Jahangir's World Times First Comprehensive Magazine for students/teachers of competitive exams and general readers as well.
COP 25
Long but barely fruitful
Aftab Hussain Wahla
COP or Conference of Parties is the supreme decision-making body of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and is responsible for monitoring and reviewing its effective implementation, including institutional and administrative arrangements. The body is represented by 197 parties—countries and territories—and aims at curbing greenhouse gases (GHGs) to limit global mean temperature well below 2°C from pre-Industrial level. The COP requires parties to publish an action plan of intended Nationally Determined Contribution, reflecting the ambition of the parties to limit GHG emissions to materialize UNFCCC’s objectives. COP has met annually since its first meeting in Germany in March 1995. Since then, COP has arranged 25 meetings and its 21st meeting, i.e. COP 21, was historic in terms of the outcome as it yielded the first international climate accord known as the Paris Agreement. The COP 25 was planned to schedule in Chile from December 2 to 13, 2019, but anti-government protests caused the holding of the summit in Madrid, Spain. The COP 25 was held amidst a flurry of scientific reports and mounting irrefutable evidence on the impacts of climate change on different natural disasters and hazards.
Industrial Revolution-led anthropological activities, coupled with a historically unprecedented rise in human population, have disrupted the delicate balance maintained by different natural forces. They are now creating challenges to survival even for Homo sapiens that defeated the harshest climate of the Earth. The very acquisition of erstwhile unimaginable capability to influence natural processes clouded the thinking of humanity. The humans started disrupting the physical laws of nature to enslave the destructive power of nature to achieve their ulterior motives and nefarious strategic designs. Human-led manipulation of natural process and services over the past two centuries have now started to infuriate the nature that is angry enough to unleash its counter-attack on human civilization with its most potent and lethal weapon: climate change. In the words of UN Secretary-General, António Guterres, “Nature is angry. And we fool ourselves if we think we can fool nature. Because nature always strikes back. And around the world, nature is striking back with fury.” From a significant rise in global mean temperature to human-induced intensity and frequency in extreme weather phenomena; from acidification of oceans to a steady rise in sea level; from fast-melting glaciers to rapid desertification; from reduction in agri-produce to increasing health hazards; from mass displacement of human societies to resurrection of hunger and famines; from sweltering and scorching heat waves to havoc-wreaking bushfires; from water scarcity-led droughts to Glacier Outburst Flood Lakes-caused flash floods, nature is striking back with dire consequences for the global economy, security, health, infrastructure and habitability of our ecosystem.
The year 2019 was marked with climate emergencies that shook the world. The climate change-intensified tropical cyclone Idai which battered Mozambique and the Bahamas and caused loss worth more than $2.2 billion; wildfires in Brazil that burnt to ashes 9060 km2 of the Amazon forest; the worst flooding in Venice that caused the damage to the tune of $1.1 billion; and the heat wave across Europe that set all-time high temperature records in western Europe and caused more than 1500 deaths in France are telling manifestations of climate change. That is not just imagination or prediction for the future, it’s here, knocking at our doors and impacting every walk of our lives. The situation was so grave that Oxford Dictionary declared climate emergency the word of the year 2019 and European Parliament declared climate and environmental emergency in Europe, and globally, while urging European Commission to ensure that budgetary and legislative actions of member countries are aligned with the objective of limiting global warming to under 1.5°C. For the first time in UN history, Youth Climate Summit was organized on the sidelines of UN General Assembly session with an aim to bring together young climate action leaders and ensure meaningful engagement with top decision-makers of countries and territories.
In addition, various climate change-induced disasters and emergencies and high-profile diplomatic and political events were organized to discuss climate change. Scientists published a series of reports in 2019 that corroborated the link between worsening habitability level of planet Earth and increasing human-induced changes in normal atmospheric, hydrological and biological functioning of our home. The World Meteorological Organization released Statement of State of Climate which reported that the concentration of CO2 has increased by 147% (407 ppm) of pre-Industrial revolution level and the average mean global temperature is hovering around 1.1°C above from 1750s that has made 2019 the 2nd hottest year on record. The report also revealed that the 2010-19 decade has become the warmest decade since 1850. Apart from this, ocean acidification occurring at the rate of 0.017-0.027 pH per decade and record low ice extent in Arctic and Antarctic have also been discussed in report. In another report published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, scientists appealed for multi-dimensional, well-coordinated, deep-reaching, urgent and unprecedented changes to overhaul the overall economic system. The scientists warned the world that we had just twelve years to keep global warming within the 1.5°C limit, otherwise just half a degree rise in mercury could worsen the risks of droughts, floods, extreme heat and poverty for hundreds of millions of people. IPCC urged the parties of Paris Agreement to further enhance their NDCs to keep temperature between 1.5°C to 2°C. Global Climate Risk Index 2020 also warned against the risks and costs associated with climate change-induced extreme weather events. The report concluded that as a direct result of more than 12,000 extreme weather events (storms, floods, heat waves etc.) during 1999-2018, about 495,000 people have died worldwide and $3.54 trillion have lost. Cumulatively, the 10 most affected countries suffered staggering losses of $90 billion (PPP) in 2018 and 5,486 people were perished by various extreme weather events.
The International Union for Conservation of Nature also updated the Red List of Threatened Species and added 1840 new animal and plant species which have become endangered due to manmade climate change-induced variation in weather and population growth-caused habitat destruction. Now the list has expanded to 30,000 species which are on the verge of extinction. IPCC in its report in 2013 forecast that continued global warming would cause 60 cm rise in sea level by the end of the century that would put 360 million people on the risk of coastal flooding. Now the forecast has been revisited, as per cautious estimate, the sea rise would expose at least 400 million people to the risk of coastal floods and other oceanic hazards.
