COP 17: A few key issues summarised

‘In the world we live in, the bad wolf of climate change has already ransacked the straw house and the house made of sticks, and the inhabitants of both are now knocking on the door of the brick house where the people of the developed world live’. Archbishop Desmond Tutu

1. KYOTO PROTOCOL AND CUTTING EMISSIONS (CARBON DIOXIDE)

The most popular issue in the COP negotiations is: will rich countries sign up to the Kyoto Protocol and cut their emissions enough to save the world? For global warming to stay within safe levels according to science, carbon dioxide (CO2) levels in the air must be reduced so our planet’s temperature can only go up by an average of 1.5 ºC degrees. At the moment we are on a pathway towards an increase of 5ºC! This would mean many people in Africa will not be able to grow food or survive the weather.

A global agreement is necessary because everyone is impacted but it must be legally binding so that rich countries are bound by international law. BUT rich countries must take action first and most, but cutting their emissions by at least 40% – they are the ones who have historically emitted more CO2 into the atmosphere, primarily through the burning of fossil fuels (coal, gas, oil) to feed their industries and their lifestyles. South Africa is the biggest emitter in Africa, and the 13th biggest in the world – more than the Netherlands, Brazil and Australia. So South Africa must also take responsibility to cut emissions whilst it continuing to develop.

The Kyoto Protocol is a legally binding agreement that many rich countries (except the USA and Australia) signed up to, committing to cut their emissions. The Kyoto Protocol ends in 2012 and the COP has been negotiating a renewal – a second commitment period. But many rich countries object (e.g. Canada, Japan, Australia, Russia, USA) to renewing the Protocol because:
- Some developed countries do not want to sign up at all – e.g. USA
- Some want the big developing countries to sign up (because now they are also polluting more) – e.g. China, India, Brazil, South Africa, Mexico
- Some say it’s too difficult to take action because of the global economic crisis (rich countries would need to spend a lot of money to change it’s practices and reduce emissions) and national politics (particularly in the USA where many people still don’t believe climate change is happening!)

According to an Oxfam study, developing countries are planning to cut more emissions than rich countries even though, the rich countries are responsible for 75% of emissions in the air. If Durban does see rich countries cutting emissions enough, then the impacts of a climate change on South Africa over the next 50 years alone are likely to be severe and it will be the poor, rural communities and women who continue to be hit hardest.

2. FINANCE

Developing countries have said that they need money and support help adapt to climate change and to continue develop sustainably – not using coal, gas and oil. Farmers and fishers all over Africa need financial resources to improve water storage facilities, growing different kinds of crops or keeping different kinds of livestock and many other ways to adapt. In 2009, rich countries agreed in that years COP that they would give $100 billion per year from 2020, and in 2010 it was agreed that a Green Climate Fund would be set up to manage this money. Throughout 2011, countries have been debating how the Fund will be managing answering questions such as who will look after the fund and how money reach people who need it e.g. the poor and women (women suffer the most but are not prioritised for financial support)– this should be agreed in Durban.

BUT where will the $100 billion come from? Rich countries must finance this empty Fund! The money must come both from rich country governments but we know that aid money is not reliable so they must also agree to give money from taxes on industrial shipping and aviation industries. These two industries are heavy polluters – industrial shipping currently emits more than the whole of Germany – by taxing, they could cut raise money for climate change and cut their emissions (e.g. $10bn per year from shipping).

Many rich countries do not want to commit to where the money will come from and how much they will give. They also do not want to commit to a tax on the shipping industry because they know that their industries will need to pay (even though it is very small). In Durban however, we need a breakthrough – it could be the one positive thing that happens – Fill the Climate Fund!

3. CARBON MARKETS

The idea behind carbon trading is a marketplace. Carbon is given a price, allowing people, companies or countries to buy or sell it. If a country bought carbon, it would be buying the rights to emit it (by using coal, gas, oil), and a country selling carbon would be giving up its rights to emit it. Rich countries can use this market to buy the rights to emit from another (e.g. developing) country whose industries do not produce as much of these gases. The developing country then gets money that it can use to invest in renewable energy for example.

