COP28: Should India and China receive or pay climate damage fund?
EPAIndia comes in third and China is the major transmitter of house gases in the world.
Why is there debate over whether the two nations may contribute to a fund to address the harm caused by climate change when they both have sizable markets?
The issue persists even after COP28, the the UN ( UN) climate change conference held this year in Dubai, announced a deal between nations to start the fund’s operation and 18 countries pledged funding for it.
The Vulnerable 20 Group ( V20 ), which has 68 developing countries as members, reported in 2022 that 55 of its members ( the rest joined recently ) had lost$ 525 billion ( £414.2 billion ) as a result of climate change over the previous 20 years. This represented one-fifth of their money.
Although China and India are not among these nations, they contend that they too have underprivileged populations in need of like a fund’s monetary assistance.
According to a UN report from 2022, developing nations will require more than$ 300 billion annually to combat climate change by 2030. It continued,” Our capacity to mitigate and adapt to climate change is closely related to our need for damage and destruction financing.”
What is the damage and loss portfolio?
In order for poorer countries that have been affected by climate-related disasters, such as communities displaced by floods or rising sea levels, to recover and become rehabilitated, the fund aims to offer financial assistance.
Damage and destruction refer to a condition in which communities are unable to conform to or plan for atmospheric impacts because the damage has already been done, which is different from climate adaptation funds.
The damage and harm bank was formally established during next week’s COP27 in Egypt following years of conflict between developed and developing nations.
At COP28, the deal is scheduled to go into effect. According to the Natural Resources Defence Council, which has been monitoring financial commitments at COP28, fifteen developed nations and the host country of the UN, a developing country, have so far made money commitments totaling about$ 660 million.
Who ought to foot the bill?
The US, a developed nation and the second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases in the world, and other developed countries say China and India may meet them in not only significantly reducing emissions for effective global climate activity, but also making contributions to the bank.
China and India, however, disagree, claiming that their great emissions are more recent than those of developed nations like the US and the UK.
They also assert that because they are also developing nations, as defined by the 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, they actually qualify to receive the loss and damage fund to which they have been asked to lead.
County discussions about how to create the finance work have been contentious in the year since COP27, but in October 2023 they came to an agreement.
The comments, which have since been approved by COP28, “urge” developed nations to help the damage and damage bank and “encourage” others to do so voluntarily.
Additionally, the decision demonstrates that all developing nations are qualified to submit cash applications.
However, negotiators claim that the decision has never resolved the conflict between created nations and significant developing economies like China and India over who should receive the fund or pay for it.
A mediator from a Western nation who asked not to be named said,” The sources of funding still remain an important controversial issue that has been parked for now.”
Who ought to receive it?
In 2006, China surpassed the US as the world’s largest carbon dioxide ( CO2 ) emitter.
However, China and India both contend that established nations ‘ emissions of greenhouse gases started in the 1850s, the start of the professional era, and contributed to the climate crisis.
In the the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change ( UNFCCC), the two Asian giants also emphasize the idea of” common but differentiated responsibilities,” which essentially states that all nations have a duty to reduce greenhouse gas emissions but that each nation’s share of responsibility varies depending on their needs for development.
That same debate has also received support from numerous legal societies and climate activists.
According to Liane Schalatek, associate producer at Heinrich Boll Stiftung, a US-based international organization that closely monitors damage and destruction negotiations,” The large loss and problems we are seeing right now are the consequence of 30 years of largely foot-dragging by developed countries on reducing their emissions faster and providing climate finance to developing countries.”
She argued that it was morally inappropriate and dishonest to beg developing nations to contribute to the new account on an equal standing with developed nations.
But, developed nations contend that the classification of nations is out of date and needs to be changed.
In 1992, states were classified as developed and developing. Since then, according to reviewers, a lot has changed, especially in nations like China and India that are now significant economies and leading transmitters of greenhouse gases.
They claim that an example has now been set with the UAE, a developing nation on the UNFCCC list, having pledged$ 100 million for the account.
An private negotiator from a European nation added,” We hope not only China and India but also other states, including Saudi Arabia, which are listed as developing nations in 1992, will see themselves more as contributors to the bank than consumers.”
A few tiny island states even repeated that message.
” Social responsibility.”
The Alliance of Small Island States ‘ cause damage and destruction finance negotiator, Michai Robertson, contends that big economies like China and India must fulfill a “moral responsibility to join with the fund.”
The entire council ( including developed and developing countries ) acknowledges that we need beyond developed states as well and other parties to get involved by using the words “encourage other party parties for providing bank” in the proposal.
However, this is not the first instance in which a culture bank has required considerable time to establish.
The discussion surrounding the loss and damage climate finance is compared by a plan and advocacy agent I spoke with to an earlier climate finance pledge that has still not been carried out.
