After series of meetings amid arguments for two days, the 19th session
of the Conference of Parties in the Polish capital yesterday agreed on
several key decisions including a pledge by developed nations to raise
$100bn for the newly-formed Green Climate Fund (GCF) by 2020.
The draft decisions were adopted by the ministerial meeting on the 12th
day of the conference between late afternoon and evening. The conference
under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) began on
November 11 at the Warsaw National Stadium was supposed to end on
Friday. But the meeting prolonged till 6am on Saturday and it resumed
after a three-hour recess.
One of the most disputed conferences since 1995, Warsaw experienced huge
criticisms firstly because of the host country’s taking sponsorship
from over 20 business firms, holding an international coal summit that
coincided with the climate talks and its pro-coal energy policy.
The US, the European Union, Japan, Australia, Canada, India and Qatar
were severely criticised at different times for their role which only
delayed the negotiations, say observers.
Earlier on Thursday, over 800 UN observer NGOs quit the conference while
the Group 77 and China staged a three-hour walk out the previous day
for slow or no progress in the negotiations.
In protest, the NGOs continued their demonstrations in and outside the
conference venue and putting pressure on the government to pay heed to
the sufferings of the poor and vulnerable countries.
Earlier, local environmental conservationists and coal miners protested
outside the stadium and at the city centre criticising the host
government’s position on mitigating carbon emission and the rich
nations’ chocking a meaningful progress at the negotiation table.
A dozen of research reports on climate vulnerability, loss and damage in
poor countries driven by disasters, anti-environment activities of
banks and business firms were published, while discussions and
exhibitions took place in parallel with the conference at the venue.
Over 10,000 people converged in the Warsaw National Stadium in Poland,
which has a stand capacity of over 58,000, to attend the UN climate
talks amid tight vigilance – by local and the UN security personnel. Of
the participants, over 4,700 were government delegations while the
others include over 3,500 NGO members and around 1,000 journalists.
Marcin Korolec is the COP19 president. He had been serving as the
environment minister of Poland until November 20 when he had been
removed by the prime minister. But he will stay as the plenipotentiary
of the Polish government to the climate negotiations until next year’s
event in Lima, Peru.
Green Climate Fund
The structure and functions of the GCF, a long-standing demand of the developing countries, were finalised on Friday.
But there had been no money in the fund. The pledged $70bn, though the
source is not specified yet, would support projects and other activities
in developing nations to adapt with the adverse impact of climate
change and promote renewable energy.
After 2020, the developed countries are pledge-bound to release $100bn every year.
Loss and damage
Meanwhile, the developing nations compromised on international mechanism
on loss and damage. At the last moment, they apparently bowed to the
objections of the rich countries, mainly the US and those under the
European Union, to agree that it would be under the framework of the
Adaptation Fund.
Some observers think that it is a drawback of the mechanism while others
say getting a mechanism is also significance at the COP19. The least
developed countries including Bangladesh expressed frustration over the
stance of the rich countries.
Institutional arrangements and functions of the mechanism were agreed on Friday.
However, all countries under the convention had agreed in Doha
conference last year about the formulation of the mechanism as a
separate issue as adaptation measures cannot cover the loss from extreme
weather events like cyclones, droughts and irregular rain – triggered
by global warming and the changing weather patterns.
Until Friday, developed countries pledged $100m in the Adaptation Fund,
which is almost empty now, to fuel stalled projects which may help
vulnerable communities become more climate resilient. From now, this
amount would be shared among projects under the loss and damage
mechanism, with special vision.
However, it is not clear whether this is new money or money diverted from other aid budgets.
Loose climate deal
Yesterday, the COP19 failed to finalise a legally-binding climate
agreement on emission cut because of the reluctance by some developed
countries. Rather it was agreed that all countries would come up with
their “contribution” not “commitment” on emission cut plans in the first
quarter of 2015 – voluntarily – and there would not be any review,
monitoring and verification.
The countries would be asked to sign a legally-binding agreement during
2015 Paris summit. Before that, it is hoped that the developed nations
at the meeting with UN chief Ban Ki-moon in September next year would
announce their emission-cut plans. The meeting is also likely to see
specific plans on their contribution in the $100bn-fund.
On Friday, countries pledged for $280m in the Reducing Emissions from
Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) programme to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions in 49 partner countries.
Quotes
Lidy Nacpil, of Jubilee South, Asia Pacific Movement on Debt and
Development, said: “The Philippines and Filipinos in our resilient
response to the devastating typhoon Haiyan put the issue of ‘loss and
damage’ on the front page of newspapers and these talks.
“But the suffering of people does not seem to have been enough. It was
heartening to see the US fold to pressure from people across the world
in allowing the word ‘mechanism’ into the outcome and recognising loss
and damage is beyond adaptation. Instead of establishing a system that
could respond to the new climate realities, they’ve established more
talks and given no real resources. It’s reflective of a broader outcome
that is deaf to the needs of impacted peoples and the urgency of the
problem.”
Brandon Wu of ActionAid International said: “This so-called ‘finance
roadmap’ leads up the garden path. The inclusion of a specific number
was blocked by the US and others entirely. It provides none of the
clarity required and all of the obfuscation expected of rich governments
who refuse to recognise their legal and moral responsibility to provide
international climate finance.”
Countries have been exposed at the climate negotiations as beholden to
vested interests, such as the dirty fossil fuel lobby, after they once
again missed an opportunity to put the world on a pathway to securing a
comprehensive climate action plan in 2015, according to Climate Action
Network, an umbrella of 850 NGOs from over 100 countries.
“At the time when climate impacts are hitting communities around the
world, we have seen the true nature of international climate politics:
economic interests keen to maintain the status quo have been the hand
pulling the puppet strings of governments in these negotiations,” CAN’s
International Director Wael Hmaidan said.
Mohamed Adow from Christian Aid said: "In agreeing to establish a loss
and damage mechanism, countries have accepted the reality that the world
is already dealing with the extensive damage caused by climate impacts,
and requires a formal process to assess and deal with it, but they seem
unwilling to take concrete actions to reduce the severity of these
impacts."
Meena Raman, negotiations expert at the Third World Network, said: "The
blocking by rich industrialised countries has been disgraceful. They
blocked any reference to a specific number on pollution controls, such
as the 40% called for by the IPCC. Similarly, they rejected a target on
financing of $70bn by 2016.”
She said: "The agreement here is for countries to discuss their
contributions to the international effort toward the ultimate objective
of the Convention. That means that post-2020 contributions will have to
add up to avoid 1.5C of warming. The negotiations next year will have to
grapple with the emissions budget required and how to share it fairly
based on historical responsibility and capacities, if the world is truly
to avoid dangerous climate change."
Asad Rehman, head of international climate, Friends of the Earth EWNI,
said: “People across the world were clear this was to be a clean versus
dirty energy conference. There was a chance to choose clean energy but
the word energy is nowhere in the ADP text. Instead, there's another
technical talkshop. Why not listen to people who have real
people-focused energy solutions and raise them up. There was a concerted
push for a globally funded feed-in-tariff here but that call from the
poorest people in the world, those with no access to energy, was roundly
ignored. It’s another victory for the fossil fuel corporations, who
just so happen to be the official sponsors of the conference."
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário