FROM THE UN CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE
OF PARTIES (COPs 26 to 29th): -REVIEW OF OUTCOMES, ACHIEVEMENTS,
CHALLENGES AND THE ROAD TO COP30 IN 2025, BRAZIL
BY
Prof. Muhammed Tawfiq Ladan (PhD. Law)
INTRODUCTION
The
United Nations (UN) Climate Change Conferences, also known as Conference of the
Parties (COPs), are important global climate action events because they: -
I.
Address climate change[1]:
- COPs are the world’s; highest decision making body on climate change. They
provide a forum for countries to: -
·
Review the implementation of
the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC), the Kyoto Protocol and
the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, 2015;
·
Adopt decisions to further
develop and implement these agreements;
·
Negotiate multilateral
responses to climate change;
·
Set standards and advance
action.
II.
Raise awareness[2]:
- COPs raise awareness of the threat of Climate Change;
III.
Bring together stakeholders[3]:
-COPs strategically bring together governments, civil society organisations,
industry or businesses, and individuals to work together on climate change.
IV.
Share benefits[4]:
- COPs can help countries share benefits of climate action, such as more jobs,
stronger growth, and cheaper and cleaner energy.
The UNFCC is a multilateral treaty adopted in 1992 to
stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations. Its over-arching objective is to
prevent dangerous human- made interference on the climate system[5].
It is against this background that this paper seeks to
review the outcomes, achievements and challenges of COPs 26, 27, 28 and 29 and
chart the road to COP 30.
1. COP
26, GLASGOW, UK 2021: - TOGETHER FOR OUR PLANET[6]
The UN Climate Change Conference in Glasgow (COP26) brought
together 120 world leaders and over 40,000 registered participants, including
22,274 party delegates, 14.124 observers and 3.886 media representatives. For
two weeks in 2021, the world was riveted on all facets of climate change — the
science, the solutions, the political will to act, and clear indications of
action.
The outcome of COP26 – the Glasgow Climate Pact – is the
fruit of intense negotiations among almost 200 countries over the two weeks,
strenuous formal and informal work over many months, and constant engagement
both in-person and virtually for nearly two years.
“The approved texts are a compromise,” said UN
Secretary-General António Guterres. “They reflect the interests, the
conditions, the contradictions and the state of political will in the world
today. They take important steps, but unfortunately the collective political
will was not enough to overcome some deep contradictions.”
Cuts in global greenhouse gas emissions are still far from
where they need to be to preserve a livable climate, and support for the most
vulnerable countries affected by the impacts of climate change is still falling
far short. But COP26 did produce new “building blocks” to advance
implementation of the Paris Agreement through actions that can get the world on
a more sustainable, low-carbon pathway forward.
What was agreed?
Recognizing the emergency
Countries reaffirmed the Paris Agreement goal of limiting
the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above
pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit it to 1.5 °C. And they went
further, expressing “alarm and utmost concern that human activities have caused
around 1.1 °C of warming to date, that impacts are already being felt in every
region, and that carbon budgets consistent with achieving the Paris Agreement
temperature goal are now small and being rapidly depleted.” They recognized
that the impacts of climate change will be much lower at a temperature increase
of 1.5 °C compared with 2 °C.
Accelerating action
Countries stressed the urgency of action “in this critical
decade,” when carbon dioxide emissions must be reduced by 45 per cent to reach
net zero around mid-century. But with present climate plans – the Nationally
determined Contributions — falling far short on ambition, the Glasgow Climate
Pact calls on all countries to present stronger national action plans next
year, instead of in 2025, which was the original timeline. Countries also
called on UNFCCC to do an annual NDC Synthesis Report to gauge the present
level of ambition.
Moving away from fossil fuels
In perhaps the most contested decision in Glasgow,
countries ultimately agreed to a provision calling for a phase-down of coal
power and a phase-out of “inefficient” fossil fuel subsidies – two key issues
that had never been explicitly mentioned in decisions of UN climate talks
before, despite coal, oil and gas being the main drivers of global warming.
Many countries, and NGOs, expressed dissatisfaction that the language on coal was
significantly weakened (from phase-out to phase-down) and consequently, was not
as ambitious as it needs to be.
Delivering on climate finance
Developed countries came to Glasgow falling short on their
promise to deliver US$100 billion a year for developing countries. Voicing
“regret,” the Glasgow outcome reaffirms the pledge and urges developed
countries to fully deliver on the US$100 billion goal urgently. Developed
countries, in a report, expressed confidence that the target would be met in
2023.
Stepping up support for adaptation
The Glasgow Pact calls for a doubling of finance to support
developing countries in adapting to the impacts of climate change and building
resilience. This won’t provide all the funding that poorer countries need, but
it would significantly increase finance for protecting lives and livelihoods,
which so far made up only about 25 per cent of all climate finance (with 75 per
cent going towards green technologies to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions).
Glasgow also established a work programme to define a global goal on
adaptation, which will identify collective needs and solutions to the climate
crisis already affecting many countries.
Completing the Paris rulebook
Countries reached agreement on the remaining issues of the
so-called Paris rulebook, the operational details for the practical
implementation of the Paris Agreement. Among them are the norms related to
carbon markets, which will allow countries struggling to meet their emissions
targets to purchase emissions reductions from other nations that have already
exceeded their targets. Negotiations were also concluded on an Enhanced
Transparency Framework, providing for common timeframes and agreed formats for
countries to regularly report on progress, designed to build trust and
confidence that all countries are contributing their share to the global
effort.
Focusing on loss & damage
Acknowledging that climate change is having increasing
impacts on people especially in the developing world, countries agreed to
strengthen a network— known as the Santiago Network – that connects vulnerable
countries with providers of technical assistance, knowledge and resources to
address climate risks. They also launched a new “Glasgow dialogue” to discuss
arrangements for the funding of activities to avert, minimize and address loss
and damage associated with the adverse effects of climate change.
