Don’t block progress on finance, adaptation, loss and damage

COP26 Climate Conference in Glasgow, Scotland. Mark Carney, UN Special Envoy on Climate Action and Finance, speaks. UNRIC - Miranda Alexander-Webber

Glasgow, 9 Nov (Prerna Bomzan): At the informal stocktaking plenary of the ongoing UNFCCC’s COP 26, held on 8 Nov, developing countries led by the G77 and China, called on developed countries to make progress on key issues of importance such as finance, adaptation and loss and damage.

Similar calls were made by the sub-groups of the G77 and China, including by the Like-minded Developing Countries (LMDC), who urged developed countries not to be a “roadblock” to the hope of the thousands who had marched on the streets of Glasgow.

On the first day of the second week of the talks, COP26 President Alok Sharma took stock of the first week’s work and outlined his proposals towards taking work forward in the second concluding week. (See further details below). Developing country Parties intervened to give their take on the negotiations during the first week.

Guinea for the G77 and China said that the first week “exposed many continuing challenges to negotiations and decision making in a consensus-based, inclusive and transparent Party driven process”. It said on Finance, “a COP without a concrete outcome on finance can never be successful. Finance is the enabler for ambition in developing countries. They cannot be expected to update their nationally determined contributions (NDCs) or report on their climate actions appropriately without adequate and reliable finance provided for them. Additionally, the commitment of developed countries under the Convention is to provide rather than simply to mobilise resources, which are two different things. We are disappointed that developed countries are unwilling to discuss long-term finance matters, which means that the current USD 100 billion goal, which was adopted under the COP, but is unfulfilled, cannot be assessed either by the COP itself, or under the UNFCCC. In reality, it is an empty commitment”.

Guinea further said “on the establishment of a new climate finance goal, we are disappointed that only one developed country group presented a submission, while all the subgroups of developing countries proposed robust and participatory processes and  methodologies that would guarantee that the needs and priorities of developing countries are taken into account. A process that focuses on workshops without clear objectives or vague discussions until 2024 is not acceptable”.

“On transparency under the Paris Agreement (PA), the G77 and China would wish to see an outcome where the enhanced transparency reporting requirements for developing countries is matched with adequate and transparent financial, technical and capacity building support, and linkages have been made between transparency and Article 6 (of the PA on market and non-market approaches). Discussions on transparency should not prejudge the discussions under Article 6”, it emphasised.

“On transparency of support, this is an opportunity for developing countries to transparently report the support provided and mobilized, and we will not accept censoring our needs for financing for loss and damage or the fact that support for loss and damage is not being provided. Developing countries need to report on these needs in a matter that differentiates this support from adaptation and mitigation”, it stressed.

“On the guidance for the operating entities, it is the responsibility of the COP to determine financial needs of developing countries. This information, now provided by the Standing Committee on Finance, needs to be the basis of the replenishment processes of the operating entities of the financial mechanism. A COP without clarity on finance, or an outcome of only empty or insufficient announcements that will create debt for developing countries, can never be a successful one”, Guinea underscored.

It said “on progress of the agenda item on the National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), the conflicting time schedules for the adaptation-related agenda items adversely affected the progress of work on national adaptation plans at this Subsidiary Bodies (SBs) session. Adaptation planning is a major channel for building resilience in developing countries and therefore we expect developed country parties to expedite actions on providing financial resources for developing countries to formulate and implement their NAPs. Glasgow without clear financial provisions for the NAPs will be a failure”.

“On development and transfer of technologies, the Group of 77 and China is deeply concerned with the slow progress made and with the challenges faced by the Climate Technology Centre and Network (CTCN) in securing stable and sustainable financial resources to fulfill its mandates as the implementation arm of the Technology Mechanism. The linkag -es between the financial mechanism and technology mechanism needs to be strengthened to enable the scale-up of the transfer and deployment of climate technologies to support climate mitigation and adaptation actions in developing countries. The Group looks forward to satisfactory results from the CTCN Donor Roundtable on 8 November 2021 in Glasgow”, it said.

“On the global stocktake (GST), the Group appreciates the willingness and flexibility shown by all Parties in recognizing that the lists of sources of inputs and information for the GST are non-exhaustive and may be further complemented by further sources and information. We are looking forward to the activities that will be undertaken in the GST so that we as Parties will have a better understanding of how we got here, where we are now, where we want to go and how to best achieve the objective of the Convention and the global goals under the Paris Agreement based on equity and taking into account the best available science”, it emphasised.

“On agriculture, the Group is determined to pave the way for the Koronivia joint work on agriculture towards implementation to end a series of lengthy talks that has lasted for more than 8 years. We believe that the knowledge acquired from Parties will serve as a good start for implementation and will continue the course of discussions on future topics”, it said.

