26.3 C
Lagos
Sunday, June 29, 2025
Home Blog Page 2105

Opportunity, challenges ahead Paris Agreement, by CDKN

admin
-
0
Opportunity, challenges ahead Paris Agreement, by CDKN

As the world celebrates – and laments – the Paris Agreement, nations have been urged to immediately begin its implementation. According to the Climate & Development Knowledge Network (CDKN), the agreement is encouraging but if ambition does not continue to increase in future years, then the achievement of a 1.5- or even a 2-degree target – and many of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) – will be in danger.

CDKN Chief Executive Sam Bickersteth and Head of Negotiations Support Kiran Sura welcome delegates to the CDKN stand in Paris. Photo credit: Geoff Barnard, CDKN
CDKN Chief Executive Sam Bickersteth and Head of Negotiations Support Kiran Sura welcome delegates to the CDKN stand in Paris. Photo credit: Geoff Barnard, CDKN

Sam Bickersteth, CDKN’s Chief Executive, stresses that the agreement’s significance for future development pathways for the least developed and most climate vulnerable countries – as an element of the SDGs – cannot be underestimated.

“Critically, it will increase the flow of additional public and private finance for vulnerable countries for both low-carbon and climate-resilient investments. Ambition, including the pathway towards a possible 1.5-degree limit and five-yearly reviews, will be played out through the national climate plans (the INDCs),” he says.

The CDKN’s global, regional and country team leaders reflect on the opportunity and challenges ahead.

Kiran Sura, CDKN’s Head of Negotiations Support: “The Paris Agreement has delivered a universal and ambitious plan to halt dangerous climate change. This is an historic moment for the world and a life line to those climate-vulnerable countries and small island states on the front line of climate change. However, it is now up to us all to grab this life line and deliver the action needed to meet the challenging target of limiting warming to 1.5oC and provide the international support climate-vulnerable countries need to protect themselves against the impacts we have already locked in. The Presidency’s skilful handling and diplomacy has not only ensured a deal was delivered but also that all voices – especially those of the poorest and most vulnerable that are often not so loud – were heard. Merci, Paris.”

Geoff Barnard, CDKN’s Senior Knowledge Management Advisor: “The Paris Agreement is a much-needed shot in the arm for everyone who has been working to champion climate issues, ever since the disappointments of Copenhagen.  From exhausted negotiators to passionate civil society activists, the relief coming out of Paris is palpable. The hugging and whooping in the Conference Hall spoke volumes for the emotional response of many around the world who have put their combined shoulders to this huge and heavy wheel, which at times has felt hopelessly mired in disagreements and wrangling.  The wheel is finally moving, and the elation that so many of us feel is testament to the passion and commitment that has underpinned all the hard work up to now. There is a great deal more work to be done, starting today.  But let’s celebrate this moment of jubilation in Paris, and cherish the inspiration it provides us for the long road ahead.”

Mairi Dupar, CDKN’s Global Public Affairs Coordinator: “Congratulations to the governments who rose above their differences in Paris and responded to climate experts’ warnings about the dangers of a 2-degree world. They have recognised that radical action on climate change is needed to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals and protect the lives and prospects of the world’s poorest people.

“Reining in dangerous levels of warming calls for astonishing reserves of human ingenuity – but this effort does not happen in a void. CDKN is among the many alliances that have already been trying and testing approaches to climate compatible development for several years: approaches to curbing emissions while achieving greater climate resilience and human development. CDKN doesn’t have all the answers, but we are committed to sharing best practices as well as beautiful failures; we do this in our new book ‘Mainstreaming Climate Compatible Development’, which summarises the first five years of CDKN’s experience. We hope others will join us in this spirit of expanding and strengthening knowledge networks, to empower everyone for the opportunities and challenges ahead.”

Carl Wesselink, CDKN’s Regional Director for Africa: “The Paris Agreement is both a big step forward and a frustrating shortcoming. Its success will depend on the implementation of voluntary INDC targets. For African countries implementation will require more refined strategies and innovative finance.  Realising low (avoided future) emission development strategies will be a priority across the continent, and the sooner the better. Countries with heavy fossil-fuel use will need to grapple with the implications for their economies. The increased climate finance pledges, and particularly adaptation aid, is a victory but will fall short of the need. The financial implications of the loss and damage clause are still to be determined, and Africa will participate keenly in that process.”

Revocatus Twinomuhangi, CDKN’s Senior Strategic Advisor for Uganda: “The new global climate agreement adopted in Paris represents important progress towards addressing the climate change that is currently threatening human survival on this planet. For the least developed countries are that a highly vulnerable, the Paris Agreement brings hope for accessing climate finance to invest in adaptation that will build climate resilient economies, communities and ecosystems. In particular, the establishment of a technical and knowledge platform under the Nairobi work programme on impacts, vulnerability and adaptation to climate change is crucial for capacity building. By supporting country-owned and country-driven adaptation actions, the implementation of the Agreement will contribute to poverty reduction, which is crucial to building climate resilience and ensuring sustainable development. It is time to build on this momentum to work for the achievement of the global SDGs.”

Connie Espinosa, CDKN’s Regional Director for Latin America and the Caribbean: “For the Latin American and Caribbean Region, the Paris Agreement rises above the different views of sub-regional groups towards a common objective for a low carbon and resilient future. We celebrate this historic moment and acknowledge the trust our governmental leaders have put in an organised and cooperative international context that will facilitate climate finance to our region. We are proud of the three Latino figureheads who paved the road towards the Paris Agreement: the Peruvian Minister of Environment, Manuel Pulgar Vidal, responsible for the 20th COP Presidency and who worked for achieving consensus among Parties. The Argentinian Pope Francisco with the presentation of the encyclical “Laudato Si” on climate and environment and by directly talking with Presidents and mayors for their support to achieve an Agreement; and finally, Christina Figueres from Costa Rica, as Executive Director of the UNFCCC, who orchestrated all the support needed for negotiations to happen.”

Claudia Martinez, CDKN’s Senior Strategic Advisor for Colombia: “After the excitement of the signature of the Paris Agreement, Ban Ki Moon stated that “we shall all stay united and bring the same spirit to the crucial test of implementation”.  The Paris Agreement sets for the first time a long term goal for every country that has committed to achieve its INDC.  In the case of Latin America and the Caribbean, our overall emissions account for 11% of the world’s emissions, mostly related to deforestation and land use change followed by energy including transport.  But in this emerging region, the trend is to shift to more carbon–intensive economies looking similar to the current developed economies. In a business as usual scenario, countries could increase the use of energy and transport increasing their emissions share by 50 % according to the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB). After Paris the challenge is to grow and decarbonise our economies at the same time.”

Ali Sheikh, CDKN’s Regional Director for Asia: “At the heart of Paris Agreement is the process and mechanism to increase the ambition as part of periodic reviews. The nations will meet every five years to revise their national action plans or what is generally known as the INDC. CDKN can have a genuine pride in having catalysed and fostered the INDC process in many, many ways – ranging from helping some countries develop their distinct contributions by adapting unique methodologies and internal processes, by supporting research and investments in methodologies, by developing toolkits for least developed countries and by supporting their participation in a wide range of capacity building and training exercises. CDKN has also galvanised support for INDC implementation, which we hope will serve as an important building block for the implementation of the historic Paris Agreement.”

Munjurul Khan, CDKN’s Senior Strategic Advisor for Bangladesh: “Adoption of the Paris Agreement is a historic landmark achievement of the global community. This Agreement created an opportunity to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels by taking into account of the objective of the Convention, and being guided by its principles, including the principle of equity and Common But Differentiated Responsibility (CBDR) and Respective Capabilities (RC), in the light of different national circumstances. Inclusion of human rights and climate justice in the Agreement shall provide scope for stronger argument for demanding climate action for vulnerable. However, the non-punitive nature of compliance measure may be a serious limiting factor for implementation of the Agreement.”

Ari Huhtala, CDKN’s Deputy CEO and Climate Finance Lead: “The Paris Agreement sets a target for financial commitments from developed countries, but it is important to remember that what is needed for the required transformational change is trillions, not billions. The floor of $100 billion per annum should be used as a catalyst to accelerate the shift of all resource flows towards climate compatible options. Meeting this commitment is doable, fossil fuel subsidies alone amount to significantly more and carbon pollution can and should be priced. Instead of only tracking flows from developed to developing countries, we should focus on ensuring the effectiveness of the committed funds, and support developing countries in that endeavour.”