New deals and announcements
There were many other significant deals and announcements –
outside of the Glasgow Climate Pact – which can have major positive impacts if
they are indeed implemented. These include:
Forests
137 countries took a landmark step forward by committing to
halt and reverse forest loss and land degradation by 2030. The pledge is backed
by $12bn in public and $7.2bn in private funding. In addition, CEOs from more
than 30 financial institutions with over $8.7 trillion of global assets
committed to eliminate investment in activities linked to deforestation.
Methane
103 countries, including 15 major emitters, signed up to
the Global Methane Pledge, which aims to limit methane emissions by 30 per cent
by 2030, compared to 2020 levels. Methane, one of the most potent greenhouse
gases, is responsible for a third of current warming from human activities.
Cars
Over 30 countries, six major vehicle manufacturers and
other actors, like cities, set out their determination for all new car and van
sales to be zero-emission vehicles by 2040 globally and 2035 in leading
markets, accelerating the decarbonization of road transport, which currently
accounts for about 10 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions.
Coal
Leaders from South Africa, the United Kingdom, the United
States, France, Germany, and the European Union announced a ground-breaking
partnership to support South Africa – the world’s most carbon-intensive
electricity producer— with $8.5 billion over the next 3-5 years to make a just
transition away from coal, to a low-carbon economy.
Private finance
Private financial institutions and central banks announced
moves to realign trillions of dollars towards achieving global net zero
emissions. Among them is the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero, with over
450 firms across 45 countries that control $130 trillion in assets, requiring
its member to set robust, science-based near-term targets.
2. COP
27, SHARM EL-SHEIKH, EGYPT, 2022: - TOGETHER FOR IMPLEMENTATION[7]
Under the
slogan Together for implementation, the 27th United Nations Climate
Change Conference (COP27), was held in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, from 6 to 18
November 2022 (extended by 36 hours, until the morning of 20th). The COP27 was
under the Egyptian Presidency on behalf of the African region.
It brought
together almost 35,000 representatives of 198 governments with the aim of accelerating climate action to fulfil the goals of the Paris Agreement. After intense negotiations,
the Sharm El-Sheikh Implementation Plan1 was adopted, as well as a
number of other important decisions to further operationalise the Paris
Agreement.
The COP27 was
convened near the end of a year that has seen devastating floods and unprecedented
heat waves, severe droughts and formidable storms, all unequivocal signs of the
unfolding climate emergency. At the same time, millions of people throughout
the world are confronting the impacts
of simultaneous crises in energy,
food, water, and cost of living, aggravated by severe
geopolitical conflicts and tensions.
Whilst the COP26 in Glasgow was all about
target setting but COP27 in Egypt was all about implementation. COP27 is also taking place against the backdrop of inadequate ambition to curb
greenhouse gas emissions. According to the UN’s
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), CO2 emissions need to be cut 45% by 2030, compared
to 2010 levels to meet the
central Paris Agreement
goal of limiting
temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius by the end of this century.
This is crucial to avoid the worst impacts of climate change, including more frequent and severe droughts,
heat waves and rainfall. A report
published by UNFCCC ahead of
COP27 shows that whilst countries
are bending the curve of global greenhouse gas emissions downward, efforts remain
insufficient to limit global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius by the end of the century[8].
Back in 2009
richer nations promised developing countries they would provide USD100 bln a year by 2020 to help with climate
change, that goal was missed and expected to be achieved in 2023.
Ahead of the
conference, 200 countries were asked to submit new plans to cut emissions by
2030, to prevent temperatures rising by more than 1.5 °C. With these new plans,
global temperatures are still expected to rise to 2.4 °C. Thus, the Egyptian COP27 President, Sameh Shoukry,
wanted to focus on turning some of the more ambitious targets and pledges into
tangible action. However, since COP26 in Glasgow until COP27, only 29 countries
came forward with updated more ambitious Nationally Determined Contributions
(NDCs).
The Sharm
El-Sheikh Climate Change Conference opened with strong appeals to step up climate
action and support and move from pledges to implementation.
The Summit
adopted the Sharm el-Sheikh climate
implementation summit Declaration COP27. The declaration acknowledges the scientific reports on current and future impacts of climate change and recognized the seriousness of the climate
emergency facing the planet.
While recognizing every country’s responsibility to act and rise to the occasion
to deliver on previous commitments from the Convention to the Paris Agreement, leaders
reiterated that it was
time to move from pledges
to rapid, robust,
and impactful implementation[9].
BRIEF
ANALYSIS OF KEY COP27 OUTCOMES
Global
Stocktake of Paris Agreement
A new UN
Climate Change report[10] shows that while countries
are bending the curve of global greenhouse gas emissions downward,
these efforts remain insufficient to limit global temperature rise to 1.5 °C by the end of the century.
The combined climate pledges of 193 Parties under the Paris Agreement
could put the world on track for around 2.5 °C of warming by the end of the
century. The report’s findings underscore the need for urgent implementation
and much more ambitious climate action.
The global stocktake of the Paris Agreement
(GST) is a process for taking stock of the implementation of the Paris
Agreement aimed to assess the world’s collective progress towards achieving
its long-term goals. The GST facilitates the assessment of global collective
progress on mitigation, adaptation and means of implementation. The
first GST runs from 2021 to 2023 and will be repeated every 5 years. Its
outcomes will inform countries on updating and enhancing their NDCs, their climate actions and support. This process is critical
for accelerating climate
action. There are three components to the global
stocktake process:
1) Information collection and preparation; 2) Technical assessment; and 3) Consideration of outputs. The last phase of the GST, consideration of outputs,
will take place at COP28 in 2023. At these sessions this item related
to the ongoing technical phase of the first GST and
its political outcome, expected at COP 28.
Global Goal on
Adaptation
COP 26
established a comprehensive two-year (2022-2023) Glasgow-Sharm El-Sheikh work programme (GlaSS) on the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA). This item focused on the
GGA work programme, specifically to capture progress
made throughout 2022 and provide guidance and concrete ways forward
for 2023.