Given the ten-year trust gap that is at the center of UN climate negotiations, it is not surprising that many developing nations view this as little more than a postponing technique, according to Ross Fitzpatrick of Christian Aid, an organization dedicated to alleviating poverty.
The failure of wealthy countries to fulfill their prior commitment to provide$ 100 billion in annual climate finance starting in 2020 is the best example of the trust deficit.
This$ 100 billion commitment to climate finance was made by developed nations at the 2009 climate summit in Copenhagen, separate from the loss and damage climate account.
According to Aarti Khosla, the director of Climate Trends, a Delhi-based organization that studies loss and damage discussions and other weather issues, as long as that commitment is not carried out, big developing nations will always have an argument against making any commitment to the Los and Damage Climate Fund.
The definition of” common but differentiated responsibilities” also changes, according to her, “because the convention’s principles ( the 1992 UN climate convention ) call for evolving obligations.”
But without the developed world keeping its earlier claim, it is difficult for China and India to contribute to the account.
Check out the BBC’s more India-related reports:
- India position victories support Modi’s re-election campaign
- The American siblings are dominating the games world.
- American street food becomes popular with chocolate fritters and teacup pizza.
- What US officials were aware of prior to the death of a Sikh secessionist
- How American hole workers were freed by “rat- hole” miners
Why are leaders still flying to climate summits by private jet?
At the most recent UN climate summit in Dubai, COP28, more than 70 000 members from nearly 200 nations include Raji Sunak, David Cameron, and King Charles. However, they are just a few of the thousands who will have flown that on their own. The British monarch, foreign secretary, and prime minister actually took three different planes to their destinations.
Around 315 private jet flights were made at COP27 in Egypt last season. This is a remarkable data, especially given that fewer earth leaders attended the COP because some were preoccupied with Bali’s G20 summit.
To calculate the carbon footprints of traveling to this year’s meeting, COP28 in Dubai, for various modes of transportation, including private jets, we assembled a group of scientific experts. In the end, we want to give participants the tools they need to choose climate-conscious go.
In order to discourage participants from using private jet unless absolutely necessary for safety, we furthermore compared the carbon footprints of the previous three Officers to help determine where the conferences might be held.
Although we do n’t yet have complete data, the use of private jets last year—and probably this year as well—indicates that this is becoming the new norm and has progressed beyond just the most important world leaders.
carbon footprints of various modes of transportation
According to pollution from burning jet energy and because mist routes help produce high-altitude clouds that trap more heat in the atmosphere, flying is already one of the most carbon-intensive modes of transportation. Additionally, decarbonization is particularly challenging because we cannot just use electric planes in their place.
Personal jet travel is the most damaging function of all because it uses a lot of fuel while transporting some people. According to French scholar Thomas Piketty, if we are to combat climate change, we must address them because they serve as an illustration of school inequality.
Their usage by well-known individuals blatantly undermines the purpose of a climate conference and exemplifies the lack of commitment to sustainable practices as well as the disconnect between economic concerns and individual behavior.
This runs the risk of forming and influencing public opinion. According to earlier studies, people are less likely to get climate action seriously if they believe their leaders are failing to contribute.
Prior to the formal peer review, we looked at the use of private jets for the COP27 in Egypt ( our findings are available as a preprint ). The majority of private flights were short-haul, frequently lasting only an hour between the capital city of Cairo and the seminar location in Sharm El-Sheikh. As takeoff and landing consume more energy than cruising, planes are even less effective over shorter distances.
Therefore, avoiding small airlines and private aircraft is essential. In light of this, we looked into a variety of vacation choices for individuals from the UK, where we are based, to travel to COP28 in Dubai.
Even after taking into account a flight from Istanbul because you ca n’t travel the entire distance to Dubai by train or coach, private jet travel pollutes the area 11 times more than commercial aircraft, 35 times worse than train, and 52 times the amount of coach travel. For those traveling from the UK, this year’s pollutants may be higher due to the longer trip to Dubai than Egypt.
Transport from London to COP28 carbon intensity ( grams of CO2equivalent ):
The UNFCCC, the UN system that chooses where Criminal meetings will take place, may bear some of the blame for flight emissions. Conflict zones surround Dubai, making flying that necessary because they obstruct area pathways from Europe, Asia, and Africa.
While the majority of delegates will want to travel sustainably, their choices will depend on the availability of other modes of transportation, such as healthy land routes, and, for those traveling farther away, at the very least, the ability to fly directly to reduce their carbon emissions.
In this regard, Dubai is a wise choice because it has many direct flights and there is less need for following or internal flights due to its proximity to major airline hubs.
Our study emphasizes the necessity of properly weighing the effects of traveling to COP meetings on the carbon footprint. In the end, decision-makers may need to choose the spots of climate change conferences that will help reduce the carbon footprint of the attendees.
