, Germany in June 2022 was of the Subsidiary Bodies set up under Article 18 of the Paris Agreement, which have to address the Technical and Scientific advice and implementation on countries’ work to address climate change. They are therefore an essential part of the detailed ‘nuts and bolts’ work needed to make each COP meaningful.
Another part of the work of the Subsidiary Bodies, as Shreya KC explained, is preparation of the Global Stocktake. This is a five yearly formal review of progress, or lack of it, towards climate goals, and is very important as a means of committing the parties to a constant, transparent technical assessment.
Loss and damage has become one of the main contentious issues in climate negotiations. Article 8.1 of the Paris Agreement provides:
“1. Parties recognize the importance of averting, minimizing and addressing loss and damage associated with the adverse effects of climate change, including extreme weather events and slow onset events, and the role of sustainable development in reducing the risk of loss and damage. “
Essentially, the issue resolves into two groups of countries, one arguing that they did little to contribute to climate change but are suffering most of the effects, and therefore developed countries should pay for the loss and damage they are suffering: and developed countries seeking to avoid open ended commitments to addressing past emissions. At COP26 the issue was not fully resolved but addressed by committing to a further discussion, known as the Glasgow Dialogue.
Many thanks to Shreya from everyone at COP26 and beyond!