Setup of Loss and Damage Fund
A most significant achievement at COP27 is considered the setup of a “loss and damage” fund (LDF) to help vulnerable countries pay their rising
costs of climate
damage from wilder weather and rising seas. Climate “loss and damage” includes not
just harm to people, their homes and
infrastructure from disasters such as floods, droughts and storms but also
forced displacement from slower impacts
such as sea level rise, as well as losses of cultural heritage and community
livelihoods.
The agreed
loss and damage deal at COP27 is a positive step, but there was a lot of
criticism about countries not moving faster to decrease greenhouse gas
emissions and limiting warming to below 1.5 °C. The leaders had missed the chance to speed up the rapid and deep emissions cuts essential to limit climate
damage. However, given the nature
of the negotiations, it had
not been possible to take decisive steps forward to reduce emissions and move
away from polluting oil and gas.
Safeguarding Food Security and
Ending Hunger
The COP27
cover decision also says that “safeguarding food security and ending hunger” is
a fundamental priority, and that
communities can better protect themselves from climate effects if water
systems are protected and conserved. The text also mentioned food for the first time and recognised
how food shortages could continue to be
driven by climate change. This is progress as the Glasgow Climate Pact
(2021) made no mention of
agriculture, food or water. However, the decision doesn’t have new dedicated
funding for food systems from
governments. Absent from the text is any reference to the IPCC’s estimate that food systems
are responsible for between 21% and 37% of global
emissions. New research[11] estimated that 42% of
recent food price inflation has been due to climate change. In its report the
Word Bank warns of ‘human catastrophe’ food crisis[12]. In Egypt countries committed to a four-year programme to discuss
solutions to ongoing
food issues.
The overarching cover decisions Sharm El-Sheikh Implementation Plan[13] capture the progress made
in the negotiations and various events held in conjunction with the
negotiations, such as the Marrakesh Partnership for Global Climate Action. They
address science, ambition and implementation, energy, mitigation, adaptation,
loss and damage, early warning systems,
just transition, finance,
technology, capacity building,
transparency, taking stock, Article
6, Ocean, Forest, and action by non-Party Stakeholders.
Koronivia Joint Work on
Agriculture
The Koronivia
Joint Work on Agriculture (KJWA) addresses issues related to agriculture,
including through workshops and expert meetings, with consideration of
vulnerabilities of agriculture to climate
change, as well as approaches to addressing food security. Under
this item negotiations focused on considering the next phase of KJWA,
including an enhanced joint work programme. The COP27 Decision urges parties
and others to increase their efforts to promote
sustainable agriculture, with a view to eradicating hunger and poverty while ensuring food security.
Boosting Low Emission Energy
Matters
Relating to the Work Programme for Urgently Scaling up Mitigation Ambition and
Implementation (Mitigation Work Programme – MWP) were mandated by the Glasgow
Climate Pact and aims to explore ways to raise
mitigation ambition before
2030. During the negotiations the main disagreements
were about identifying new categories of countries, such as “major emitters”
or “vulnerable developing countries”, and timeframe of the Mitigation
Work Programme (MWP),
especially the end date (to conclude in 2023 or 2030) and actions.
On temperature goals, there were calls to refer to the need to stay below 1.5 °C, while other
countries wanted to refer to the full text of the temperature goals in the Paris
Agreement to stay well below 2 °C while pursuing efforts to limit long-term
temperature rise to 1.5 °C. The final decision emphasized the urgent need for
increasing efforts to reduce collectively emissions through accelerated action
and implementation of domestic mitigation measures to achieve the Paris
Agreement goal, and Parties were
requested to revisit and strengthen the 2030 targets in their NDCs, aligning
them with their long-term low greenhouse gas emission development strategies.
The Sharm el-Sheikh implementation plan includes references to boosting
“low- emission” energy, as well as renewables. The text also supports the plans of many fossil- fuel-producing countries
to use fledging carbon capture
technology to curb emissions rather than scaling back production. Also, for the first time the final text
encourages reform of big lenders such as the IFIs and multilateral development
banks (MDBs). For example, the IMF
has USD1 trillion available to lend to countries in financial distress, but
only a small fraction of this is climate
finance. The COP’s endorsement of reform is significant because
it comes from countries who are also shareholders in these institutions and can make change
happen.
Phase Down Coal Use
Developed countries
had pressed, for an agreement
to reach peak global emissions
before 2025, to decide a clear
path to phase down coal use (a goal set in Glasgow), and to phase down all
fossil fuels, not just coal. All of those things were not included in the final
cover decision – the Sharm el-Sheikh implementation plan but included that
limiting global warming to 1.5 °C above
pre-industrial levels requires
“rapid, deep and sustained reductions in greenhouse gas emissions” by 2030. The section on energy had also been weakened at the last minute – calls to phase out fossil fuels were blocked by
oil-producing states. It is recognized that the only way to safely limit
warming to 1.5 °C is to equitably phase out oil, gas, and coal,
instead, this decision creates a risk of a major increase of new oil and gas production.
Long-Term Climate Finance
This process aims to advance mobilization of climate finance resources from multiple sources,
including public, private, bilateral, multilateral, and others. In 2010 COP16
in Cancun, developed countries committed to a goal of USD100 billion annually
by 2020 for developing countries. A key issue at this COP was how to reflect
on the fact that this goal had not been met and how to address the gap and encourage actions
to support developing countries’ needs.
The lack of a common definition and accounting methodology with respect to
assessing progress towards the goal was recognized.
New Collective Quantified Goal on Climate Finance
The Paris Agreement states that a new collective quantified goal on climate
finance (NCQG) shall be set prior to the 2025 CMA, from a floor of USD 100
billion per year. Subsequently, in Glasgow Parties decided that their work will
be organized in an ad hoc work programme (including technical expert dialogues (TED)), submissions, ministerial dialogues,
and stocktakes and guidance. The work will continue consideration of this
matter at the next conference. At the negotiations there were discussion on the
level of the new goal, with developing countries seeking to reference the
need for trillions rather than billions of dollars, while developed
countries considers that it was premature to consider a “quantum”, or numerical
financial goal. Also, there were significant debates on the sources of support.