But, personal aircraft are still not advised. They have a much larger carbon footprint than other modes of transportation, worsen current weather agreements inequalities, and mislead the earth.
Professor Priti Parikh is Professor of Infrastructure Engineering and International Development at UCL, Carole Roberts is Researcher at Carbon Footprint of Transport, Mark Maslin teaches Natural Sciences there, and Prof.
Under a Creative Commons license, this post has been republished from The Conversation. read the article in its entirety.
COP28: Singapore reaffirms commitment to domestic climate action, global collaboration
SINGAPORE: The 2015 Paris Agreement provided the framework for all the world’s nations, including Singapore, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in line with limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.
The world, however, is on track to heat up between 2.1 degrees Celsius and 2.9 degrees Celsius by 2100, according to the 2022 report by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
The UN also warned earlier this week that plans to expand oil, gas and coal production by major fossil fuel countries would push the world far beyond the Paris deal’s global warming limit.
Speaking at the 28th Conference of the Parties (COP28) in Dubai on Saturday (Dec 2), Senior Minister and Coordinating Minister for National Security Teo Chee Hean referenced the increasing frequency and severity of extreme weather events of late, including heatwaves in Asia as “clear warning signs”.
COP28 will see the conclusion of the first Global Stocktake of the Paris Agreement and the annual climate meeting is a “timely opportunity for the world to keep the target of 1.5 degrees Celsius within reach”, said Mr Teo.
As the window of opportunity to tackle climate change is “small and closing quickly”, he stressed this was an opportunity to “course-correct” and “take decisive action” to keep the aim set in Paris in sight.
To this end, Singapore “reaffirms its commitment to domestic climate action, regional partnerships and global collaboration”, Mr Teo said.
Renewed US-China ties bode well for climate action
The relationship between the US and China is the most important in the world, and it has been unstable and sometimes under extreme stress in recent years. But a recent meeting between presidents Joe Biden and Xi Jinping in California may bring new momentum for global climate action.
Climate change is a priority area of cooperation for the two countries, and a key document was released just ahead of the presidents’ meeting. The Sunnylands Statement on Enhancing Cooperation to Address the Climate Crisis reaffirms the two countries’ support for climate action and further institutionalizes their cooperation.
The leaders of both countries understand that solving the climate crisis requires global collective action – especially from the world’s two largest polluters, who between them account for 44% of the world’s carbon emissions. Even during a time of crisis in their bilateral relations, the US and China still tried to maintain regular exchanges on climate change thanks to strong personal ties between their climate envoys.
With Israel-Gaza and the long-lasting Ukraine-Russia war both creating problems for US foreign policy, Biden wants to rebuild the relationship with China. At the same time, China eagerly wants to reduce tensions in order to remove trade and investment restrictions imposed by the US. Climate change is a way for the two countries to rebuild trust.
Strengthening climate cooperation
The Sunnylands statement notes a working group will be set up to accelerate climate actions. This group was initially planned in 2021 but stalled after senior Democrat Nancy Pelosi visited Taiwan in the summer of 2022.
Its establishment will provide additional guarantees to continue cooperation on climate change amid possible political turbulence in both countries, especially around next year’s presidential election in the US.
The statement also supports cooperation between cities, provinces and states in China and the US. Several Chinese provinces have already learned from California’s experiences to set up emissions trading programs of their own, while California has signed agreements with various cities and provinces – including Guangdong province on industrial decarbonization, and Jiangsu province on offshore wind.
Agreements like these can ensure climate action continues when cooperation at the national level is interrupted, perhaps due to future political changes. Plans to reduce non-CO₂ greenhouse gas emissions also represent important progress. Most important of these is methane, which has strong greenhouse effects.
The US has been pushing China to address methane since 2021 – and just a week before the Biden-Xi meeting, China announced its first methane action plan. The Sunnylands statement sent a signal to the rest of the world that the planet’s two largest emitters intend to make more efforts to reduce these emissions.
Implications for COP28
The statement also reaffirms the two superpowers’ support for the UN’s official climate processes, including the Paris agreement – the success of which depends on the ambition of each country’s pledge to reduce emissions. Crucially, the two biggest emitters have reaffirmed their determination to be more ambitious when the pledges are next updated in 2025.
The current UN climate conference, COP28 in Dubai, will also conclude the first global “stocktake”, which is likely to find there has not been enough progress towards the goal of limiting warming at 1.5°C. That’s why many countries and other stakeholders – even including big businesses – have called for a global agreement to phase out fossil fuels to be made at the conference.
The success of this initiative is likely to depend on the political will of China, which – despite already burning the most coal in the world – has continuously expanded its coal-fired power plants.
While the Sunnylands statement has no explicit mention of ending fossil fuels, it says both countries intend to “sufficiently accelerate renewable energy deployment in their respective economies […] so as to accelerate the substitution for coal, oil and gas generation.”
