End of COP27 – a lot still required
The 27th Conference of Parties (COP27) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) held in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt came to a close with the gavel going down on a final agreement on Sunday, 20 November 2022. It was held against the global backdrop of political and economic turbulence; and many questions were asked as to what could possibly be expected as outcomes from this meeting.
In our final analysis on this summit, we point out the key outcomes.
Loss and damage
Developed Countries have traditionally resisted calls for specific loss and damage funding, partly in fear of related liability and compensation calls that might ensue given their responsibility for most historical emissions. It should be noted that the decision that adopted the Paris Agreement in 2015 notably states that the article on loss and damage does not include liability or compensation.
The political declaration that emerged from COP27, known as the Sharm el-Sheikh Implementation Plan, provides that a new fund will be established to partly deliver the money for loss and damage. The fund was created for countries vulnerable to the effects of climate change. In a sense, this was seen as an important win for climate justice. The plan was described as a landmark moment in global climate politics, one that acknowledges that the developed countries and biggest carbon emitters are responsible to the developing world for the harm caused by climate change.
Regrettably, the amount of money to be pledged into this fund and details of where it will come from was not agreed. A transitional committee was established on the operationalisation of the new funding arrangements and establishment of the fund by the next meeting in 2023.
These commitments though fall short of any urgency and leaves one wondering if the proposed finance mechanisms will get sufficient money flowing quickly enough. Moreover, climate change is not relenting as many will continue to be affected.
Article 6(4) of the Paris Agreement
A limited amount of progress was made in respect of carbon markets under Article 6(4) of the Paris Agreement. A supervisory body under the UNFCCC will continue to work on the rules of Article 6(4). However, the rules of procedure for the body that supervises the Article 6(4) mechanism have already been adopted and there are many issues remaining to be discussed, among them whether the Article 6(4) mechanism can include emission avoidance and conservation activities, arrangements for connection of the electronic registry for Article 6(4) mechanism and requirements for the statement of a host party where any Article 6(4) activity will take place.
Delayed action on such important issues will be a disappointment to many. Given the urgency, it is not surprising that the supervisory body has been tasked with facilitating the transition of existing projects under the Clean Development Mechanisms to the Article 6(4) mechanism by June 2023.
Adaptation
The meeting having been held on African soil, many were expecting a pronounced focus on adaptation and finance, which are priority issues for Africa. While discussions were held on the Global Goal on Adaptation, which the countries are now working to specify, many believe the issue did not get the attention it deserved. To many, the only new tangible outcome on adaptation was the decision to “initiate the development of a framework” to be adopted in 2023, which will guide the Global Goal on Adaptation work programme.
A core part of the work programme involves enhancing understanding of what the goal actually means and how to measure progress towards achieving it. Adaptation by its nature needs to be very local and qualitative, thus posing challenges to collective efforts defining the global goal.
Finance was expected to be another big topic for discussion. Among the most contentious of these issues related to tracking the delivery of developed countries’ USD 100 billion by 2020 pledge, which pledge had been missed. There was also a pledge from Glasgow (COP26) to double adaptation finance provision from 2019 levels by 2025. We are yet to see how the new and old pledges will be met by the developed countries between now and COP28.
Looking forward
Following strong criticisms from several quarters of insufficient progress on mitigation, in particular the absence of wording peaking global emissions before 2025 and phasing out all fossil fuels – this issue may prove significant for next year at COP28.
Perhaps next year’s G7 and G20 meetings will offer important opportunities to make decisions that help unlock financial flows in light of the unfulfilled USD 100 billion pledge and the new loss and damage fund agreed at COP27.
Conclusion
Strong criticisms from several quarters pointed out that the texts did not go beyond Glasgow in demonstrating higher ambition, which in their view, would have included references to peaking of global emissions by 2025 and phasing down all fossil fuels, not just coal. Others, in turn, were more concerned about the “erosion” of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. In addition, argued rhetoric around ambition was used to disguise a lack of appetite to provide support to developing countries.
The conclusion of COP27 means that for 27 years, the world has been meeting to negotiate on climate change under the auspices of the UN. The impact of climate change is evident and urgency in decision making is paramount. We can only hope the world leaders will unite on this subject and preserve our beloved home, earth.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advise should be sought about your specific circumstances.