“On loss and damage, more work still needs to be done to bring about convergence on the proposed functions for the Santiago Network that are still outstanding. The issue of loss and damage financing and the operational functions of the Santiago Network that reflect the needs and priorities of developing countries must be clearly reflected in the decision. We are concerned at attempts by developed countries to narrow the scope of the finance and technical assistance that we expect will be catalyzed by an operationalized Santiago Network”, Guinea highlighted.

In closing, it said that “on the programme budget for the biennium 2022-2023, there must be a better balance between adaptation and mitigation. Adaptation-related as well as GST activities as well as new mandates reached at Glasgow are in the need to be funded from the core budget program budget for biennium 2022-2023”.

Bolivia for the Like-Minded Developing Countries (LMDC) highlighted that “all we hear in the negotiations’ rooms, corridors and statements is ambition, ambition, ambition. We have heard our partners say that when they talk of ambition they mean ambition in mitigation, adaptation and means of implementation. However, there does not seem to be any appetite from our partners to unleash ambition when it comes to the decisions which we have seen through the first week of COP 26”.

It informed that “our partners want a procedural decision on the new collective quantified goal on finance, they do not want to define climate finance, they do not want a separate decision on the global goal on adaptation, they are reluctant to include pre2020 roundtables’ report in the second periodic review and do not want to give theme 2 of the second periodic review its due importance, they do not want to talk about the loss and damage needs for developing countries. How can real ambition be achieved with such approach? ”.

Bolivia reminded that “if we do not learn from history, we are bound to repeat its mistakes. Glasgow is not the starting point of climate action for us, as is being portrayed. We come from Paris, Rio, Stockholm—let us not forget that. There is a history of broken promises and unfulfilled commitments by the developed countries, which has a very strong bearing on where we are at today in terms of temperature increase and its impacts. And, Science recognises this. Those who advocate for science cannot just look at the future and ignore the past. The two are interlinked. Our countries are undertaking ambitious climate action, in addition to addressing challenges of eradicating poverty and developing sustainably. The principles of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities are non-negotiable for us. As we go into week 2, we urge our partners to negotiate in good faith, and stick to mandates. We owe it to the thousands who have gathered here amidst a pandemic in hope. We cannot fail them. I urge my developed country partners to not be a roadblock to their hope”.

It said that for the second week, “it is our firm view that technical negotations should be allowed to continue and given more time to complete the work, before the issues are sent to the Ministers”.

It also expressed “concerns about the process and health of all negotiators” with the first week involving “inf-infs [informal informals] going on till late into the night”. “We cannot afford to risk the health of our negotiators by making them work late nights—the pandemic is far from over”, said Bolivia and hoped that the Presidency will “consider an approach that does not tax our negotiators unduly in the second week. On the process, there were several clashes and different consultations happening on related agenda items in parallel. This must be avoided” it added.

Interventions were also delivered by Antigua and Barbuda for the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS); Bhutan for the Least Developed Countries (LDCs); Peru for the Independent Alliance of Latin America and the Caribbean (AILAC); Gabon for the Africa Group; Switzerland for the Environmental Integrity Group (EIG); Saudia Arabia for the Arab Group; India for Brazil, South Africa, India and China (BASIC); Papua New Guinea; Georgia; Indonesia; Bangladesh; and observer constituencies.

OUTLINE OF PROCESS DURING REMAINING WEEK

At the outset of the informal stocktake, Sharma invited the Chairs of the Subsidiary Bodies (SBs) to report back on the outcomes of their work, including issues that were not concluded. He also invited the UK’s lead negotiator Archie Young to update work of the governing bodies and of the Presidency consultations on some of the issues to be resolved.

Tosi Mpanu Mpanu (Democratic Republic of the Congo), Chair of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological advice (SBSTA), informed that Parties engaged in negotiations on 19 agenda items, concluding work on the Nairobi work programme on impacts, vulnerability and adaptation to climate change; Koronivia joint work on agriculture; sources of input for the GST) under the PA; research and systematic observation; and second periodic review of the long-term global goal under the Convention and of overall progress towards achieving it.

He also informed that draft decisions were recommended on the joint annual report of the Technology Executive Committee (TEC) and the CTCN; on second workplan (2022-2024) of the Local Communities and Indigenous Peoples Platform; and on the set of functions of the Santiago Network on Loss and Damage including its institutional arrangements.

Outstanding issues which required “further technical work and/or political interventions” were in relation to Article 6 of the PA (market/non-market mechanisms); enhanced transparency framework (ETF); report of the Adaptation Committee; and response measures.