As China is also a global leader in clean technologies with the largest solar and wind capacity in the world, further cooperation between the two countries on renewables is good news.
The two countries also agree that the global stocktake should “send signals with respect to the energy transition”. This implies they may be willing to discuss the phaseout of fossil fuels at COP28, and potentially support an agreement.
Finally, being respectively the largest developing and developed countries in the world, China and the US have also shown commitment to building consensus in contentious negotiations on climate finance – money paid to poorer countries to help them adapt to climate change or cut their own emissions.
On the first day of the conference the establishment of a so-called loss and damage fund was announced, to help more vulnerable countries cope with the consequences of climate change. This is a good start. This is a good start.
However, existing pledges remain insufficient, and funds will still need to be equitably distributed to developing countries impacted by climate change. Cooperation between the two superpowers will be instrumental in building effective and just institutions to deliver that money.
As China and the US have restarted their climate cooperation with strong commitments, the world can raise their expectations for COP28. Global policymakers must seize their last remaining opportunities – and this is a promising start.
Yixian Sun is Associate Professor in International Development, University of Bath
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Wetlands hold answers to climate mitigation, adaptation Â
Along Asian coastlines, there are many areas where rural communities are experiencing alarming rates of sea-level rise due to the loss of their mangrove cover. Europe also has lost half of its wetlands, much of it through drainage.
Last year, the Andalusian parliament legalized the widespread abstraction of underground water by strawberry farmers, which is drying up the Doñana wetland and leading to the desertification of Spain.
Degradation of Sahelian wetlands in north-central Africa has caused resource scarcity, undermining human well-being and compelling people to migrate.
In Indonesia, peat swamps are rapidly being logged, burned, and converted for agriculture, causing massive forest fires affecting the respiratory health of millions of people.
Meanwhile, as you read this, the world’s largest tropical wetland ecosystem, the Pantanal of Brazil, is being scorched by wildfires.
What, you may ask, does this have to do with an annual UN climate conference, COP28, which is focused on emissions reduction and coping with the impacts of a globally heating world?
Well, everything.
Mitigation
Mitigation refers to reducing the amount of greenhouse gases trapped in the atmosphere to slow the rate of climate change. The most important action needed in this aspect is rapid and ambitious emission reduction.
The UN Environment Program’s Emissions Gap Report tracks the gap between where global emissions are heading with current country commitments and where they ought to be to limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. The 2023 report shows that progress has been made since 2015 but much deeper emissions cuts need to be made this decade to limit global warming.
Research has shown that nature-based solutions can provide more than one-third of the cost-effective climate mitigation needed to stabilize warming to below 2 degrees by 2030. Alongside aggressive-fossil fuel emissions reductions, nature-based solutions offer a powerful set of options for nations to deliver on the Paris Climate Agreement.
Wetland ecosystems like mangroves, marshes, peatlands and seagrass beds absorb and store carbon. They are essential parts of Earth’s natural carbon cycle and crucial to mitigating climate change.
Last year’s State of the World’s Mangroves report estimated that mangroves sequester carbon at up to four times the rate of terrestrial forests.
Peatlands are some of the most misunderstood habitats on our planet. Viewed for decades as wastelands, peatlands – though only covering about 3% of our planet’s land – store about twice the amount of carbon as all the world’s forests combined.
While mitigating climate change is essential, adapting to it is an equally urgent matter, and wetlands have some solutions.
Adaptation
The effects of climate change are already being felt. The five warmest years on record in Europe have all occurred since 2014, leading to multiple heatwaves. Floods and landslides from extreme rain took hundreds of lives across Asia this year.
We can only expect the frequency and intensity of disasters caused by climate change to increase especially as new UNEP analysis shows insufficient progress made by countries. And unfortunately, the hardest hit are those who contributed least to its cause.
Wetlands can curb some of these effects. The sturdy roots of mangrove forests and leaves of seagrass meadows protect shorelines from storm surges and sea level rise by preventing erosion and softening the force of waves. Peatlands act as sponges, slowly holding and releasing water, reducing the intensity of both floods and droughts.
Conversely, the loss and degradation of wetlands exacerbates the climate crisis by releasing greenhouse gases and leaving ecosystems, and the people dependent on them, more vulnerable to the effects of climate change. The draining of peatlands alone releases the equivalent of about 4% of all annual emissions caused by human activity.
To enable global warming to remain below 1.5 degrees, at least half of drained peatlands should be restored by 2030, and further peatland loss should be prevented.
Despite ample evidence in support of nature-based solutions, the amount of public international funding flowing to them for adaptation accounted for less than 1.5% of total climate finance flows in 2018, and public multilateral and bilateral adaptation finance flows to developing countries declined by 15% in 2021.