Jebi Rahman, CDKN’s Partnerships and Networks Programme Manager: “The Paris Agreement resonates with CDKN’s strong partnership work to date, and the task ahead to continue forging knowledge networks at the subnational, country, regional, and global levels. Partnerships will be needed at all these levels to create the disruptive change required for enhanced pre-2020 action by developing country Parties.  Much work needs to be done to innovate, share lessons learned, and support capacity development, before reviewing and ratcheting up ambition in the next five years.  The road ahead is long, and I look forward to continuing with colleagues and partners, old and new, on this journey.”

Court delivers verdict on DR Congo SIFORCO case, Greenpeace kicks

admin
-
0
Court delivers verdict on DR Congo SIFORCO case, Greenpeace kicks

Five policemen and soldiers were on Monday convicted for their role in a vicious attack against community members protesting against an industrial logging company in a Congolese village in 2011.

Kumi Naidoo. head of Greenpeace
Kumi Naidoo. head of Greenpeace

The men were found guilty by a court in Kinshasa and sentenced to between two and three years in prison charges including torture. They were among 60 policemen and military personnel who entered the small village of Bosanga, located in Yalisika, in the Equateur province in May 2011 to quell protests against the company SIFORCO.

Serious human rights violations were subsequently committed, including rape, physical aggression, torture and destruction of property.

In a reaction on Wednesday, Greenpeace Africa insists that many involved, such as SIFORCO, are still to be held accountable.

“Greenpeace welcomes the condemnation of the perpetrators of the attack; however, we are very surprised by the sentences that do not reflect the gravity of the violence and crimes suffered by the community” said Victorine Sirri Che Thöner, the head of Greenpeace Africa’s Congo Forest campaign.

“We are also concerned that some individuals involved in the attack and identified during the investigations have not been brought to trial and SIFORCO was not held responsible for its implication,” said Victorine, adding: “Unfortunately the only current route for appeal is to redress the issues of reparations for victims.”

The Court did not convict SIFORCO or assign any liability despite acknowledging that torture was committed by the military in the company’s vehicle. The convictions come after many lengthy judicial delays over a period of years. To date only 14 of the 45 victims have been granted the right to seek reparations.

The villagers were protesting against the company, claiming it had not deliver on promises made in 2005 and revised in 2009, to provide infrastructure and services to the community in exchange for logging their forests. Faced with community opposition, SIFORCO called in the help of local authorities and security.

“This trial sends out a signal that industrial logging in the Democratic Republic of Congo does not contribute to local development but instead generates multiple recurring conflicts with local communities,” said Che Thöner.

Yalisika is in the Bumba region in the Congo Basin – home to the world’s second largest tropical forest after the Amazon, which is increasingly under threat from industrial logging companies – the majority foreign-owned – who plunder the DRC’s rich resources with impunity.

Nigeria’s fresh 2030 gas flareout date termed ‘hypocritical’

admin
-
0
Nigeria’s fresh 2030 gas flareout date termed ‘hypocritical’

Dr. Godwin Uyi Ojo, Executive Director of the Environmental Rights Action/Friends of the Earth Nigeria (ERA/FoEN), while speaking on Monday (December 13, 2015) on the outcome of UNFCCC Climate Change Conference (COP21), frowned at Nigeria’s new deadline date to halt gas flaring, saying that the idea is tainted with insincerity

Olabode Akinfemi (left) and Godwin Ojo who were both of the ERA/FoEN, at a Media Debriefing Session in Monday in Lagos
Akinbode Oluwafemi (left) and Godwin Ojo who were both of the ERA/FoEN, at a Media Debriefing Session in Monday in Lagos

 

After more than 20 years of intense Earth Summit negotiations by the Conference of Parties (COP) of the United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change (UNFCCC), Parties finally adopted a Treaty on how to conduct mitigation and adaptation measures to combat climate change. While mitigation is on how to cut back emissions preferably at source, adaptation is on how to cope with the impacts of climate change.  To the Environmental Rights Action/Friends of the Earth and our allies, the question begging for answer is this: ‘Does this Treaty mark a significant shift toward curbing climate change?’ The answer is capital NO. The Treaty is disappointingly a non-binding one because it favours voluntary mechanism rather than a legally binding mechanism. It is no more than kicking the Can down the road.

First, a key area of unfair treatment meted by developed countries to developing countries is in the weak ambition in curbing climate change. Although the agreement recognizes limiting temperature rise to under I.5 degrees, a position informed by science and pushed by global civil society groups but it has been subordinated within a 2-degree development pathway. Clearly equity and fair shares on the global carbon bank that should hold developed countries accountable has not been used to generate solutions.

Second, although national governments commit to public disclosure of emission reduction in reporting, monitoring and evaluation in relation to the uploaded intended nationally determined contribution (INDC) targets, yet there is no ambition to cut back emissions at source. Clearly, INDCs aggregate so far is on a 3-degree trajectory making it hard if not impossible to realise 2 degrees within the pledged commitments. For Africa, where the mean temperature rise is higher than the global mean, many of its countries will be roasted.

Thirdly, in terms of adaptation, although the treaty acknowledges historical responsibility by developed countries responsible for the release of carbon emissions into the atmosphere yet the finance that is required for developing countries to adapt is based only on voluntary mechanism of $100 billion from 2020 rather than legally binding. Also, what happens between now and 2020 remains unclear.

Fourthly, the loss and damage by catastrophic climate change from excessive floods, persistent droughts and storms often lead to serious harm to mother earth, destruction of livelihoods, and loss of lives. A legally binding mechanism for compensation from climate impact on loss and damage has been precluded from the agreement and this has let the developed countries off the hook. It has placed the burden of addressing climate change on the door steps of the developing countries rather than the developed countries.

Fifthly, the term de-carbonisation has been eliminated and substituted with a weak and vague term, carbon neutrality. The Treaty seeks to vigorously promote false solutions such as carbon markets, agro-fuels which competes with farmlands and food crops for fuel, reducing emissions from degradation and deforestation (REDD+), and carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies that are yet to be proven and thereby poses serious risks.

Clearly, the voice of the peoples, farmers, fishermen and communities the world over have been compromised and the rights to food and water have not been guaranteed. The governments have reflected more the interests of the corporations rather than the citizens they represent.

 

Way Forward

Since real solutions lies in the people, civil society groups will continue to mobilise and build people power to alter the power imbalance currently in favour of corporations.

We recommend that:

  • there is need to kick big time polluters out of the COP process in entirety so that dirty energy companies involved in huge emissions are not part of the decision-making process.
  • since the Treaty has a limited and vague vision of reducing emissions we propose the urgent de-carbonisation of the economy and the energy sector by recognising and promoting an energy transition from oil, gas, coal and other fossil fuels by 2030. Governments should divest public finance, subsidies and loans for oil, gas and coal and these should be invested in renewable energy development.
  • the Nigerian government should immediately embark on a post petroleum economy and diversify the energy mix to renewable sources of energy. To this end, we hereby launch the Annex 0 group in contrast to Annex 1, and Non-Annex 1, and Annex II Groups. Annex 0 is an initiative to recognize the efforts of peoples, communities, nationalities, undertaken against the impacts of oil, gas, coal, and other fossil fuel extraction and to halt its expansion, protect the environment, and lives on planet earth.  A Register of Annex 0 membership is hereby opened for practical uses by 2016.

To conclude, two issues emanate from the Nigerian government response to environmental issues which lends credence that it is conducting environmental protection as “business as usual” rather than within the populist change agenda.  For example, as was the case in Copenhagen, the Nigerian government pledged to end gas flaring but did not put in place any mechanism to address this.

In Paris, 2015, the World Bank and Nigeria government’s hatched another crooked plan to end gas flaring by 2030. We consider this as hypocritical, deceptive and World Bank’s interference on national sovereignty in a country where gas flaring has been declared illegal since 1984. We call on the government to end gas flaring now and not to wait till 2030 when it will be too late.

Let me once more draw attention to another related issue within the government profess change agenda which has to do with the non-implementation of the August 2011 UNEP report assessment and recommendations. While political will to clean up Ogoni is important, the federal government should commence immediate action by putting their money where their mouth is. They should ensure Shell Oil Company lives up to its responsibility. So far, the Ogonis remain short-changed and their livelihoods destroyed.