The publication of these reports and preceding intense climate activism including climate strikes etc. right before the commencement of COP25 had made Summit extremely significant. The summit was scheduled to discuss the enhancement in Nationally Determined Contributions to maintain the cut rate of emission in line with the Paris Agreement. Participants were also expected to find ways for enactment of implementation mechanism of Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage to compensate for the costs associated with ever-compounding climate extremes owing to GHGs emission of rich countries. In addition, in depth deliberation on establishment of fair global emission trading system was also on the agenda of climate summit.
Heads of states, climate officials, non-government organizations, youth groups and other non-state actors participated in the summit. Unfortunately, though squabbling and wrangling among climate negotiators over technical details dragged the two-week long summit to make a last-ditch push to salvage consensus to prevent climate breakdown, the prolonged negotiation did not yield the desired outcomes as the world community failed to come up with ambitious emission cut in line with the Paris Agreement. The official text released about 40 hours after the deadline admitted the ever-widening gap between what is required for curbing global warming below 2°C from pre-industrial level and what commitments the countries are making. The points of contention that have seriously undermined the fight against climate change and are posing serious threats to international climate change regimes are worth discussing.
Finalization of rules regulating the carbon market remained one of the major sticking points and further debate was put off till the next summit scheduled to be held in Glasgow, London. Carbon trading allows two or more countries meet their emission target cost effectively. If country finds it easier to meet its emission target cheaply, it can achieve more than the required target. This country can trade this additional emission reduction with country which finds it harder to achieve its NDCs. This trading is called carbon market and additional reduction in emissions is called credits that can be achieved through adoption of zero-emission energy, greater energy efficiency, electrification in transport and building and other measures.
Article 6 of the Paris Agreement defines rules for carbon trading and helps reduce the cost of emission cut. Double counting of emission reduction by both the countries selling or buying carbon credits is a major hurdle in universal adoption of carbon market rules, moreover, the countries like Brazil insists that the natural forests must also be counted as carbon credits, this stance is opposed by many countries that is creating diplomatic mountain to climb for climate negotiators to resolve the issue. The one outcome of COP25 that is worth mentioning is adherence to San Jose Principles by thirty governments in order streamline regulation governing carbon market and improve environmental integrity. Apart from this, the negotiation remained inconclusive and sharply divided.
Warsaw international mechanism for loss and damage was established in the nineteenth meeting of the Conference of Paris (COP19) held in 2013. The underlying objective of WIM was to address the loss and damage caused by climate change in developing countries which are vulnerable to climate extremes and variations. The mechanism did envision knowledge enhancement and formulation of risk management approaches, strengthening dialogue and energies among vital stakeholders and provision of finance, technology and capacity building to most affected nations but it does not determine liability and compensation which is long-standing demand of Alliance of Small Island Nations and resisted by developed countries. This time also the negotiators wrangled over the wording of loss and damage mechanism. The fiercest resistance came from the US that opposed any clause which may hold accountable the advanced countries for climate havoc wreaked upon the small island nations, resultantly, negotiation was carried away for next summit in the UK.
Stakes were particularly high this time because Paris Agreement implementation is due to start next year, therefore climate activists and scientists were hoping that countries would come up with ambitious emission cut pledges to ensure the smooth implementation of the Paris agreement. Unfortunately, it did not happen. Out of 190 parties, 80 countries promised to increase their emission cut next year and 73 nations, 14 regions including EU, 398 cities and 786 businesses vowed to set long-term target of net zero emissions by 2050. As per Climate Action Tracker, updated commitments of only a handful of countries are compatible with a 2°C target.
The United States which has triggered the withdrawal mechanism from Paris Agreement, played the role of spoiler, and thwarted any attempt to force countries enhance their climate commitments of NDCs. Australia, India, China and other major polluters can also largely be blamed for deadlock. The urgency of the situation can be gauged from the fact that since the adoption of the Paris Agreement in 2015, the emission has risen to 4% instead of reduction and at the current rate,
the world is set to embrace 3°C rise in temperature by the end of century which would cause irreversible rise of 2 meters in sea level that is enough to inundate coastal cities like Miami, major portion of Shanghai, Osaka, Karachi and Alexandria. In addition to coastal flooding, longer drought, fiercer hurricanes and shift in thermal threshold of major staple crops would also adversely impact the Earth. As per various reports, annual cut of 7.6% in GHGs emission would have to be maintained, in case, we wish to cap global temperature below 2°C from pre-industrial level. This rate seems too much ambitious that would entail considerable economic slowdown in major economies of the world.
Though the text released at the conclusion of summit has consternated climate activists and scientists. The very gathering of more than 190 countries in itself is a major milestone in fight against climate change. Realization about inadequacy of NDCs in limiting global warming as well as the leading role played by EU heralds some positive outcome at COP26. It is high time the COP was institutionalized on pattern of other international legal and political institutions with unhindered policymaking and implementation powers so that the long-term sustainability of our ecosystem may be ensured through pursuance of financially, diplomatically and politically-supported policies. War against climate change is turning against us; we have no option but to fight to the last. Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg—she has been recently named as Time’s Person of the Year—rightly asked world leaders when she said: “I don’t want your hope. I don’t want you to be hopeful. I want you to panic, and act as if the house was on fire.”