But the news is not all bad. Recent analysis shows a growing inclusion of coastal and marine ecosystems in climate strategies. For instance, Belize plans to protect and restore mangrove and seagrass ecosystems to enhance their carbon sequestration capacity, while Liberia has committed to fully integrating mangrove emissions and absorption into the national greenhouse gas-inventory by 2030.
Healthy wetlands are a powerful solution to the climate crisis. What we need now is urgent action. Governments, business, and civil society must collaborate to scale up the safeguarding and restoration of wetland ecosystems, as well as tackle the drivers that destroy wetlands.
Commitments and efforts under the Convention on Wetlands can be leveraged to deliver climate action but finance needs to be made available to support wetland projects. With the conclusion of the first Global Stocktake, COP28 should be the time countries rapidly include ambitious wetland actions in their Nationally Determined Contributions.
Achieving climate equity for the Commonwealth
The Commonwealth of Nations has demonstrated a long-standing dedication to tackling climate change and assisting member countries in mitigating its adverse effects.
The unified political determination to safeguard the planet for succeeding generations has been precise and robust, dating back to the Langkawi Declaration on the Environment in 1989. During this pivotal moment, Commonwealth leaders pledged to take concerted action, both independently and collectively, through a program focused on environmental initiatives and addressing the challenges of climate change.
Climate action plays a vital role in the resilience and prosperity of small island developing states (SIDS), particularly within the Commonwealth. SIDS, despite their diversity, face significant vulnerability to the impacts of climate change, posing existential threats to their economies and ecosystems.
The Commonwealth actively supports SIDS in advocating for increased climate action, recognizing the unique challenges they confront in the face of climate change. The commitment of the Commonwealth heads of government to various goals, including climate action, underscores the interconnectedness of health, education, gender equality, and climate resilience for SIDS.
Access to electricity is essential for economic progress and poverty reduction. However, many less developed nations in the Commonwealth face limited power availability, which hampers such social services as health and education. Additionally, it is crucial to decarbonize the energy sector and ensure climate equity to promote sustainable development objectives.
Energy access disparities are prominent in the Global South, where both power access and the proportion of renewable energy lag behind the global average. African Commonwealth nations, in particular, require significant electricity availability development despite being leading renewable energy producers.
Bridging these disparities is essential to fulfill the objectives of Sustainable Development Goal 7 (SDG 7), which aims to achieve universal access to affordable and reliable energy services.
The Commonwealth Sustainable Energy Transition (CSET) Agenda is a collaborative platform for concerted efforts among member countries to expedite the shift toward low-carbon energy systems and attain SDG 7. This initiative is grounded in three fundamental pillars: inclusive transitions, technology and innovation, and enabling frameworks.
It champions actions led by members to accelerate inclusive and equitable energy transitions, ultimately realizing the objectives of SDG 7. The CSET Agenda has introduced three new member-led action groups focusing on energy literacy, geothermal energy, and a crosscutting youth action group.
Transitioning to a low-carbon economy is vital for achieving decarbonization targets and addressing climate change. However, this transformation poses challenges due to the historical reliance on hydrocarbon energy sources.
Moreover, the shift toward decarbonization may lead to stranded hydrocarbon assets, affecting not only their owners, but suppliers, staff, entire communities and regions. A comprehensive and inclusive policy framework is necessary to guide member nations in aligning their efforts with the UN Sustainable Development Goals and the COP21 Paris Agreement.
While policy frameworks and climate targets are essential, they must be accompanied by binding rules and regulations. Legislation can enforce energy-efficiency standards, promote the adoption of renewable energy, and phase out carbon-intensive practices. As already done in the UK and Canada, prohibiting internal-combustion engines or coal-fired electricity generation can expedite the energy transition and propel positive climate action.
Climate injustice is a significant concern within the Global South, where poorer nations often contribute more to combating climate change than wealthier countries. Evaluating national emissions capabilities and historical emissions reveals stark disparities, emphasising the need for fair burden-sharing.
Wealthier nations have an opportunity to address climate injustice by supporting renewable energy projects in Commonwealth countries, thereby reducing energy poverty.
To this end, the Commonwealth Climate Finance Access Hub (CCFAH) facilitates unlocking climate finance for small and vulnerable member states. This initiative assists countries in bidding for and gaining increased access to climate finance by supporting the development of grant proposals and project pipelines.
The process also involves building human and institutional capacity, providing technical advisory services, and fostering cross-Commonwealth cooperation. Commonwealth national climate finance advisers, deployed and embedded in relevant government ministry departments, play a key role in facilitating sharing of experiences and expertise among member states.
| Africa | Caribbean | Pacific |
| Mauritius | Antigua & Barbuda | Fiji |
| Eswatini | Belize | Solomon Islands |
| Namibia | Grenada* | Tonga |
| Seychelles* | St Lucia | Vanuatu |
| Zambia | Barbados, Jamaica & Guyana* | |
| Regional Technical Assistance – Commonwealth Regional Climate Finance Adviser, Indo Pacific | Incoming – Regional Technical Assistance | Regional Technical Assistance – Commonwealth Regional Climate Finance Adviser, Africa |
| * Countries that have previously been supported by a Commonwealth national climate finance adviser. | ||
Examining how energy is generated, delivered, and utilized is essential to achieving decarbonization goals and fostering socioeconomic growth. Accelerating the energy transition requires strong political will, technological advancements, and cost reductions. Finally, ensuring inclusive processes during this transition is crucial for achieving sustainable and people-centered social development.