 

Ogun, Lafarge, NSIA showcase forest restoration scheme at COP21

admin
-
0
Ogun, Lafarge, NSIA showcase forest restoration scheme at COP21

The Ogun State Forest Landscape Restoration Project was presented on 7th December 2015 to the international community at the UN Climate Change Climate Conference (COP21) that held recently in Paris, following the memorandum of understanding signed in September 2015 by the Ogun State Government (Ogun State), the Nigeria Sovereign Investment Authority (NSIA) and Lafarge Africa Plc.

Gov Ibikunle Amosun of Ogun State
Gov Ibikunle Amosun of Ogun State

The PPP project will transform 108,000 hectares of degraded land in Ogun State into an arable green area through a Forest Landscape Restoration project aimed at launching public and private agroforestry projects with strong environmental, social and economic impact. It is a pioneering initiative demonstrating how proactive public entities can join forces with a private group to launch sustainable projects that will position Nigeria as a leader in Africa on sustainable Climate Change PPP projects.

With the theme “Regional public/private partnership initiative against climate”, a two-day side event held at the green climate generations’ areas of the COP 21 venue to showcase the public/private partnership concept as a tool for development, and to present the planned project to potential investors, development agencies, as well as Green and Climate Change funds.

The Ogun State Forest Landscape Restoration project partners led by the Governor of Ogun State, Senator Ibikunle Amosun, was also hosted at an event, which is dedicated to local and regional government, raising ambition, awareness and visibility of real and potential local climate action. Membership of the Senator Schwarzenegger “Regions of Climate Action” (R20) Organisation was conferred on Ogun State at the occasion.

Other dignitaries from the partnering institutions at the 2015 Paris Climate Conference include Mr. Peter Hoddinott, Area Manager South & West Africa LafargeHolcim; Mrs. Adepeju Adebajo, CEO Cement, Lafarge Africa Plc; Richard Eckrich, Head, Infrastructure Fund, Nigeria Sovereign Investment Authority; and Dr. Henry Neufeldt, Head, Climatic Change Unit of the World Agroforestry Centre.

Commenting on the Ogun State’s participation at the Climate Conference, Governor Amosun said: “The Forest Landscape Restoration project is a well thought initiative, in partnership with two responsible institutions, NSIA and Lafarge Africa.”

He noted that almost 70% of Ogun State is arable land. There is therefore a significant potential for improving lives and livelihoods. Governor Amosun described the agroforestry project as a win-win opportunity for companies and citizens, offering a range of benefits: it will reduce CO2 emissions by increasing vegetation and eliminating the current negative slash-and-burn practices; it will create employment for young graduates and will help to diversify Nigeria’s economy. Governor Amosun insisted on the absolute importance to address simultaneously, the short-term job creation necessity while preparing the climate change mitigation long-term challenge.

Commenting on its commitment to the realisation of the project, Mr. Peter Hoddinott, who is also the Group Managing Director/CEO Lafarge Africa Plc, said: “As a responsible organisation, we are working to minimise the impact of our activity on the climate. Lafarge Africa plans to replace 30% of its fuel use from fossil to biomass by 2020. We need to put in place a solid structure to move into renewable energy, which is clearly what this partnership offers.”

Speaking at the event on behalf of Mr. Uche Orji, MD/CEO of NSIA, Richard Eckrich, said: “The NSIA recognises the importance of agriculture to the economy; a sector which employs around 70% of Nigeria’s population. We are therefore committed to supporting this initiative by helping to raise funds and leveraging our expertise in public-private-partnerships, in particular in terms of establishing a “best in class” project governance to enhance the scheme”.

Eckrich further stated that NSIA’s intervention is consistent with its strategy and echoed Hoddinott’s hope that the project could be replicated if successful.

COP21 strives for justice but misses mark

admin
-
0
COP21 strives for justice but misses mark

After much anticipation for a new global climate agreement, COP21 is being widely hailed as a success, with 195 countries from diverse positions signing the Paris Agreement. But the day after the dust settles, numerous civil society organisations are evaluating the stark contrasts between what is possible in the political process and what is scientifically necessary to avoid climate chaos.

Martin Vilela, Bolivian Platform on Climate Change. Photo credit: coalitionclimat21.org
Martin Vilela, Bolivian Platform on Climate Change. Photo credit: coalitionclimat21.org

Many walked away pleased that the Paris Agreement called for limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius within the purpose of the agreement. However, the reference is aspirational, and the agreement lacks mechanisms to achieve it. Based on the current pledges for change and the state of pollution rates, by the time countries formally take stock in 2023, we will have already polluted to such a degree that we will have locked in the climate chaos we came here to prevent.

“The biggest misconception around 1.5 is that mentioning it means that they will actually meet that goal. This agreement did not actually design a pathway for how to achieve 1.5. We came to Paris needing a way to achieve tangible results, instead we came out with more empty promises and false solutions,” said Martin Vilela from the Bolivian Platform on Climate Change.

This lack of specificity in dealing with pollution has been described as “between dangerous and deadly” by leading climate scientists. Similarly, South Africa also noted that the Paris Agreement came at the expense of immediate action, and called for energies to now be channelled into pre-2020 efforts.

While many heralded France’s achievements of facilitating a fair process to reach the Agreement, this was marred in the last moments as France buckled to US pressure and changed the language of the nearly finalised text to say that developed countries should rather than shall take on reducing pollution across all sectors of the economy, indicating a lower level of legal obligation.

Many developing countries’ support for the Agreement was contingent on “shall” rather than “should”, but a process was not provided to respond to this major change made in the last moments of adopting the agreement and characterised a “technical correction”. In many ways, the agreement’s new rules are substantially weaker for wealthy countries than the current ones.

Another major concern came, again under US insistence, in the language on “loss and damage,” where an “exclusion clause” was inserted in order to prevent the poor and particularly vulnerable countries (the same ones calling for the 1.5C goal) from claiming any future liability or compensation claims being made under the agreement against the big historic polluters.

The great paradox is the Paris outcome paid lip service 1.5C without the means to achieve it, while, at the same time, excluding the rights of the poorest countries to compensation for warming above these levels.

A critical component of the Agreement was always that finance for developing countries would be ramped up. In concluding the talks, President Hollande spoke proudly about the $100 billion “floor” in finance, but observers have pointed out that the reality doesn’t match the rhetoric.

“The 100 billion per year by 2020 is now extended to 2025 and a new goal is to be set after that. So developed countries have obtained another five years to deliver what they agreed to do. It is regrettable that this has happened as it delays action in developing countries who are in need,” said Meena Raman, Legal Advisor, Third World Network.

Although tired after a long road to Paris, and with many concerns over the outcome, civil society groups nevertheless determined to press on and use the Agreement and the pledges made to it as tools to push for stronger national actions. They are already looking to a “facilitative dialogue”, agreed for 2019, to increase ambition and look to initiatives like the African Renewable Energy Initiative to deliver real results on the ground.

“As both a Kenyan and a climate policy expert, I have never been more proud. The significance of of the Africa Renewable Energy Initiative is not to be understated: it is an exceptional moment in Africa’s history and a game-changer for the continent. And our leadership has inspired other countries to show their support,” Mohamed Adow, Senior Climate Change Advisor, Christian Aid explained.

“While disappointed by the outcome of the climate talks, we see that there were many success’. The climate justice movements mobilized despite the state of emergency and we showed the world that we are an unstoppable force that will continue to do the real work of developing tangible solutions to our world’s problems, and not wait for politicians to do what is necessary,” said Lidy Nacpil, Asian Peoples’ Movement on Debt and Development.

Prof Nwajiuba: Rethinking political economy of Nigeria post-COP21

admin
-
0
Prof Nwajiuba: Rethinking political economy of Nigeria post-COP21

The 21st Session of the Conference of the Parties (COP21) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) should be an eye opener and trigger inner reflections and new actions by the Nigeria political class. Irrespective of what the agreements contain, and whether or not they are implemented, one simple thing stands out clear. The simple thing is that the serious countries of the world have resolved to end the era of energy dependence on especially petroleum, a resource which empowers countries which in the perspective of the G8 and the OECD are in parts of the world with heavy geopolitical risks. To this extent, the serious push for ending or in the least minimising use of fossils is beyond the need to reduce carbon emissions and mitigate climate change.

