This month, the 27th annual Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, otherwise known as COP (27), took place in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt.
Image: UNFCC
The conference spanned over two weeks of collaborations between various actors, including climate activists, scholars, climatologists and scientific researchers, politicians, and UN board members. It is one of the only events on the political calendar that invites a plethora of contributors across-board. COP is the founding place of the UN’s most valued sustainability goals, most notably the Paris Agreement orchestrated in COP21. The Agreement oversaw the creation of a legally-binding, international treaty on climate change, and marked the beginning of the ‘no rise above 1.5’ policy. The agreement has since anchored the succeeding COP conferences to track global developments in climate change mitigation. The question is always posed; how close are we to 1.5 in this decade?
“Science, Solutions, Solidarity. For a Liveable Planet” - UNFCC
The conference is designed to house the necessary conversations between major actors to facilitate change. However, our ongoing global experience with climate change has shown time and time again that our national and international protection systems are not sustainable enough to manage the increasing collateral damage of our warming planet. Global threats dim the light of optimism amongst certain climate actors and thus COP27 came with a mix of emotions.
Enthusiasm was also dampened by some world leaders. UK national news outlets have been in discussion over the attendance of Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s attendance at COP27 in Egypt. Rishi attended the Leaders’ Summit segment of the conference after u-turning his previous decision not to attend due to domestic issues within-state. Deciding not to go to a COP event would be an aggressive political message to world leaders in the wake of a climate emergency.
The outcomes of COP27 to a large extent mark the strained attitudes amongst state leaders to consider global warming holistically with other economic and geopolitical issues. COP 27 came at a time of global economic insecurity, strained international relations within Europe, conflict in the East and climate catastrophes across Asia and Africa. Yet, climate activists at COP27 have stated that failure to recognise the influence global warming has on all these factors will only further embed conflict into our global order. Therefore, it is important to think critically about the following outcomes of the conference, as follows:
Loss and Damage
A loss and damage policy has been lobbied by developing countries for decades. Politicians and civilians have been seeking financial aid and reparations for the damage to their country caused by extreme weather. The loss and damage clause marks a major landmark for climate justice that has sprung out of decades of diplomatic activism. Yet the harder part follows: the fund must be officially set-up and filled. There is no policy enacted to decide what countries will pay for the damage, and no further policy on reducing fossil fuel emissions or introducing a fossil fuel cap. To this end, the loss and damage fund will likely be in extreme demand over the coming years as more countries face damage as a result of climate-induced devastation.
No rise above 1.5
COP27 oversaw the sustained agreement to keep global temperatures below 1.5 degrees. However, some countries attempted to repeal this goal and called for an abolishment of the clause yet were not defended by all states. To this end, the agreement to reach a global peak of emission rates by 2025, meaning all emission rates should be on a downward trajectory from this year onwards, was removed from the COP treaties this year.
Gas and Fossil Fuels
Low-emissions energy boosting was also on the agenda this year. Low-emission energy can refer to a variety of resources. Green energy sources with low emission rates include solar power and wind farms. Yet other, less eco-efficient sources of energy come from nuclear power and gas. This has resulted in some disappointment from member states, specifically, countries representing African nations, with large gas reserves, as a topical issue in the wake of energy transfer is the matter of lucrative gas deals. Member states came to Egypt hoping to strike these deals off the table.
Adaptation
Adaptation as a form of managing climate change is a recognised strategy amongst scholars. Changes to our current climate have seen extreme seasonal temperatures and record highs this summer, alongside increasing cases of extreme drought and flooding. The UN recognises that climate change causes global insecurity and disproportionately affects poorer countries. These dramatic weather events disproportionately hit poorer nations, and subsequently requires more relief and aid services in regions that cannot afford to outsource supervisions. Countries in the global north produce the greatest emission rates and biowaste. Yet, the long-term damage of this has resulted in countries across continents experiencing major and increasing environmental disasters because of rising sea levels, hostile land environments and public health crises.
Adaptation processes such as floodgate building, wetland preservation and forest reconstruction are needed to prevent further extreme damage and loss of life. In 2020, states agreed on a budget of $100b but only c. $20b has materialised. In Sharm-El-Sheikh, the notion to donate this money was sought to be revoked by some states, but this was reaffirmed after some conference room friction.
Tipping Points
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has published a key finding report on tipping points. The report refers to the risks posed to our largest biomasses, including the Amazon and Permafrost. The IPCC concluded at COP27 that global warming doesn’t occur linearly, and that because of this we could see rapidly escalating effects such as major heating in the Amazon transformative from a carbon sink to a carbon-source, and rapid melting of the permafrost resulting the outbreak of methane, a very powerful greenhouse gas. Some states wished to have certain extracts of this report blanked out before its final release, but the IPCC has gone forward with its publication and these tipping points make for a pretty harrowing read.
COP27 draws public attention because it invites a plethora of people to its conference, it is a petri-dish of human ideas. However, even with this, the level of power at COP27 this year has not gone unnoticed. Member states have shown a strong hand in putting off action-based policy and instead have favoured a low-level, figurative strategy.
The collaboration between leaders and civilians must be genuine to provide real change. Unfortunately, less of that has been seen this year. The outcomes cannot be changed for another year, but there must be hope that as pressures increase, definitive action will take place on a global scale to mitigate further climate change, as our time continues to run thin.
Comments