IFRC wraps up Hanoi meeting with calls for better disaster preparedness in Asia Pacific
ISRAEL-HAMAS WAR
The Israel-Hamas conflict, into its seventh week, has displaced more than 1.7 million people in the Gaza Strip, according to the United Nations’ children’s agency UNICEF.
Multiple aid organisations, including the IFRC, have renewed calls for an extended humanitarian ceasefire and pleaded for desperately needed aid to be allowed unimpeded into the devastated enclave.
“(We) express deep concern about the protracted crisis in the Middle East and express solidarity with Palestinian Red Crescent Society and Magen David Adom,” said Tunku Puteri Intan Safinaz, chairwoman of the Malaysian Red Crescent Society, in a statement at the conclusion of the conference. Magen David Adom is Israel’s national emergency medical, disaster, ambulance and blood bank service.
Dr Hossam Elsharkawi, IFRC’s regional director for Middle East and North Africa, also read to delegates the organisation’s recommendations regarding developments in Gaza.
“Endorsing the truce is insufficient. We must actively call for a permanent ceasefire,” he said.
“It is crucial to issue a statement condemning the violations and denouncing atrocities, specifically the deliberate targeting of civilians, medical personnel and hospitals,” he said.
Other recommendations include advocating for additional access points to Gaza, avoiding forcing people to leave their homes in population transfer scenarios, and providing support to the Palestinian Red Crescent.
The aid network said that civilians are paying the “highest price” in the hostilities, and has called on all parties to allow humanitarian organisations to safely access and support those impacted by the crisis.
Delegates said the conflicts in Gaza and Ukraine take away huge amounts of attention and resources from programmes on climate action.
“The biggest challenge is that we have more and more diversified types of humanitarian crises,” said Mr Ma Wenbo, a representative from the Red Cross Society of China.
“We have natural disasters, and we also have man-made ones like war, armed conflicts, etc., which is stretching our resources.”
CLIMATE RISKS
Even as these conflicts divert public attention, the IFRC highlighted the need for the region to guard against growing climate risks.
Delegates at the conference agreed on a call for action for Asia Pacific, which is the world’s most disaster-prone area.
Nearly 45 per cent of the world’s natural disasters occur in Asia and the Pacific, and more than 75 per cent of those affected live within the region, according to the UN.
At COP28, a chance for the West to make amends
The West often engages in moral grandstanding when addressing critical global issues like climate change, emphasizing the need for action and accountability. But when it comes to taking responsibility for historic carbon emissions, the developed world often falls short of its obligations.
This disparity between rhetoric and action has significant implications, particularly for vulnerable nations. The Loss and Damages Fund, a significant achievement of the COP27 summit last year in Egypt, highlights this disconnect.
The increasing severity, breadth, and regularity of climate calamities has disproportionately affected developing countries, as evidenced by the Global Climate Risk Index 2021. Of the 10 most affected territories and countries between 2000 and 2019, all were in the developing world.
The Gr9up of 77 and China played a pivotal role in including finance for loss and damages at COP27. The emphasis was on framing this mechanism as a global commitment rather than liability or compensation. The result was collective acknowledgment of the asymmetric impacts of climate change and a step toward rectifying these imbalances.
However, the path to operationalizing the fund is fraught with obstacles. The impasse at an October meeting on the topic cast doubt over the process, particularly concerning the fund’s practical implementation.
Fortunately, a breakthrough was achieved at a follow-up meeting in Abu Dhabi this month. The text adopted there will form the basis of a final decision at COP28 in Dubai in December. Even before that meeting starts, the deal on loss and damages already has the potential to become one of the meeting’s greatest achievements.
Yet even amid progress, the adopted text reveals three issues that hint at how difficult it will be to implement the fund. The success of COP28 in addressing these issues will be a test of the international community’s commitment to equitable climate action.
The first point of contention concerns identification of fund contributors. Developing nations advocate for financial commitments from developed countries, while the United States and Europe assert that emerging economies, notably China and Gulf nations such as Saudi Arabia, should share financial responsibilities equitably.
During preparatory meetings for COP28, the Saudi delegation reportedly referred to historical “failures on obligations and gaps in action” by Western nations during and after the Industrial Revolution, an opinion shared by many leaders in developing countries.