Professor Chinedum Uzoma Nwajiuba
Professor Chinedum Uzoma Nwajiuba. Photo credit: diamondeducationmagazine.com

What gives my country, Nigeria, visibility at the global stage is neither her size nor huge and rapidly growing population, but that we are a major petroleum exporting country. Our huge and growing population of course presents an attractive market for those intending to export all manner of products, including China (that is also setting up new Coal plants). The attraction is enhanced by the purchasing power of the country which sources over 80% of its foreign exchange earnings from petroleum exports. Regardless of the commercial attraction, Nigeria remains one of the countries regarded as being of huge geopolitical risk. Perhaps even more of a risk than Nigeria as source of hydrocarbon supply is the Middle East.

How seriously the United States, for instance, views the risk emanating from the principal export commodity of countries like Nigeria is seen in President Obama’s open declaration early in his presidency that by the end of his tenure, the United States would scarcely be in a position to be held hostage ever again by the international Oil market. Today, that vision of Obama for the United States has considerably been realised. We are likely to see Europe following suit in minimising their own dependence, just as Japan announced within the period of the COP21 that she is commencing the building of new coal plants with better efficiency and less carbon emissions. This trajectory has grave implications for Nigeria and it is critical that the political class in Nigeria follow, listen and plan with these developments in mind.

They mean it when they say it

In case there are Nigerians who may think it is a joke, I will cite a few examples of challenges faced by the G8 and OECD at least since the 1970s and how they were decisively addressed. These include:

  1. What will Europe do with ageing vehicles? I believe this was a front page cover of Time or Newsweek Magazine sometime in the 1970s. With economic prosperity that followed the end of the Second World War, and the rapid expansion in personal vehicles, ageing cars became a problem. Then recycling was not much in the social and economic consciousness. One solution that emerged was that following the Structural Adjustment Era of the mid-1980s, many young men from Africa found themselves in Europe, doing mostly jobs the Europeans would rather not do. Most of their earnings were used to buy ageing vehicles (Tokunbo) which were exported to Africa. In the same period cases of infertility, asthma, cancers, etc. increased rapidly in our part of the world. Medical records in hospitals, import records in Ports and borders across Nigeria tend to support this scenario. Europe dealt with her ageing vehicles, and today has developed substantial capacities for recycling.
  2. We have seen the huge ICT transformation, especially the internet since President Clinton announced what he called the information super highway. This in addition to the GSM has created a new world unknown a few years ago.
  3. After the financial crisis in 2008, one obvious shift was to fuel efficient vehicles. Germany for instance commenced a programme of trade-in of less efficient vehicles for more efficient vehicles. Today that programme has significantly succeeded. In the same period it has become very fashionable for Nigerians and also other Africans to acquire energy-guzzling SUVs of all types. From our politicians, businessmen/women, clergy, to even lecturers, people are having more than one second-hand SUV imported, sometimes preferably from the United States (American Spec!). How can a people advance without a thinking elite?
  4. In the last half a decade, Germany, the economic power house of Europe has advanced rapidly on renewables. Today, Germany has re-engineered household energy consumption, reaching close to 50% on renewables, especially solar, while Norway has achieved similar levels on wind energy. In some cases some houses generate solar energy that is sold to other consumers. We can expect Southern European countries with more solar radiation in a few years to become very important in this. Note also the significant investments in solar capacities in Morocco (on the African continent but with European temperament).

The long-term consequence of these for Nigeria is decline in relevance. Changing relevance of different parts of the world and organisations is something we need to reflect on.

Three Key meetings happened simultaneously – Relevance?

As the COP 21 was going on in Paris two other important meetings were holding. One was the OPEC ministers meeting, December 4 in Vienna, and the other was the Chinese meeting with African Presidents in Johannesburg. Of these three, by all estimates the least important was the OPEC ministers meeting.

There are persons who ordinarily should know, but did not know that OPEC Ministers were meeting. Rewind to 20 years before now, or even 10 years ago. An OPEC Ministers meeting was an important world event. This time it meant little. Just as the meeting ended Brent crude price fell to less than $40 per barrel, the lowest in seven years (the year Obama came to office). With that attitude to the OPEC meeting, is there little doubt that the Organisation does not hold the relevance and clout of the past? In fact, some persons are saying that the G8/OECD may be wanting oil prices to go down to $20 per Barrel. If that happens, what is the implication for Nigeria? Nigeria’s political class should be aware that the drum beats have changed, and so must the dance steps change. The ‘culture‘ of monthly Federation Account meeting in Abuja to share whatever SHELL and the others bring, in order to pay Civil servants, teachers, pensioners, and do other things is gradually becoming a matter for the history books. Governors asking for bailout should know that it is not sustainable. Nigeria requires more decisive decisions and actions that acknowledge that the party is over. We shall come to required decisive actions.

The other meeting of African presidents in Johannesburg had nearly all African Presidents physically present. That perhaps was a better attendance record than an African Union (AU) meeting. What was at stake? Simply, Chinese money. China is the new big man in town. China has the cash. China is the number two in size, but a major creditor to the number one (the United States). Note that just before the COP21, the World Bank/IMF announced that the Chinese Yuan has become one of the currencies for international exchange. The financial buoyancy of the Chinese is a key unsaid factor in the G8/OECD insisting in renegotiating the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities at the COP21. Their argument is that China and some of the BRICS may claim to be undeveloped, but they are also currently major polluters and most importantly have the cash to bring to the table. At the Johannesburg meeting, the Chinese did it the way a Nigerian big man will do it. They announced the huge figures to support African counties and an elated President Mugabe could not hide his excitement when he said, that is what we have been expecting our former colonisers to do for Africa. Now, what did China do to move up the ladder? That is what we should learn from and not just expect Chinese cash. We should produce/manufacture, consume what we produce/manufacture, and export.

My People, the party is over

My greatest wish is that the political class in Nigeria be equipped to interpret and understand the new/emerging (emerged) world and ensure that Nigeria is positively relevant. But we first need to understand that the party is over. The Owambe is over.

With about 170 million persons to feed, most of whom have no skills relevant to the contemporary world we are a major geopolitical risk. I like the way Our President Buhari put it to the US and Europe – bring the $14 billion to reflate Lake Chad so we can revive livelihood in that area and stop them matching to Europe. I believe it is the kind of thing Europe will understand. Note also that if Europe stops the migrants from the Middle East and the migrants chose to march southwards into the savanna of West Africa, no person, government or organisation has the capacity to stop them. We have been unable to stop an illegitimate Boko Haram. Please may God not let this thought get into the heads of the migrants heading to Europe.

Truth be told, Nigeria already has enough challenges for one country. The way things are, with significant amounts shared monthly, the extant insecurity and projected insecurity for Nigeria is serious. Yet there are more worries to come. A few of them include:

  1. The high rate of population growth. It is projected that at current growth rates, by 2050 (35 years from now) we shall be more populated than the United States (over 400 million persons). Should we not start even using moral suasion and re-orientation/attitude change to discourage people having too many children?
  2. Huge youth population where every young man wants to be a millionaire and every young girl wants to dress/look like a model/beauty queen. Where else on earth do we have this kind of national aspiration and goal? This is neither a worthy nor attainable goal. We have to embark on creative reorientation and attitudinal change.
  3. A Nigerian asked me at the COP21 that if Morocco is hosting COP22 next year after haven hosted the COP in the past, and Durban hosted COP17, why not Nigeria. Another Nigerian asked if we saw security men at the airports saying to us on arrival “anything for the boys?” or “Oga your boys are here sir”. And, come to think of it, if the event had held in Nigeria, I can imagine how aggressively female undergraduates of our tertiary institutions would have invaded the meeting venue and adjoining facilities. For COP18 in Doha, we saw lots of young East Africans who were in Doha to do part-time job during the COP. Some of them were engaged as ushers, guides etc. Would they have tried asking for Nigerian students? Please don’t lynch me in the name of patriotism, but we have to acknowledge the way things are. Where is even the venue to host the COP in Nigeria, and where are the airports, transport facilities, security and others. After years of oil boom, our infrastructure is too far behind. It is time for the Nigeria elites and political class to take our country serious and we also need to embark on massive cultural re-orientation of our people.
  4. The skills gap is widening between us and even countries in Africa. We need new paradigms of how to return quality education and skills development in Nigeria. A huge population with the current and projected difficult public finance scenario (projections show that global oil demand will remain low at current parameters through 2016) may require what other countries who passed through similar situations did – export manpower. Except for a small proportion of young persons who find their way out of the country for postgraduate studies, most other young persons are being prepared for life in the 2020s with life tools of the 1970s, minus acceptable values. This spells trouble for the future. We have many persons with degrees whose skills capabilities limit them to Okada riders and phone recharge card sellers. They have no clue what else to do and of course have little opportunities. Many of them even as private school teachers at primary school level are a wonder to behold. We need to declare a national emergency in education in Nigeria, and perhaps fundamentally re-orientate and redesign the entire sector. We need to agree we do not have enough teachers as most of what we have now as teachers are not it. No school system can rise above the capacity of the teaching stock.
  5. We need to consume what we produce. Even when due to membership of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) we cannot ban Imports, we need to mobilise the NGOs/CSOs to help reorient Nigerians through massive campaigns, and leadership by example etc., to consume Nigerian products. This is one real way to address our financial challenges, and generate employment, reduce poverty, and insecurity. This is of urgent national importance. We need a massive campaign to convince our people to farm and produce and not idle away in the name of looking for jobs in cities. We need to replace an ageing farming population, and we need to have a massive youth farm programme supported financially and technically.
  6. We need to re-order the structure and conduct of transportation in Nigeria. Reviving the railways should be a major priority. Johannesburg (South Africa), Rabat and Marrakesh (Morocco), and now Addis Ababa (Ethiopia) have trams in the cities. Why is Nigeria, the largest economy in Africa left behind? We need, as a matter of urgent National action, working trains linking the major routes with the heaviest volume of transport of people and goods in Nigeria. See the regular tanker menace in Apapa in Lagos. Must we move all that fuel from the Wharf through congested Lagos by tankers? Why not Rails? Why are we even importing fuels?
  7. Can we have a massive programme on renewables in Nigeria and at least develop solar efficient “bush lamps” for rural households? The technology exists and we can do with this what Coca-Cola or even MTN has done in a short period. Let each villager have a small lamp that is solar powered. With economy of scale, the unit price falls.