Disagreements were also around the role for the private sector and an expanded
group of donor countries.
Action for Climate Empowerment
Action for Climate Empowerment (ACE) is a term
adopted by the UNFCCC to denote work under Article 6 of the Convention and
Article 12 of the PA (education, training, public awareness, public
participation, public access to information, international cooperation). The
overarching goal of ACE is to empower all members of society to engage in
climate action. The COP26 and the CMA3 adopted the 10-year Glasgow work
programme on ACE. COP27 adopted the
four-year action plan under the Glasgow work programme on ACE, which focus on
immediate action through short-term, clear and time-bound activities, guided by
the priority areas of the Glasgow work programme (policy coherence; coordinated
action; tools and support; and monitoring, evaluation and reporting).
Gender and Climate Change
An intermediate review of the gender action plan’s
implementation was considered. Language on support for gender-related
activities appears in the overarching COP27 cover decision and the decision on
guidance to the GEF. Parties are urged to accelerate their efforts to advance
implementation of the enhanced Lima Work Programme on Gender and its gender
action plan (GAP):
·
encourages parties and relevant organizations to
strengthen the use of sex-disaggregated data and gender analysis in
implementing climate policies, plans, strategies and action;
·
invites the ILO to consider organizing a workshop
or dialogue;
·
underscores the need to promote efforts towards
gender balance and improve inclusivity in the UNFCCC process by inviting future
COP Presidencies to nominate women as high-level climate champions, parties to
promote greater gender balance in national delegations, and event organizers to
promote gender-balanced events;
·
encourages parties and relevant public and private
entities to strengthen the gender responsiveness of climate finance.
ARTICLE 6 OF PARIS AGREEMENT
Article 6 of the Paris Agreement was one of the most technical parts of the COP27
process. It is about cooperative approaches to cutting emissions, market and non-market based. While the Article 6
“rulebook” was completed at COP26 in Glasgow, COP27 faced decisions on the
definitions and procedures that are still needed before any trading can begin.
Several contentious issues were deferred, including how to treat emissions from
“removals”, whether to allow credits for “emissions avoidance” and when carbon
credits could be “revoked”. COP27 managed to deliver a significant amount of
additional guidance that will help to operationalize Article 6. However, trading under Article 6 is unlikely to
start before 2024 at the earliest, while the voluntary carbon markets may take off earlier. However, countries
that are planning to take part in the Paris Agreement market mechanisms should
already build the required national
structures.
One generic issue of all the climate change treaties is the
fact that currently countries calculate their total emissions and set targets
based on what they produce within their borders such as from producing
electricity or burning fuels. This means that they don’t count the emissions from the goods and services produced by
another country for them. This is even though the developed nations import
large amounts of manufactured products from developing countries. For example,
if these “consumption-based” emissions were counted then the UK’s carbon
footprint would more than double. In the cover decision for the first-time
countries recognised “the importance of
transition[ing] to sustainable patterns of consumption”. However, it is not clear yet how governments will translate this
into national actions.
Recommendations for Participation in Article 6.2 and
Article 6.4 of the Paris Agreement
The
benefits from participating in the carbon markets for the host countries are
proven, as they stimulate sustainable development co-benefits. As many
developing countries do not have the resources necessary to make economy-wide
transition towards a low emissions future, through the participation in the
mechanisms they can receive certain financial resources, clean technologies, and
new green jobs. However, there is needs for a lot of efforts from the host
country governments to prepare, operationalize, run, monitor, and report the
process of participation in the mechanisms. These efforts could be supported by
international organisations, but the host country government needs to be
proactive. There is a need for a clear
national position on how and how much will be transferred and a mechanism
for timely adjustments depending on the NDC implementation status.
A national Article 6 strategy and a policy framework
will help the country to participate efficiently in and benefit from the Paris
Agreement market-based mechanisms, while forming an integral component of the
country’s Long Term Low Emissions Development Strategy and Sustainable Development.
Article
6 of the Paris Agreement establishes two market-based approaches for Parties to
cooperate voluntarily in achieving their NDCs under the Paris Agreement:
· Article 6.2 sets out guidelines covering the internationally transferred mitigation outcomes (ITMOs) between two
governments that are Parties to the Paris Agreement.
· Article 6.4 establishes a new project-based multilateral mechanism
(Sustainable Development Mechanism – SDM)
“to contribute to the mitigation of
greenhouse gas emissions and support sustainable development”. This Mechanism replaces the former Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and will be governed by a
Supervisory Board that would approve all Article
6.4 projects.
ITMOs are the emission reductions under Article 6.2 that can already be traded between countries. Countries
such as Japan and Switzerland already have concrete plans to buy a variety of credits and count them towards their NDCs. However,
it is typically a lengthy process
for countries to conclude Article 6.2 bilateral agreements/Memoranda of
Understanding (MoU), so it may still be some time until ITMOs are widely
traded. As for the emission reductions created under Article 6.4 (A6.4ERs), it
will likely take two to three years more or longer before they can be issued and traded.
The Article 6.4 system is overseen
by the UNFCCC Supervisory Body.
Because of the
stronger bottom-up architecture of the Paris Agreement market-based mechanisms compared
to the flexible mechanisms of the Kyoto Protocol, they require higher levels of engagement and oversight
from the host country institutions. Thus, more efforts are needed in capacity building and preparations,
including fulfilling certain eligibility
criteria.
There is a need to establish a national
institutional framework to
effectively govern,
track and report on Article 6 activities and transactions. As a first
step, the government should appoint a national focal point for Article 6. A requirement for Article 6.4 is the establishment of a Designated National Authority (DNA). A
DNA is a national organization granted responsibility by the government to
authorise and approve participation in SDM projects. The main task of the DNA is to assess potential SDM projects, to determine whether
they will assist the host country
in achieving its sustainable development goals, and to provide a letter of no objections to project
participants in SDM projects.