But should rich countries be allowed to buy their way out of reducing their own emissions? And does all the money given to developing countries really get invested in the right way? Currently, the Kyoto Protocol allows such trading and is used by many rich countries. COP 17 will discuss how this can continue but with stricter controls on how carbon is bought and how the revenues are used. However, they are also discussing how to bring in markets for protecting forests as well as soil carbon. There have been recent ideas to include a market for carbon that is in the soil. By paying farmers to use techniques that capture carbon in the soil (such as no tilling), polluters can again reduce their own responsibility. Many countries in Africa say that they do not want markets – they should receive money for reducing emissions (from the Green Climate Fund) but other rich countries should not benefit from that – but others who stand to gain financially do support it.

4. FURTHER SUPPORT – TECHNOLOGY AND CAPACITY BUILDING

Every country in the world will have to adapt to climate change to in order to survive. But by far the biggest adaptation challenges will be found in the poorest countries, particularly Africa, and within them rural communities who are already struggling. Adaptation in agriculture is about making farming better able to cope with likely climate impacts. In the COP negotiations, adaptation has been an issue where developing countries are looking for the resources, technology, capacity building and cooperation to help them. A key debate is around a global Adaptation Committee that is being set up to oversee cooperation and support for developing countries adaptation – it sounds like this Committee will be agreed in Durban and countries in Africa are mostly happy about it.

Many developing countries have also created a National Adaptation Plan but there is very little support to implement them – they need finance, technology and the capacity. With regards to technology, a new Technology Centre is being designed to help this sharing. But there also needs to be agreement that rich countries will share technology and skills with developing countries for free. Many countries do not agree.

5. AGRICULTURE MUST SUPPORT SMALL SCALE FARMERS

Small scale farmers across Africa are vital to the continent’s food security. Farmers organizations and other civil society organizations must play a central role in the design, implementation and review of all climate-related agriculture policy. Inadequate consultation has taken place at both the national and international level with farmers and other members of civil society. At the COP, agriculture is covered in adaptation and also a negotiation on how commercial agriculture should reduce its emissions. But small scale farmers must not be forced to carry out certain practices or given false incentives - they need to be supported (through money, technology, skills) to develop appropriate ways of adapting to climate change. Let’s not allow the focus to move away from commercial agriculture cutting emissions and small scale agriculture receiving adequate support.

Not in the negotiations but events to watch out for:

a) 3 December, a workshop on Climate Smart Agriculture – the initiative supported by the World Bank, FAO and South African Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries – a scheme of farming practices that promises better resilience to climate change; higher yields; and reduces CO2 – it also promises to pay farmers for adopting certain practices. But who has consulted small scale farmers on this scheme? Is this another false solution?
b) 7 December – President Zuma will join other leaders (e.g. Kofi Anan, President Lula of Brazil) to launch a new climate investment platform which will coordinate all climate funds for agriculture – this platform will be supported by the World Bank but managed by NEPAD and the African Union. But how will this benefit small scale farmers? Will they be able to access?

A FEW KEY DEMANDS FROM COP 17:

- Rich countries must cut their emissions and agree to be bound by international law – they must sign up to Kyoto or another legal deal
- Rich countries have emitted the most so they must cut the most emissions – at least 40% by 2020
- Developing countries must be supported to grow sustainably without relying on dirty energy – to stop using coal, gas and oil, and start using renewable energy like solar and wind
- There must be money available for developing countries to adapt to climate change and grow sustainably – with women prioritised for support
- Rich countries need to put fill the Green Climate Fund to reach the $100bn that they agreed to in 2009
- The COP must agree to other reliable sources of money, not just aid - taxes on internationals shipping fuels could raise $10bn for the Fund every year.
- Carbon markets are not the answer! Rich countries must not be allowed to buy their way out of cutting their own emissions.
- Developing countries must be supported with technology and skills to help adapt to climate change – this must be delivered free and without conditions.
- All decisions to with agriculture must involved small scale farmers and support their crucial role in the worlds food security.

Remember: Climate change is with us. The world’s climate is changing as a consequence of human activity specifically the rich countries who were the first to industrialize and who have long enjoyed the economic and social benefits. The global impacts of, and responsibilities for, climate change are unequally shared. Those with the least responsibility for climate change stand to suffer most from current and future consequences effects of man-made climate change. COP17 must take urgent action to prevent dangerous climate change!

BROUGHT TO YOU BY PAMBAZUKA NEWS

* Established by the late Steve Biko in 1983, TCOE is a national organisation that operates mainly in the rural areas of South Africa. The main work and experience of the organisation in the past ten years has been to stimulate the building of local organisations, local leadership and assist these associations to access land and productive assets to improve their livelihoods.
* Please send comments to editor[at]pambazuka[dot]org or comment online at Pambazuka News.