Some Decisive Actions for Public Sector Finance

With the financial challenges confronting the central and state governments in Nigeria, some persons suggest we focus on taxation. That is right if we can find creative ways of taxing the rich more and close the gap as is the case in the Nordic countries. However, in one state I know the Local Governments have been mandated to seize goats, fowls and palm oil from villagers as a way to raise IGR. Good luck. Now consider these:

  1. Would it make sense for the central and state governments to agree that current financial structures are not sustainable and restructure the country entirely returning to manageable structures requiring less bureaucracy? The answer is no. No privileged group willingly gives up privileges. Pharaoh did not. Another prayer from me: may what happened to Pharaoh not happen to the privileged class/groups in Nigeria,
  2. Can we declare a national emergency and convene a meeting of the public and private sectors and decide to make a national sacrifice to say, for instance, all wages, emoluments, earnings etc. for both the private and public sectors be reduced by half? The answer will be No. There will be losers, and better economists than me who will rather we reflate by putting more money into circulation, as a stimulus, or because of the traditional argument that capital will be advantaged over labour. Those ones may lynch me.
  3. Can we agree with former CBN Governor Sanusi to devalue the Naira. Perhaps lets agree that oil prices have fallen by a third and so let us devalue by 100% (for instance), getting the Dollar to N300? No. Nigerians are already saying No. We saw that in the 1980s and we have nothing else to export except the Oil which is internationally priced, and so devaluation has no real benefit, but will bring high cost of imported industrial goods and inflation.

But Nigeria is a clever country! One of my friends will say this. We have not said we are devaluing the Naira, but depreciating the Naira, and so since early this year we have officially moved from about N160 to the Dollar to N197. In the unofficial market, it is over N250 as I write. Is there still round-tripping going on, or is the Naira simply showing its true colour? I don’t know.

What about this option?

It seems to me the situation is getting to what it was before the oil boom commenced in the early 1970s. What therefore should the central and state governments do? I focus on the states. I suggest the state governments look at how the regions were financed. How did the Eastern, Midwestern, Western and Northern regions seek funds in that era? What commodities did they produce and export to earn foreign exchange – given the configuration of demand and supply in the world at the time? Oil palm, Rubber, Cocoa, Groundnuts etc., Marketing Boards, exports, etc.!

Many of our states are bigger than some African Countries that have no oil and are still functioning. Hence, states and clusters of states need to delve into modern Nigerian history and attempt the question, “what is the oil palm of the 2010s and 2020s? what will represent the cocoa, cotton, groundnuts, etc of the 1950s in the 2020s – and how do we go about increasing production and expropriation for public good?”

The best time to plant a tree, they say, is 10 years ago; and the next best time to plant the same tree is today. The train of reduced hydrocarbon dependence by erstwhile major buyers of Nigerian crude oil has since left the station. We cannot afford to pretend that things will remain the same. It is already late in the day. There is an urgent need to begin planting those trees of economic restructuring that were not planted decades ago today. Fortunately, we have some history to learn from. It is time to dust up Okparanomics, Osadebenomics, Akintolanomics, and Bellonomics textbooks and manuals. Feeding bottle federalism is not sustainable. Welcome to a new Nigeria.

By Professor Chinedum Uzoma Nwajiuba (Nigerian negotiator at COP 21; Professor of Agricultural Economics, Imo State University Owerri, Nigeria, and Executive Director (Part-Time), Nigerian Environmental Study Action Team (NEST), Ibadan.. E-mail: chnwajiuba@yahoo.de; Phone: +234(0)8033273871)

COP21 betrayed the poor, vulnerable – Nnimmo Bassey

admin
-
1
COP21 betrayed the poor, vulnerable – Nnimmo Bassey

COP21 has come and gone and, like most others before it, the response has been varied. Some have applauded the Paris Agreement as a giant step for humankind. Some are claiming a big win. Others take a holistic look at the future scenario the agreement presents and are aghast that after two decades of climate negotiations greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise and the Paris Agreement does not indicate any urgency in tackling this fundamental problem even though it does indeed recognise the urgency of the crisis.

Nnimmo Bassey
Nnimmo Bassey

The Agreement speaks of a desirability to work towards a temperature increase of 1.5o C while immediately aiming at a target “well below 2o C.” We wonder how the COP quantifies the difference between 1.5 and “well below” 2 degrees. And which may be greater in this language of diplomats? The Agreement recognizes everything that needs to be recognized, including the need for finance and technology transfer, human rights, gender and intergenerational equity, etc., but provides no scope for the operationalising these in a manner that signifies this acknowledgment. Although it is generally agreed that fossils must be kept in the ground if we are to stand a chance of keeping temperature increase below 2 degrees above pre-industrial levels, the COP, perhaps encouraged by its oil company partners, ignored this and locked the planet on the path of peril.

The scaffold on which the entire COP21 hung was the infamous intended nationally determined contributions (INDCs).  While the COP Itself notes that the figures submitted by countries do not on the aggregate point a way to cooling the planet, it nevertheless stayed the cause of this clearly wrong path. The INDCs if implemented will lead to a temperature increase of over 3 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels wiping out communities of people and sparking unpredictable repercussions. The Agreement recognises that INDCs will also be achieved through removals of GHGs – through sinks and offsets, etc. Thus, the path of the INDCs taken by the COP is an irredeemable self-inflicted injury that subverts real efforts to tackle the climate menace.

Applauding the COP for being a success because for the first time all nations have indicated commitment to tackle climate change on the basis of the INDCs indicates a total disregard of climate science and equity as epitomised by this pathway.

 

Head in the Oven, Feet in the refrigerator (or that Sinking Feeling)

We note that the Agreement speaks repeatedly of “sinks and reservoirs of greenhouse gases.” These are wedges to keep the door open for all sorts of carbon offset schemes including REDD and all its variants, yet-to-be-proven carbon capture and storage, geoengineering and such like. We can thus expect intense externalising of climate action on climate victims as well as carbon colonialism – which may include what is referred to in the Agreement as “internationally transferred mitigation” (Article 6) rather than direct in-country carbon emissions reduction.

At the launching of a publication of the No REDD in Africa Network (NRAN) at the Climate Forum during the COP, Firoze Manji, the pan Africanist, described carbon offsetting as putting your feet in a refrigerator when your head is in the oven and hoping to achieve a median temperature for your body. Very apt indeed.

The agreement ties non-market climate solutions to the enhancement of “public and private sector participation in the implementation of nationally determined contributions.” This hints at the privatisation of carbon or pollution, which arguably is already happening through carbon trading.