Countries like
Nigeria needs to have a very good expertise and sound understand of adopted
decisions on implementation of the mechanisms. Additionally, there is a need to build expertise of the government and other relevant
stakeholders (including private
sector) through trainings, workshops, etc. provided by
UNFCCC or other international organisations, and establish dedicated units to deal with emissions trading.
3. COP
28, DUBAI, UAE, 2023: - JUST, ORDERLY AND EQUITABLE ENERGY TRANSITION[14]
The
COP 28 UN Climate Change Conference in Dubai, was the biggest of its kind.
About 100,000 delegates were registered, including more than 150 Heads of State
and Government, about 2,000 official representatives of fossil fuel companies,
were among the representatives of national delegations, civil society, the
private sector, indigenous people, youth, philanthropy and international
organizations in attendance at the conference from 30 November to 13 December
2023.
COP 28 was particularly momentous, having
shown that progress was too slow across all areas of climate actions: - From
reducing greenhouse gas emissions, to strengthening resilience to a changing
climate, to getting the financial and technological support to vulnerable
nations, countries responded with a decision on how to accelerate action across
all areas by 2030. This includes a call on governments to speed up the
transition away from fossil fuels to renewables such as wind and solar power in
their next round of climate commitments.
The Key Outcomes[15]
1). The end of fossil fuels?[16]
Perhaps surprisingly, this was the first COP to officially
acknowledge that fossil fuels are the root cause of climate change. And it is
worth remembering that fossil fuels were only first mentioned in an
international climate agreement in 2021 at COP26 in Glasgow. Yet it
still lacked ambition.
Most countries wanted a strong statement on phasing out or
at the very least phase down (reducing) fossil fuels. Instead countries agreed
a statement saying we must “transition away from fossil fuels in
energy systems, in a just, orderly and equitable manner, accelerating action in
this critical decade, so as to achieve net zero by 2050 in keeping with the
science”.
This language – a “transition away” rather than a full
“phase-out” – is not as strong as many wanted. As a statement made by Samoa on
behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States put it, these decisions are “an
incremental advancement over business as usual” when what is needed is
“exponential step-change” to keep 1.5°C alive.
In theory the agreement heralds the end of the fossil fuel
era, but it offers an intentional loophole for countries and companies to
“abate” the use of fossil fuels by using carbon capture and storage. This
justifies the continued burning of oil and gas[17].
2). Loss and damage[18]
“Loss and damage” is the term given for finance for
developing countries that have suffered a major climate change-related
disaster. A fund was agreed at COP27 in 2022 and recent announcements
mean US$700 million has now been pledged.
While this is welcome news it is a drop in the ocean
compared with the US$400 billion actually needed. It’s also
insignificant compared to, for instance, the estimated US$7
billion cost of building the COP28 venue Dubai Expo City.
It is still not clear how the fund will work, what the
major funding streams will be or whether the allocation of finance will be
community-driven and corruption free. And despite opposition, it has been
agreed the World Bank will administer the fund for a negotiated fee of
24% – meaning one in four dollars pledged will never make it to the countries
in need.
So overall, this summit did not deliver on climate finance
and this key issue has been pushed to COP29 November 2024.
3). Renewable energy and transitional fuels[19]
A pledge signed by 118 countries to triple
renewable energy capacity and double the global rate of energy efficiency by
2030 is a step in the right direction.
It is worth noting the text of the pledge also recognises
the role “transitional fuels” will have in maintaining energy security for the
time being. This makes the use of climate-damaging liquefied petroleum
gas acceptable. This isn’t ideal, but in developing countries it is still
a healthier and less polluting option for home cooking and heating than
burning wood or other biomass. Nonetheless, there really should be a timeline
attached to the use of these transitional fuels.
On the sidelines of COP28, green hydrogen also had its
moment. Produced through a process that splits water using electricity
generated from wind or solar power, industries pledged to scale up
zero-emissions fuel derived from renewables-based hydrogen to 11 million
tonnes by 2030.
4). Oil and gas decarbonisation charter[20]
Over 50 national and international oil companies,
representing about 40% of global production, signed a decarbonisation charter.
The initiative sets three main aims: to achieve net zero emissions in each
company’s direct operations (as opposed to the use of their products) by or
before 2050, to achieve near-zero methane leakage from the production of oil
and gas by 2030, and to achieve zero routine flaring (burning excess gas) by
2030.
The last two pledges are particularly important as methane
is a very powerful (but short-lived) greenhouse gas and a quarter of all
man-made methane emissions come from oil and gas production. So reducing
these emissions is a quick win which buys us time. But again, 60% of world oil
and gas production is not covered by this charter. These companies will
continue to save money by venting methane and flaring natural gas.
5). Global stocktake – 1.5°C is at risk[21]
The “global stocktake”, finalised at COP28, was the first
time the global climate regime took stock of how the international community
has collectively reduced its greenhouse gas emissions since the Paris Agreement
in 2015.
The biggest takeaway from the stocktake told us what we
already knew – the world is way behind and the 1.5°C warming limit agreed in
Paris is at risk.
While the big takeaway from COP28 will be that countries
have come up with a deal that calls for them to transition away from fossil
fuels while acknowledging the need for a “deep, rapid” reduction in emissions,
the weak language is at complete odds with the official global stocktake.
4. COP
29, BAKU, AZERBAIJAN, 2024: - CLIMATE FINANCE[22]
The
29th Conference of Parties (COP 29) to the UNFCC took place in BAKU,
Azerbaijan, between 11 and 24 November, 2024.
THE
MAIN OUTCOMES OF COP29
COP29 was described as a “finance COP”, meaning the focus
of the 2024 negotiations was on developing and agreeing the processes by which
climate action will be paid for. This was reflected in COP29’s two main
outcomes[23]:
·
An agreement on the New
Collective Quantified Goal on Climate Finance (NCQG); and
·
The operationalising of the
international carbon trading system overseen by the UN under Article 6 of the
Paris Agreement.
1.
Agreement on Climate Finance[24]
COP29
saw the culmination of three years of negotiations on the NCQG. The final
agreed NCQG Decision will now form the foundation for international climate
finance arrangements after 2025. This Decision contains an agreement by the
Parties to the Paris Agreement to triple the annual target for climate finance
from the current USD 100bn to USD 300bn by 2035. Developed country parties will
take the lead in mobilising this sum for developing country parties.