The West has a history of falling short in funding climate action. A 2009 promise to mobilize US$100 billion annually for developing countries by 2020 was never met. It’s high time the West matches its rhetoric with financial commitment. COP28 is the place to deliver.
While the developing world is open to funding from non-governmental sources like the private sector and humanitarian groups, the primary responsibility lies with Western governments. Failure to step up could mean either the loss and damages fund remains non-operational, or its scale is too small to impact climate-change mitigation and adaptation significantly.
The second key challenge for COP28 is pinpointing which nations should benefit from the fund. At COP27, the definition of “particularly vulnerable” sparked debate – a matter still unresolved. COP28 must clarify this. It’s a complex issue; assessing loss and damages goes beyond simple economic factors to include losses that are less tangible and harder to measure, like those from gradual environmental changes.
There’s also a gap between what affected communities experience and the data collected by governments and organizations. Localized impacts may seem more pressing than the broader climate context, complicating the creation of effective responses.
The third challenge revolves around the location and administration of the fund. Western countries, particularly the US and the European Union, favored housing the fund within the World Bank, an idea that developing countries have strongly opposed.
Opposition was rooted in concerns that the World Bank’s loan-based financing model was unsuitable for debt-burdened developing countries, and that the bank’s decision-making process was too heavily influenced by its major donors, particularly the US. Moreover, high administrative fees associated with the World Bank have further fueled resistance.
Despite these reservations, developing countries made a substantial concession by agreeing to an interim arrangement where the fund would be housed in the World Bank for four years, under conditions that included direct access to grants and inclusivity of non-World Bank member states. But if the rest of the demands of the developing world are not met, they can easily do away with this concession.
Thus COP28 faces a crucial task in making the Loss and Damages Fund operational. If successful, next month in Dubai will mark a significant victory for the Global South and those communities bearing the brunt of the West’s historical emissions. This momentous step could pivot the scales toward a fairer climate future.
This article was provided by Syndication Bureau, which holds copyright.
School Strike 4 Climate: Australian students with ‘sick note’ demand climate action
Getty ImagesThousands of Australian students have walked out of class to attend School Strike 4 Climate rallies, backed by a “sick note” from “climate doctors”.
Signed by three prominent scientists, it concludes: “It is my recommendation that they take a sick day to protest for a sick planet.”
The students called for greater climate action, as the country faces another summer with natural disasters.
However some state education officials said schools will not accept the note.
Penned by Dr David Karoly, Dr Nick Abel and Dr Lesley Hughes, the letter was available online for students to download.
It said they were unfit to attend school because of “increased anxiety” around government inaction, “elevated stress” due to the impact of climate change, and “feelings of despair” about their future.
The note is not a formal medical certificate, and education departments in New South Wales and Victoria said it will not be accepted in their schools.
The Minister for Education Jason Clare also said students should not be at the Friday strike. “I want our kids to be passionate, I want our kids to care about democracy and I want our kids to care about the future, but I also want our kids at school,” he said.
But students who attended the protests across nine cities said the government’s response demonstrated a failure to take their concerns seriously.
“[They are] throwing our future under the bus by approving new coal and gas [projects] in Australia,” year 10 student Joey Thompson told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation in Melbourne on Friday.
In Sydney, protesters chanted “shame” outside the office of Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek.
One 16-year-old, Min Park, told the Australian Associated Press she was striking because of Ms Plibersek’s approval of new coal and gas projects.
“She is listening to the fossil fuel lobby instead of doing her job and taking responsibility to protect the health of the planet,” she said.
Australia has long faced international criticism for being slow to respond to the threat posed by climate change.
While the Labour government led by Anthony Albanese promised greater action to halt climate change when elected in May 2022, experts say Australia is still not keeping pace with key allies like the US and the UK.
Originating in Sweden, School Strike 4 Climate is an international movement of students who skip classes on Friday to press for political action on climate change.
The Friday rallies are the 11th held in Australia, and the largest since 2019 when an estimated 300,000 people turned out across the country.
They come after former diplomat and public servant Gregory Andrews was forced to end a hunger strike outside Parliament House in Canberra. Mr Andrews had refused to eat until the government declared a climate emergency, but was taken away by an ambulance on Friday morning.
Related Topics
-
-
19 September
-
-
-
7 September
-
Xi and Biden at summit speak of conflict avoidance
State leaders of China and the United States met on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) leaders’ meeting on Wednesday to discuss trade, Taiwan and other geopolitical issues.
Chinese President Xi Jinping and US President Joe Biden had a face-to-face meeting at Filoli estate, a historical site in San Francisco. The two had not met each other since they had a talk in Bali, Indonesia a year earlier.
“Sino-US relations have not always been smooth, but the two countries still have to deal with each other,” Xi said in his opening speech at the meeting. “Confrontation is not a practical move. The earth can accommodate both China and the US.”