Climate finance remains grossly insufficient with targets of $10 billion yearly up to 2020 when this would shift to $100 billion yearly. That these amounts are insufficient can be seen from the fact that the US spent about $68bn to handle the aftermath of just one hurricane, Hurricane Sandy. Considering that rich countries spend up to $2 trillion annually in needless wars releases equally underscore that what we see are specious power play and climate apartheid. And, by the way, who accounts for the millions of tonnes of greenhouse gases released in warfare besides destruction of lives and wreaking of havoc on nations and territories, especially those that are fossil resources rich. It is clear that the paucity of the Green Climate Fund is not a lack of funds but a determination by rich countries to avoid historical and current climate debt.

 

Transition?

The Agreement makes a passing mention of “just transition” with reference to “workforce” and the creation of decent work. Again we see that the COP is so enamoured with dirty energy or fossil driven energy forms that it could not dare name fossils or a call for just transition towards renewable energy. In fact, “renewable energy” is mentioned only once in the preamble to the Agreement and in the context of developing countries. Where did analysts get the idea that the Agreement has declared the obituary for fossil fuels?

With 2020 as the pivot year for the voluntary emissions reduction, it is clear that between now and then the remaining atmospheric carbon budget may already have been taken up. Whether that happens or not, delayed actions until 2020 presents the planet and all beings on it a very dire future that many will not survive. That also breeches the right of Mother Earth to exist, her right to maintain her cycles and speaks poorly of our understanding of intergenerational equity.

In sum, COP21 betrayed the poor, the vulnerable and all those already suffering the impacts of climate change.

  • Nnimmo Bassey heads the Health of Mother Earth Foundation (HOMEF)

How Paris Agreement will impact the world, by delegates, groups

admin
-
0
How Paris Agreement will impact the world, by delegates, groups

History was made in Paris, France on Saturday (December12, 2015) when the Paris Climate Agreement was adopted around 19:27 hours local time.

Nigeria's Environment Minister, Amina Mohammed; with Director, Department of Climate Change, Dr Samuel Adejuwon, and other delegates as the minister addresses global delegates at the close of COP21 on Saturday
Nigeria’s Environment Minister, Amina Mohammed; with Director, Department of Climate Change, Dr Samuel Adejuwon, and other delegates as the minister addresses global delegates at the close of COP21 on Saturday

It is the first time in history that all countries will agree to participate in addressing climate change.

“The Paris agreement is not perfect but it represents a major leap forward for developing countries,” says a South African delegate, amid widespread elation at the conference centre in the French capital city.

Nigeria’s Environment Minister, Amina Mohammed, stresses: “Africa’s vulnerability is complex and at the core of many of the challenges we face in the world today. It is a region full of promise, yet extreme poverty, inequality, conflicts, forced migration are all exacerbated by climate change and inaction. It is regrettable that this has not been given the required attention Africa deserves.

“However, we acknowledge today, that the world stands in a much better place for future generations because of this historic Agreement. We have agreed towards holding the temperature rise to 1.5 degree and the long term goal.”

World Bank Group President, Jim Yong Kim on the global climate change agreement at COP21, says: “We welcome the historic agreement that has just been reached in Paris.  The world has come together to forge a deal that finally reflects the aspiration, and the seriousness, to preserve our planet for future generations.

“First, it leaves no one behind – protecting the poorest people and the most vulnerable countries by calling on all of us to hold the increase in temperatures to well below 2 degrees C and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

“Second, it sends the much needed signal to trigger the massive sums of public and private sector investments needed to drive economies toward a carbon neutral world as advised by science. While doing this, we will strive to ensure that there is the necessary finance to provide resilience for developing countries.

“Third, it changes development. We agree there is no development without tackling climate change. We cannot poison the planet and thrive.

“We called for strong ambition, for remarkable partnerships, for mobilisation of finance, and for implementation of national climate plans. Paris delivered. Now the job becomes our shared responsibility. The World Bank Group is ready to help immediately and will do its utmost to realise this vision of prosperity.

“We are grateful to the heads of state and governments for their leadership, to the government of France and the United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon for their unwavering and inspiring commitment, and for the tireless efforts of the negotiators, businesses, and civil society worldwide that have made this agreement possible.”

BirdLife International welcomes the adoption of the Paris agreement, adding that it sends an important signal to governments back home and businesses alike that the world must act now and rapidly shift to a low-carbon climate-resilient development.

Patricia Zurita, CEO at BirdLife International, states: “Despite all difficulties now the international community has a global agreement, that applies to all countries and that aims at reducing greenhouse gas emissions and helping people and ecosystems to adapt. We’ve demonstrated we are willing to come together to defend our Planet, our future and that of our children. Much remains to be done, in particular when it comes to protect the poorest and most vulnerable. We remain optimistic that implementation will continue to demonstrate the crucial role protecting nature plays in managing the climate crisis. What we have before us is not perfect but does represent an historic step forward.”

Melanie Heath, Director of Science, Policy and Information at BirdLife International: “The overall goal agreed upon – that increases in temperature must be kept well below 2°C and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C – is clearly good. It is also good that carbon neutrality is a set goal in the second half of the century. Unfortunately, these two important targets are weak when it comes to implementation: there is no set date for a peak in emissions, nor for the achievement of carbon neutrality. These targets are binding at global level but there is nothing binding for countries involved. Although there is an important “no-backsliding clause” that obliges all countries to do progressively better, the planned stocktake and reviews will be key to scale up ambition and commitments.”

Edward Perry, Global Climate Change Policy Coordinator at BirdLife International: “For the first time in history we have a global climate change agreement that recognises the critical role of forests, oceans and other ecosystems in combatting climate change and helping communities adapt. Importantly, the Agreement also stresses the need to ensure the integrity of ecosystems and the protection of biodiversity when taking action to address climate change. This is critical for safeguarding ecosystems and ensuring that climate change actions are truly sustainable.”

John Lanchbery, Principal Climate Change Adviser at RSPB: “Article 5 theAgreement stresses the need for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and the role of conservation and sustainable management of forests (REDD+). This should help to ensure that more money is available to conserve forests, especially tropical forests. This is very positive, because that’s where wildlife is.”

However, impacted communities insist that the accord has failed humanity. In a statement, the Grassroots Global Justice Alliance submits: “As impacted communities, we are deeply aware of the imperative of the climate crisis. Our waters are being poisoned from fossil fuel extraction, our livelihoods are threatened by floods and drought, our communities are the hardest hit and the least protected in extreme weather events. The climate crisis is a reality, but the COP21 Paris Accord is not based on that reality.

“The atmosphere within the COP21 meeting was one of business instead of saving Mother Earth. World leaders were in deep negotiations not over climate policy, they were in negotiations about commercialisation of nature. The result is a Paris Accord that is based on a carbon market that allows developed countries to continue to emit dangerously high levels of greenhouse gasses through shell games, imaginary technofixes, and pollution trading schemes that simultaneously let big polluters to continue polluting and result in land grabs and violations of human rights and the rights of Indigenous Peoples.

“When Obama says we are doing out best, it is simply not true. From cap and trade in California, to the carbon trading requirements of the Clean Power Plan, the US came into Paris with a predetermined model based on false solutions and bullied other countries to jump on board. The commitments they made ignore the overwhelming historic responsibility as a leader greenhouse gas emitter, and are far too low to stop the burning of the planet.

“The COP21 agreement is a failure, condemning humanity to a slow and painful death.   In imposing a market strategy, global leaders, particularly those in the US and Canada, are choosing a course of inaction that is blind to the stark realities of climate crisis.

“The Paris Accord failed humanity and now we have to take things into our own hands and push at all levels of government. We know that the extraction of fossil fuels must end completely by 2050 to keep the earth from warming more than 1.5 degrees. The Paris Accord will now be moved into implementation at the national, regional, and local levels and we need to be organised to remain vigilant around the demand to keep fossil fuels in the ground, because anything short of that equals destruction.

“We join the call for System Change, Not Climate Change because we know that the fundamental driving force behind the climate crisis is capitalism, and the very nature of the extractive economy as a whole. Climate Justice is not only about the environment.  It is tied to jobs, housing, poverty, migration, food security, gender equality, access to health care. System Change requires fundamental respect for human rights, particularly the rights of Indigenous Peoples, as well as the rights of Mother Earth. System Change requires that we reject the corporate driven, free trade and investment agreements and how that is linked to also harmonising trading regimes, investment regimes, and trees, and nature itself.  We are building new alternative economic models based on an internationalist strategy of Just Transition toward renewable energy, cooperative economies, and community control.  We will continue to resist extraction at the local level in all frontline communities.