The
Decision also contains a reference to a further annual climate finance target
of USD 1.3tn of financing to be provided to developing countries by 2035.
However, unlike the USD 300bn target, there is no formal obligation on
countries to meet this larger target (which is to be raised from a variety of
sources including private finance).
Many
developing country parties have rejected in principle taking on more debt to
pay for their greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction and climate change
adaptation measures. However, the 2035 targets may be met both via the
provision of grants and concession-based finance and via higher interest loans
and other commercial financial instruments from both public and private
sources. Further, and for the first time, voluntary financial contributions
made by developing country parties will also be formally counted as
contributing to reaching UNFCCC climate finance targets. This has opened up the
possibility for countries categorised as “developing”, such as China, to take on
more formal leadership roles in the UN climate arena.
2.
Operationalising Carbon Markets[25]
After
9 years of negotiations, parties at COP 29 agreed on the rules and
methodologies for the international carbon trading system envisioned by Article
6 of the Paris Agreement. Article 6 sets out a system in which countries can
trade emission reduction credits (known as ITMOs) between themselves so that an
emission reduction in one country can be counted against the emissions
generated in another country. This trading system is designed to incentivise
states to invest in emission reduction projects as well as meet and surpass
their own emission reduction targets, thereby lowering overall global emission
levels and fostering sustainable development.
Two
Decisions were issued on the new international carbon market established under
Article 6.4 (one at the beginning of COP29 and the other at the end). A further
Decision was also issued at the end of COP on the rules for inter-state carbon
trading under Article 6.2.
These
three Decisions have set out the final steps required for the markets and
trading system to be operationalised, allowing for emission reductions assessed
and authorised under Article 6 to be officially counted as contributing to
countries’ emission reduction plans. Article 6 carbon markets are seen as a key
tool for generating financial flows from polluting to less polluting countries
through Article 6.2 and a means for States with natural carbon sinks such as
rainforests and mangroves to financially benefit from their preservation.
COP29’S
SUCCESSES AND FAILURES[26]
This COP29 Briefing Paper set out four areas in which a
successful COP would see significant progress:
1. The
NCQG;
2. New
and ambitious NDCs;
3. Agreement
on Article 6; and
4. Loss
and damage.
While a climate COP’s success or failure can be assessed
differently depending on each state’s negotiating goals and outlook[27],
this section sets out what progress was made on each of those four areas as
well as highlighting one further area of interest.
1. The New Collective Quantified Goal on Climate Finance
(NCQG)
The agreement on the NCQG is generally considered a heavily
qualified success. The USD 1.3tn climate finance goal that was demanded by many
developing country parties is contained in the final agreed Decision. However,
this Decision only “calls on” parties to meet this goal and therefore the does
not place any obligation on states to meet the goal by the 2035 deadline.
While the new USD 300bn goal for annual climate finance to
developing countries triples the previous target of USD 100bn, the wording of
the decision text only requires for this funding to be “mobilised” rather than
“provided” (i.e. only made available rather than actively distributed) by 2035.
Controversially, the funds made available can be made up of a wide variety of
public, private, bilateral and multilateral sources of finance as well as
undefined “alternative sources”. It remains unclear where the required increase
in climate financing between 2025 and 2035 will come from and whether developed
country states will commit greater levels of grant and concession-based funding
than they have already.
While coming under criticism from many sides, and despite
last minute walk outs by significant negotiating blocs, the NCQG Decision was
agreed at the end of COP29. While the NCQG Decision does not mobilise as much
money as many developing country parties were advocating for prior to COP29,
the NCQG is a compromise between the need for greater financial support for
developing nations, without which they will be unable to reduce their GHG
emissions and adapt to the negative effects of climate change, and the reduced
ability of developed countries to provide that support out of public funds.
Formally opening up climate finance targets to contributions
from both the private sector and developing countries was seen by many
developed country parties as a necessary step. This broadening of the
contributor base will also allow developing country parties, such as China, who
already provide financing for energy transition projects across the developing
world, to gain recognition for the efforts they are making towards meeting the
world’s climate goals. If successful, the NCQG’s attempt to foster a greater
role for the private sector in adaptation and the energy transition could be
beneficial for both developed and developing countries. The NCQG decision also
has a scheduled review in 2030, and so may be renegotiated sooner than the 2035
target deadline.
2. New and Ambitious NDCs
Prior to COP29, we suggested that a successful COP would
see a number of new and more ambitious nationally determined contributions
(NDCs – essentially countries’ emission reduction and climate change adaptation
plans) announced during the conference. While the deadline for countries to
announce their next round of NDCs is not until the end of February 2025, early
and ambitious announcements would have put pressure on other countries to not
only meet the February deadline but also increase their own ambition so as not
to be left behind. In the end, only Brazil, the UAE and the UK announced new
NDCs at COP29.
The absence of significant numbers of new NDCs added to the
failure to progress negotiations on the outcomes of the first global stocktake
(GST). The first GST, which culminated in the UAE in COP28 last year, was a
process that facilitated a review of the implementation of parties’ existing
NDCs so that parties could raise their ambition and improve the implementation
of their next round of NDCs. However, progress on this issue stalled as
countries from the Like-Minded Group of Developing Countries (LMDC) negotiating
bloc, especially Saudi Arabia, objected to any agreement that would give the
UNFCCC oversight over how NDCs are prepared or implemented. Failure to progress
the GST negotiations, compounded by a less ambitious NCQG than many expected,
may now mean that it will be impossible for developing and climate vulnerable
states to prepare and implement ambitious NDCs, placing the 1.5°C warming goal
essentially out of reach.