“Although the two countries have different development paths, as long as they adhere to mutual respect, peaceful coexistence and win-win cooperation, they can transcend their differences and find a way for the two countries to get along with each other,” he said. “The future of China and the US is bright.”
Biden said both China and the US should make sure that their competition will not lead to conflicts. He said both countries can work together in artificial intelligence and climate change issues.
Before the two leaders’ meeting, China and the US said in a joint statement that they recall, reaffirm, and commit to further the effective and sustained implementation of the April 2021 US-China Joint Statement Addressing the Climate Crisis and the November 2021 US-China Joint Glasgow Declaration on Enhancing Climate Action in the 2020s.
They said they decided to operationalize the Working Group on Enhancing Climate Action in the 2020s, to engage in dialogue and cooperation to accelerate concrete climate actions.
Win-win situation
On Tuesday and Wednesday, China’s state media published a series of articles, saying that the Xi-Biden meeting would help significantly improve Sino-US relations.
“We hope that the positive stance shown by the US in its recent interactions with China is not political calculation and tactic, and that the verbal commitments it has made will become concrete policies and substantive actions,” Xinhua said in a commentary on Wednesday.
“We also hope that the US will not be fettered by domestic party disputes and the selfish interests of politicians, and will work together with China to make long-term efforts to accumulate good news and momentum in China-US relations and promote the real stabilization and improvement of bilateral relations,” it said.
It said the general trend of the world is peace, development, cooperation and win-win situation, and that no country or group of countries can dominate world affairs alone.
Xinhua also said cooperation, not competition, should dominate the perception of Sino-US relations. It said if both sides define their entire relationship with competition, antagonism will continue to increase while the two nations will face a risk of slipping into the abyss of a “New Cold War.”
It said China and the US can boost bilateral trade, work together in the carbon neutrality and medical sectors and encourage mutual investment. It said China’s middle-class population will provide growth potential for American farmers.
Besides, the China Central TV said in an article that Xi had paid a lot of effort to encourage informal exchange between Chinese and US people over the past three decades. His effort included an invitation of the wife of late American physicist Milton Gardner to visit Fuzhou, where the scientist spent 10 happy years of his childhood, in 1992.
“We’re not trying to decouple from China. What we’re trying to do is change the relationship for the better,” Biden told reporters at the White House on Tuesday.
He said the US was wary of investing in China due to Beijing’s business practices, which require foreign investors to turn over their trade secrets.
He said that, by meeting with Xi, he wanted to get back on a “normal course of correspondence,” such as being able to have emergency phone calls or military talks whenever there is a crisis.
China’s ‘real problems’
In early 2023, political tensions between China and the US were heightened by the Chinese spy balloon incident, Taiwan matters and Washington’s chip exports ban against China. The two sides could only resume dialogues in May.
Xi’s US trip happened against a backdrop of China seeing a decline in its foreign direct investment (FDI) and exports this year. The Chinese economy is also facing deflationary risks.
On Tuesday, Biden said at a fundraiser in San Francisco that China has “real problems.”
“President Xi is another example of how re-establishing American leadership in the world is taking hold. They’ve got real problems,” he said, without further elaboration.
“Nations that have no problems do not exist in this world,” Mao Ning, a spokesperson of the Chinese Foreign Ministry, said in a regular media briefing on Wednesday in what may have been a retort to Biden’s remark. “China is confident that it can achieve better development and achieve brighter prospects,” she said. “It is hoped that the US can also seriously solve its own problems and bring better life to the American people.”
Prior to this, Biden said on August 10 that China’s economic situation was a ticking time bomb. He said China was in trouble as it had a slowing growth and high youth unemployment rate.
China’s FDI fell 14.7% year-on-year to about US$132.9 billion in the first nine months of this year. The figure is an estimation calculated by Asia Times with the FDI in renminbi terms.
In January-October, China’s exports fell 5.6% to US$2.79 trillion from the same period of last year. The country’s imports dropped 6.5% to US$2.11 trillion.
People also reduced spending due to falling or unstable income. In October, China’s consumer price index (CPI) fell 0.2% year-on-year, according to the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS). It was the second contraction in prices since the last one in July.
NBS officials said falling consumer prices were a result of rising food supply and weaker demand after long holidays.
The Chinese economy has been hit by a property and local government debt crisis over the past two years. Many property developers were struggling to sell their apartments, return loans and finish their construction work.
The central government is going to issue 1 trillion yuan of sovereign bonds but the sum is only enough for local governments to pay the interest on their outstanding debt.
According to China’s Ministry of Finance, the outstanding amount of local government debt grew 15.1% to 35.06 trillion yuan at the end of last year from 30.47 trillion yuan a year earlier.
Read: End to decoupling tops China’s pre-summit demands
Follow Jeff Pao on Twitter at @jeffpao3