“We had no illusion coming into this COP. We knew that the fossil fuel companies had already hijacked the UNFCCC process. We leave Paris only more aligned, and more committed than ever that our collective power and growing movement is what is forcing the question of extraction into the global arena. We will continue to fight at every level to defend our communities, the earth and future generations. As Franz Fanon wrote, ‘the magic hands are the hands of the people’.”

Jesse Bragg, Media Director, Corporate Accountability International, speaks in a similar vein, pointing out that the agreement has failed people.

His words: “Today’s Paris Agreement falls far short of the mark. In fact, it’s potentially a death sentence for millions. While it may earn pats on the back for US negotiators from ExxonMobil and the other big polluters pulling the strings, it fails the people who need decisive action most urgently.

“Not only is this agreement weak, it undermines the architecture of the convention–rewriting the rules around finance to let the US and other historically high emitters off the hook for new and additional finance agreed to in the Convention and shifting the financial burden to the Global South. This text, from a complete fantasyland, disregards over 200 years of emissions that have made those in the Global North the economic powers of the globe.

“Fundamentally, the Paris Agreement fails to deliver meaningfully toward the systemic transition the current climate crisis requires. Whether it’s ambition or differentiation, finance or liability and compensation, the positions reflected in this agreement are heavily biased towards the US, Japan, the EU and other Global North countries, and the emissions-intensive industries they represent.

But, while the agreement fails to outline the action and commitments necessary to keep warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius, the negotiations in Paris were a rallying point for civil society full of moments of hope and momentum for real solutions on the horizon.

“Around the world, people organised in unprecedented numbers to demand that leaders take urgent action to address climate change. This global mobilisation brings light to an otherwise dim outcome. Now more than ever it is clear that people can and will continue lead this movement. Our livelihoods depend on it.

“The mention of the goal to limit warming to 1.5 degrees in the agreement, while only aspirational, is the direct result of this people-powered action, proving that when people unite and collectively demand something from our leaders, they must listen. We must take small victories like this and use them to build our movement, make uncompromising demands of our leaders and hold them to account.

“In the weeks, months and years to come, we must not relent. The Paris Agreement is not enough. We must secure more decisive science-based action now, no more platitudes about the need for it later. Most of all, we must take back our democratic processes and ensure they are working for people and the environment, not big polluter profits.

“At the national level, emissions-intensive corporations have shaped our policies in their interest for decades and obscured their impacts on the environment. And, at the international level, these same corporations have forced themselves into every aspect of policymaking to not only influence policy outcomes but greenwash their otherwise dirty track records.

“For climate policy – including the Paris Agreement – to compel the rapid transition our planet so desperately needs, we must first address this conflict of interest. More than half a million people around the globe are already demanding that the policymaking process be insulated from those corporations who so richly benefit from the continuation of the fossil fuel economy. And it’s high time they listened.

“The Paris Agreement is not nearly enough for those whose lives are in peril from the climate crisis today. If governments are serious about taking the action necessary to limit warming to at least 1.5 degrees, it cannot do so with big polluters in the room. Movements have proved time and time again that when people unite around something and demand action, systemic change is possible. Now is the time to demand our leaders kick big polluters out of climate policy. The future of our world truly hangs in the balance.”

Kumi Naidoo of Greenpeace responds: “It sometimes seems that the countries of the United Nations can unite on nothing, but nearly two hundred countries have come together and agreed a deal. Today the human race has joined in a common cause, but it’s what happens after this conference that really matters. The Paris Agreement is only one step on long a road, and there are parts of it that frustrate and disappoint me, but it is progress. This deal alone won’t dig us out the hole we’re in, but it makes the sides less steep.

“The deal sets out the objective of limiting temperature rises to 1.5 degrees, but the emissions targets on the table take us closer to 3 degrees. That’s a critical problem, but it’s one with a solution. Renewable energy is already doing heavy-lifting across the globe, but now its moment must come. It’s the only technology mentioned in the Paris Agreement. There’s a yawning gap in this deal, but it can be bridged by clean technology. We’re in a race between the roll-out of renewables and rising temperatures, and the Paris Agreement could give renewables a vital boost. The wheel of climate action turns slowly, but in Paris it has turned.

“This is not a moment for triumphalism given the lives that have been lost already as a result of climate impacts, and the lives that are on the precipice as temperatures rise. This is a time for urgent action. The climate clock is ticking and the window of opportunity is closing fast.

“Now governments need to revise their short-term targets to be in line with their new goals, and revise their energy policies to speed up renewable energy uptake. They must stop funding fossil fuels and end deforestation by 2020.

“The Paris Agreement is a Treaty under international law, so it is legally binding. But the national targets (the so-called INDCs) aren’t legally binding and nor are the financial commitments. This is primarily to enable the United States to be part of this global agreement.

“The ‘Long Term Goa’” is written in seemingly incomprehensible language (“to achieve a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases in the second half of this century”), but combined with the 1.5C limit, it implies a goal of achieving net zero in all emissions by around 2060-2080. This effectively means we need to phase out fossil fuels by 2050.

“Indigenous Peoples rights are in the pre-amble and in the Adaptation section of the Agreement. But they’re not given the protection they deserve, particularly given that forest protection will be key to achieving 1.5 degrees. The Paris Agreement acknowledges that countries should respect and promote human rights in addressing climate change.

“The conference saw good initiatives around renewables during the negotiations – though outside the official talks. India’s Solar Initiative, the launch of the Africa Renewable Energy Initiative, mayors and leaders of more than 1000 cities giving their support to a 100% renewable energy future, to name a few. In the text itself, renewables are recognised in the context of promoting universal access to sustainable energy in developing countries, in particular in Africa, through the enhanced deployment of renewable energy.”

History as Paris Agreement on climate change is actualised

admin
-
0
History as Paris Agreement on climate change is actualised

195 nations set path to keep temperature rise well below 2 degrees Celsius

Jubilation as Paris Agreement is adopted. Photo credit: unfccc.int
Jubilation as Paris Agreement is adopted. Photo credit: unfccc.int

An historic agreement to combat climate change and unleash actions and investment towards a low carbon, resilient and sustainable future was agreed by 195 nations in Paris on Saturday.

The Paris Agreement for the first time brings all nations into a common cause based on their historic, current and future responsibilities.

The universal agreement’s main aim is to keep a global temperature rise this century well below 2 degrees Celsius and to drive efforts to limit the temperature increase even further to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.

The 1.5-degree Celsius limit is a significantly safer defense line against the worst impacts of a changing climate.

Additionally, the agreement aims to strengthen the ability to deal with the impacts of climate change.

To reach these ambitious and important goals, appropriate financial flows will be put in place, thus making stronger action by developing countries and the most vulnerable possible, in line with their own national objectives.

“The Paris Agreement allows each delegation and group of countries to go back home with their heads held high. Our collective effort is worth more than the sum of our individual effort. Our responsibility to history is immense” said Laurent Fabius, President of the COP 21 UN Climate change conference and French Foreign Minister.

The minister, his emotion showing as delegates started to rise to their feet, brought the final gavel down on the agreement to open and sustained acclamation across the plenary hall.

French President Francois Hollande told the assembled delegates: “You’ve done it, reached an ambitious agreement, a binding agreement, a universal agreement. Never will I be able to express more gratitude to a conference. You can be proud to stand before your children and grandchildren.”

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said: “We have entered a new era of global cooperation on one of the most complex issues ever to confront humanity. For the first time, every country in the world has pledged to curb emissions, strengthen resilience and join in common cause to take common climate action. This is a resounding success for multilateralism.”

Christiana Figueres, Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), said: “One planet, one chance to get it right and we did it in Paris. We have made history together. It is an agreement of conviction. It is an agreement of solidarity with the most vulnerable. It is an agreement of long-term vision, for we have to turn this agreement into an engine of safe growth.”

“Successive generations will, I am sure, mark the 12 December 2015 as a date when cooperation, vision, responsibility, a shared humanity and a care for our world took centre stage,” she said.

“I would like to acknowledge the determination, diplomacy and effort that the Government of France have injected into this remarkable moment and the governments that have supported our shared ambition since COP 17 in Durban, South Africa,” she said.