3. Agreement on Article 6
Agreement on Article 6 has been hailed as one of COP29’s
real successes. After 9 years of negotiations, parties finally agreed on the
framework rules and methodologies of a worldwide carbon market and trading
system. Parties have designed the new Article 6 system so that it will allow
countries to create and authorise reliable emission reduction credits that
countries can use to either offset their own national emissions or trade with
other countries. The three decisions that made up COP29’s agreement on Article
6 allow states to start developing their national carbon markets and
facilitating inter-state trades. Although past carbon trading schemes have not
been as successful as initially hoped for, parties are clear that the Article 6
carbon market should be an effective tool for persuading countries to reduce
GHG emissions whilst financially rewarding developing countries for developing
sustainably and protecting nature. Look out for Clyde & Co’s upcoming guide
to the Article 6 carbon markets, which will explain Article 6’s implications
for states and corporate entities.
4. Loss and Damage
Following the establishment at COP19 of the Warsaw
International Mechanism for Loss and Damage associated with Climate Change
Impacts (WIM), COP27 in Sharm el-Sheikh and COP28 in the UAE saw significant
progress on integrating loss and damage into the architecture of the UNFCCC
process. Loss and damage can be understood as the cost of the damage that will
be inevitably incurred by countries due to the negative effects of climate
change. However, while some procedural outcomes were reached at COP29, no
substantive progress was made in loss and damage negotiations. References to
loss and damage in the NCQG simply acknowledge existing failures to provide
adequate funding to address the issue. No new funds have therefore been
mobilised to address loss and damage specifically. Given the importance of this
issue to many developing country parties, especially those that most vulnerable
to climate change, it is expected that loss and damage will be an area of
contention at future COPs.
5. Negotiation Deadlock
While agreement was eventually reached on the key outcomes
of the NCQG and Article 6, one under-addressed failure of COP29 was that
negotiations on many other issues broke down completely without any agreement
or resolution. Parties could not reach agreement on issues including the
outcomes of the first GST, just transition, adaptation and other finance and
technology negotiations. The result of this failure being that these
negotiations were postponed for either 6 months or a year. While these failures
were not critical to the UNFCCC process in Baku, the incurred delay in what has
been recognised as a “critical decade” for climate action, reflects the general
struggles at COP29 for parties with opposing views to achieve compromise.
LOOKING
AHEAD TO COP30
While
COP29 has now concluded, there are several issues that will continue to develop
between the end of COP29 and the beginning of COP30 in Belém, Brazil, in
November 2025. Here we set out some key issues to watch out for in the year
ahead[28]:
-
1.
NDCs
All
parties to the Paris Agreement must submit their new NDCs before the end of
February 2025, to allow time for the content of those NDCs to be reviewed and
analysed before COP30 in November 2025. While most states still claim that they
will meet this deadline, informally many admit that it is likely that they will
fail to publish their NDCs before the 61st meeting of the Subsidiary Bodies of
the UNFCCC in the summer of 2025 or indeed before COP30 itself. The greater the
number of states that meet the agreed deadline, the better understanding the
world will have of whether countries are on track to meet their goals under the
Paris Agreement. The impact of a failure to meet the publication deadline will
be compounded by parties’ failure to agree on how to implement the outcomes of
the first GST and the corresponding absence of guidance on the content and form
of countries’ NDCs. This means that the content and form of each party’s new
NDC is entirely at each State’s discretion and until each NDC is published
there is little ability to predict its contents.
2.
Climate Finance
When
the Least Developed Countries (LDC) and Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS)
negotiating blocs walked out of negotiations on the final day of COP29, one of
their conditions for returning to talks was for a commitment by developed
country parties to provide greater clarity on how the USD 1.3tn annual climate finance
goal would be achieved (for more information on these and other negotiating
blocs see Clyde & Co’s COP29 Briefing Paper). The NCQG Decision
consequently refers to a “Baku to Belém Roadmap to 1.3T”. This “roadmap” aims
to scale up climate finance flows to developing countries to facilitate GHG
emission reduction and adaptation measures with a focus on non-debt based
financial instruments. Given the lack of specificity in the NCQG decision, it
is currently unclear what exactly will come out of the Baku to Belém Roadmap.
However, its importance to many developing country parties means that if their
concerns are not addressed in this process then COP30 in Belém may see further
hard-fought finance negotiations around the USD 1.3tn goal.
3.
Article 6
A
new UN carbon market under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement may have been
operationalised at COP29, but it will be the first year of the market’s
operation which will see the first examples of the market in action and what
teething problems it may encounter. Uncertainty remains over the impact of
Article 6 on the voluntary carbon markets and on existing emission trading
schemes, and so the next year to COP30 will see crucial first impressions made
around the quality of Article 6 credits and the effectiveness of the rules and
methodologies that have been agreed.
4.
An International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion
Although
independent of the UNFCCC process, in early 2025 the International Court of
Justice (ICJ) will publish an Advisory Opinion on climate change. As part of
this process, over 100 nations and organisations will make submissions to the
ICJ from 2 to 13 December 2024. The ICJ’s subsequent Advisory Opinion will
provide guidance on two main issues. The first will be on the nature of states’
obligations under international law to prevent climate change and damage to the
environment. The second will be on the legal consequences that states should
incur if, through their acts or omissions, they have made significant
contributions to climate change and past environmental damage. Although the
ICJ’s Advisory Opinion will not be binding, it will carry significant
persuasive and moral weight and will shape the nature and direction of climate
litigation against states and corporate entities for the foreseeable future.
5.
Multilateral Development Bank Reform
The
NCQG Decision adopted at COP29 emphasises the role that multilateral sources of
finance, and especially multilateral development banks (MDBs), will play in
meeting the new USD 300bn climate finance goal. The Decision highlights that
the world’s current multilateral financial architecture will need to be
reformed so that MDBs can focus on and facilitate investment into urgently
addressing climate change. Some of the reform envisaged by the NCQG Decision
includes shifting risk appetites for climate finance. This reform will require
the nation-state shareholders of MDBs to instigate and lead reforms of the
MDBs’ operational models, channels and instruments. The IMF and World Bank’s
annual meeting in October 2025, just prior to COP30, will therefore be a
crucial forum where we may see concrete proposals being made as to how MDBs
should and will aim to respond to the invitation made by the parties to the
UNFCCC for MDBs to take a greater role in climate financing.