 

Agreement Captures Essential Elements to Drive Action Forward

The Paris Agreement and the outcomes of the UN climate conference (COP21) cover all the crucial areas identified as essential for a landmark conclusion:

  • Mitigation – reducing emissions fast enough to achieve the temperature goal
  • A transparency system and global stock-take – accounting for climate action
  • Adaptation – strengthening ability of countries to deal with climate impacts
  • Loss and damage – strengthening ability to recover from climate impacts
  • Support – including finance, for nations to build clean, resilient futures

As well as setting a long-term direction, countries will peak their emissions as soon as possible and continue to submit national climate action plans that detail their future objectives to address climate change.

This builds on the momentum of the unprecedented effort which has so far seen 188 countries contribute climate action plans to the new agreement, which will dramatically slow the pace of global greenhouse gas emissions.

The new agreement also establishes the principle that future national plans will be no less ambitious than existing ones, which means these 188 climate action plans provide a firm floor and foundation for higher ambition.

Countries will submit updated climate plans – called nationally determined contributions (NDCs) – every five years, thereby steadily increasing their ambition in the long-term.

Climate action will also be taken forward in the period before 2020. Countries will continue to engage in a process on mitigation opportunities and will put added focus on adaptation opportunities. Additionally, they will work to define a clear roadmap on ratcheting up climate finance to $100 billion by 2020

This is further underlined by the agreement’s robust transparency and accounting system, which will provide clarity on countries’ implementation efforts, with flexibility for countries’ differing capabilities.

“The Paris Agreement also sends a powerful signal to the many thousands of cities, regions, businesses and citizens across the world already committed to climate action that their vision of a low-carbon, resilient future is now the chosen course for humanity this century,” said Ms Figueres.

 

Agreement Strengthens Support to Developing Nations

The Paris Agreement underwrites adequate support to developing nations and establishes a global goal to significantly strengthen adaptation to climate change through support and international cooperation.

The already broad and ambitious efforts of developing countries to build their own clean, climate-resilient futures will be supported by scaled-up finance from developed countries and voluntary contributions from other countries.

Governments decided that they will work to define a clear roadmap on ratcheting up climate finance to $100 billion by 2020 while also before 2025 setting a new goal on the provision of finance from the $100 billion floor.

Ms. Figueres said. “We have seen unparalleled announcements of financial support for both mitigation and adaptation from a multitude of sources both before and during the COP. Under the Paris Agreement, the provision of finance from multiple sources will clearly be taken to a new level, which is of critical importance to the most vulnerable.”

International cooperation on climate-safe technologies and building capacity in the developing world to address climate change are also significantly strengthened under the new agreement.

 

Signing the Paris Agreement

Following the adoption of the Paris Agreement by the COP (Conference of the Parties), it will be deposited at the UN in New York and be opened for one year for signature on 22 April 2016 – Mother Earth Day.

The agreement will enter into force after 55 countries that account for at least 55% of global emissions have deposited their instruments of ratification.

 

Cities and Provinces to Companies and Investors Aligning

Saturday’s landmark agreement was reached against the backdrop of a remarkable groundswell of climate action by cities and regions, business and civil society.

During the week of events under the Lima to Paris Action Agenda (LPAA) at the COP, the groundswell of action by these stakeholders successfully demonstrated the powerful and irreversible course of existing climate action.

Countries at COP 21 recognised the enormous importance of these initiatives, calling for the continuation and scaling up of these actions which are entered on the UN-hosted NAZCA portal as an essential part in the rapid implementation of the Paris Agreement.

The LPAA and NAZCA have already captured climate actions and pledges covering:

  • Over 7,000 cities, including the most vulnerable to climate change, from over 100 countries with a combined population with one and a quarter billion people and around 32% of global GDP.
  • Sub-national states and regions comprising one fifth of total global land area and combined GDP of $12.5 trillion.
  • Over 5,000 companies from more than 90 countries that together represent the majority of global market capitalisation and over $38 trillion in revenue.
  • Nearly 500 investors with total assets under management of over $25 trillion

Christiana Figueres said: “The recognition of actions by businesses, investors, cities and regions is one of the key outcomes of COP 21. Together with the LPAA, the groundswell of action shows that the world is on an inevitable path toward a properly sustainable, low-carbon world.”

 

More Details on the Paris Agreement

  • All countries will submit adaptation communications, in which they may detail their adaptation priorities, support needs and plans. Developing countries will receive increased support for adaptation actions and the adequacy of this support will be assessed.
  • The existing Warsaw International Mechanism on Loss and Damage will be significantly strengthened.
  • The agreement includes a robust transparency framework for both action and support. The framework will provide clarity on countries’ mitigation and adaptation actions, as well as the provision of support. At the same time, it recognises that Least Developed Countries and Small Island Developing States have special circumstances.
  • The agreement includes a global stocktake starting in 2023 to assess the collective progress towards the goals of the agreement. The stocktake will be done every five years.
  • The agreement includes a compliance mechanism, overseen by a committee of experts that operates in a non-punitive way.

The COP also closed on a number of technical issues.

  • Under the Kyoto Protocol, there is now a clear and transparent accounting method for carry-over credits for the second commitment period, creating a clear set of rules.
  • The first round of international assessment and review process (IAR) that was launched in 2014 was successfully completed.
  • A number of technical and implementation issues related to the existing arrangements on technology, adaptation, action for climate empowerment and capacity building were also successfully concluded.

What countries agreed on in Paris

admin
-
0
What countries agreed on in Paris
Greenpeace campaigners demanding a just climate deal in Paris. Photo credit: Reuters
Greenpeace campaigners demanding a just climate deal in Paris. Photo credit: Reuters

Under Paris climate pact, countries agreed on several critical components of climate action, such as:

  1. Mitigation Objectives and Plans (Articles 2 and 4): The text includes a new stretch goal of keeping warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius to accompany the current hard limit of 2 degrees. Countries will pursue the mitigation plans laid out in their domestic climate commitments, which will go into effect in 2020 (also in Decision Section II and Section III, Paragraphs 22-41).
  2. Long-Term Goal (Article 4): The overall aim specified in the agreement is to peak global greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible and undertake rapid reductions so as to achieve a balance between emissions by anthropogenic sources and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases in the second half of the century. The specificity of this long term goal is such that, when coupled with the goal of limiting warming to 2˚C, countries would be de facto required to completely decarbonise the global electric sector by 2050, according to the IPCC.
  3. Ratchet Mechanism (Article 14): The COP Decision established that a global stocktake will take place in 2018, where countries will regroup to assess and potentially adjust their national commitments (COP Decision Section II, Paragraph 20). Countries agreed to reevaluate their commitments every five years, starting in 2023, in order to get stronger action on the table and to adjust for global changes, like the falling prices of renewables and increasing climate impacts.
  4. Transparency and Compliance (Articles 13 and 15): The “sunshine” provisions of this text require all countries to report on mitigation actions and support, both given and received. All countries will participate in the same system of measuring, reporting and verification of emissions, and all will be measured against the same standards: “good practice methodologies accepted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.” The transparency system will be flexible regarding the scope and detail of developing country reporting, as long as it meets the minimum standards of the IPCC. In addition, all but the poorest and smallest countries must report at least every two years. For verification, the agreement sets up a single verification system: technical expert review. The agreement both mandates and promotes compliance to the various provisions.
  5. Adaptation (Article 7): Developed countries will provide financial and technological support to help developing countries adapt to impacts of climate change, building resilience and preventing further damage (also in COP Decision Section III, Paragraphs 42-47).
  6. Loss and Damage (Article 8): The Paris Agreement includes a section directing countries to create a special process to address the losses and damage that stems from unavoidable climate impacts which overwhelm the limits of adaptation (e.g. sea level rise), as well as follow the procedures laid out in the Warsaw Mechanism. The COP Decision explicitly excludes liability or compensation for losses and damages (COP Decision Section III, Paragraph 52)
  7. Finance (Article 9): The COP Decision text reiterates a global finance pledge with a floor of $100 billion per year in climate financing from developed countries by 2020 (Section III, Paragraph 54), and expands the donor pool post-2020 to encourage other countries to voluntarily provide additional financial support (Article 9.2). Countries have agreed to set a new global, collective climate finance goal for 2025 that increases upon the $100 billion target for 2020 (COP Decision Section III, Paragraph 54).
1...2,1042,1052,106...2,259Page 2,105 of 2,259

TV Report

Archives

2025 EnviroNews Nigeria. All Rights Reserved.

×