6.
The Organisation of COP30
Given
COP30 will be the first official opportunity for countries in the UNFCCC
process to consider and take stock of the new round of NDCs, expect the host
country, Brazil, to begin calling on parties to announce new and ambitious NDCs
sooner rather than later. Brazil will also likely focus on the symbolism of
holding a COP in the city of Belém in the heart of the Amazon rainforest,
although some have raised concerns about the impact on the Amazon of holding
the event there. This year, both France and Argentina withdrew their
negotiators from COP29 for different diplomatic reasons and the COP process
itself came under criticism from experienced negotiators. It is likely that
Brazil will therefore attempt to engage more diplomatically with parties and
perhaps try to shrink the numbers of people granted permission to attend. The
lead up to COP30 will also likely see the resolution of the uncertainty around
the US’s position on the Paris Agreement and involvement with the UNFCCC
process given incoming President Donald Trump’s stated commitment to once again
withdraw the US from the Paris Agreement.
Nigeria’s Path Forward Post-Baku Climate Change Conference:
Opportunities and Next Steps
The
Baku Climate Change Conference (COP29) occurred
in Baku, Azerbaijan, from November 11 to
November 22, 2024. This annual
event brought together
representatives from nearly
200 countries to discuss and negotiate actions to address the
global climate crisis and set new goals for climate finance, adaptation, and mitigation.
One
of the key outcomes was the agreement to triple
climate finance to developing countries, increasing the annual goal from
USD 100 billion to USD 300 billion by 2035. This new goal, known as the New Collective Quantified Goal on Climate
Finance (NCQG), aims to help countries protect
their people and economies against climate disasters and share in
the benefits of the clean energy boom.
Additionally,
COP29 saw progress on carbon markets,
transparent climate reporting, and adaptation measures. The conference also
emphasized the importance of integrating health and climate action with a new
coalition to prioritize climate and health initiatives.
While the conference achieved
significant milestones, it also highlighted the need for continued efforts
and more ambitious actions to
address the climate crisis. The outcomes of COP29 set the stage for future
climate negotiations and actions, focusing on achieving the Paris Agreement's
goals, which include limiting global warming
to well below 2 degrees
Celsius and enhancing global climate resilience. This involves not only reducing greenhouse gas emissions but also
adapting to the impacts of climate change.
Emphasizing the
need for strategic planning and implementation to maximize the benefits, the
outcomes of the Baku Climate Change Conference carry significant implications
for Nigeria as outlined in the Table below:
|
Outcome
|
Description
|
Implications for Nigeria
|
|
New Collective Quantified Goal on
Climate Finance (NCQG)
|
·
The agreement to triple climate
finance to developing countries by 2035.
|
·
Increased funding for climate
adaptation and mitigation projects, supporting initiatives like renewable
energy projects, climate-resilient agriculture, and infrastructure
improvements.
|
|
Global Goal on Adaptation
|
·
A stronger focus on adaptation to build resilience against climate impacts.
|
·
More support for building resilience against climate impacts, such as
extreme weather events and rising sea levels.
|
|
Sharm el-Sheikh Mitigation
Ambition and Implementation
Work Programme
|
·
A programme aimed at enhancing countries' climate action plans.
|
·
Urgent need for Nigeria to
update and strengthen its Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to align
with global goals.
|
|
Provision of
Financial and Technical Support
|
·
Increased financial and technical support for developing countries.
|
·
Improved climate reporting and capacity-building
efforts.
|
|
Adaptation Fund and
Loss and Damage Fund
|
·
Funds to address climate-
related loss and damage and implement adaptation
measures.
|
·
Access to funds for addressing climate- related loss and damage and
implementing adaptation measures.
|
|
Technology Transfer and Capacity Building
|
·
Focus on technology transfer and capacity building to tackle climate change.
|
·
Access to new technologies and expertise
to tackle climate change.
|
The Baku Climate Change Conference outcomes present opportunities
and challenges for Nigeria. While the country
can benefit from increased funding and support, it also faces the challenge of
effectively utilizing these resources and aligning
its policies with global goals.
Nigeria must actively
engage in these
initiatives and leverage the available support to enhance
its climate action efforts, while also navigating potential hurdles in implementation[29].
REFERENCES
[8]https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cma4_auv_2_cover_decision.pdf
[9] https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/COP27%20SUMMIT%20OUTCOMES.pdf
[10]https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cma2022_04.pdf
[11] From the
universities of Bournemouth, Exeter and Sheffield, published in October 2022
[13] https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cop27_auv_2_cover%20decision.pdf
[15] But COP28 started well with
USD 400 million being announced on day one for more vulnerable countries to
cope with climate disasters, and talk was all about a new climate agreement
including the phasing out of all fossil fuels.
[17] Ladan, M. T. (2024): - The
Right to a clean, safe and healthy environment, climate protection, litigation
and Justice: - with particular reference to Nigeria. A paper presented at a 3
day national summit on climate change in Nigeria. organised by the Citizens
Wellbeing International, UK, 25 -29 August, 2024, Transcorp Hilton Hotel,
Abuja.
[18] Refers to the damage or
harms inflicted by climate change that go beyond what people can adapt to.
These harms include: - lives lost; monetary costs from the destruction of
infrastructure, buildings, crops, and other property; the loss of entire places
or ways of life.
[19] Ladan, M. T. (2024), op.
cit.
[22] This annual event at Baku,
agreed on a new climate finance goal to triple annual funding to USD 300
billion by 2035.
[25] Baku COP29 agreed to reduce
Greenhouse gas emission, and achieve net-zero emissions by 2050.
[26] Environmental groups and
vulnerable nations criticized the USD 300 billion climate finance deal as a
“failure”. Some countries, including India and Nigeria, accused the COP29
presidency of forcing the deal through without their consent. www.carbonbrief.org-cop29 key outcomes;
www.cfr.org was-cop29-a-failure?
[29] Ladan, M. T. (2024), op.
cit.