Marianne Karlsen (Norway), Chair of the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI) informed that substantive conclusions were adopted and draft decisions forwarded on the review of the Least Developed Countries Expert Group; national adaptation plans; review of the Adaptation Fund (AF); set of functions of the Santiago Network on Loss and Damage; action for climate empowerment; gender and climate; Koronivia joint work on agriculture; annual technical report of the Paris Committee on Capacity-building; and the Secretariat budget for 2022-2023.

Outstanding issues remained on the common time frames (CTFs) for nationally determined contributions (NDCs); report of the Adaptation Committee especially work on the global goal on adaptation; membership of the AF; and response measures.

Archie Young (UK) said that technical work on the critical issue of finance will continue on 8th and 9th of Nov; initiation of work on the periodic assessment of support provided to the Technological Mechanism; work to continue on matters related to the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) for a consolidated text by evening of 8 Nov and then moving into a full draft text; and on compliance (Article 15 of PA), the final contact group would be taking place on 8 Nov.

On the Presidency consultations, he informed to visit the website for Presidency updates and that consultations will continue the second week as well as start on other issues including on the governance of the Warsaw International Mechanism on loss and damage, the results of which will be reported back. He further said that the Presidency is working closely with the Secretariat to facilitate late night working the second week.

Following reporting back, Sharma (UK) outlined organisation of work of the second week based on his “three-track” proposal published in his note of 4 Nov:

i. Continued technical negotiations on items under the governing bodies as well as a limited set of issues carried forward from the SBs, into which emerging political agreements can be incorporated;

ii. Continued Presidency consultations, including on the overarching cover decisions, as well as on issues raised during the opening plenaries of the COP, CMP (meeting of Parties to the Kyoto Protocol) and CMA (meeting of Parties to the PA), as appropriate; and

iii. Ministerial consultations which would focus on key, outstanding political issues.

As regards technical work, he expected majority of the work to be concluded by 10 Nov and briefly highlighted how work will be taken forward on the outstanding SB items:

i. On the ETF, referred by the SBSTA to the Presidency, co-facilitators Helene Plume (New Zealand) and Xiang Gao (China) to continue to lead discussions on matters relating to Transparency of Action while co-facilitators Seyni Nafo (Mali) and Karima Oustadi (Italy) to lead on matters relating to Transparency of Support. Parties were encouraged to complete the bulk of the technical work by the end of 8 Nov.

ii. On Article 6, SBSTA Chair Mpanu (DRC) to lead discussions on very limited number of issues on which technical progress can still be made and to use the time until 9 Nov after which all technical work will finish.

iii. On Adaptation referred to the COP and the CMA, SBI Chair Karlsen (Norway) to lead discussions to finalise the outstanding technical issues on the reports of the AC and complete work by 9 Nov afternoon.

iv. On the Consultative Group of Experts, referred by the SBI to the COP, Parties to continue to consider the matter under the guidance of co-facilitators Gertraud Wollansky (Austria) and Sin Liang Cheah (Singapore) and report back on 9 Nov.

v. On the functions of the Santiago Network on Loss and Damage, co-facilitators Kishan Kumarsingh (Trinidad and Tobago) and Cornelia Jaeger (Austria) to lead work and report back on 9 Nov morning.

vi. On membership of the AF Board, he would nominate a senior member of his delegation to further consult with interested Parties on the way forward [Update: John Murton (UK) to undertake these consultations].

vii. On response measures, he would confirm who will lead continued consultations on the issue as a matter of priority [Update: Peter Govindasamy (Singapore) and Paul Watkinson (France) to undertake these consultations].

On the Presidency Consultations, Sharma (UK) informed a meeting of Heads of Delegation will take place on 8 Nov to continue discussions on the COP 26 ‘overarching decisions’, informed by the Non-Paper Presidency Summary of possible elements identified by Parties published on 7 Nov.

He further said “in keeping with longstanding UNFCCC tradition”, he proposes to invite “pairs of Min-isters to lead informal consultations on outstanding issues benefitting from political guidance”, particularly those that the SBs could not resolve, adding that in choosing Ministers, he tried to ensure a balanced representation, not only among developed and developing countries but also gender balance.

i. On Article 6, Minister Eide (Norway) and Minister Fu (Singapore) to lead with a particular focus on the political issues, among these, being adaptation finance in Article 6.2, accounting for units generated outside the scope of NDCs, and the use of pre2020 units to meet NDCs. He would also continue to closely coordinate the work between Article 6 and the CDM.

ii. On the CTFs for NDCs, Minister Mujawamariya (Rwanda) and Minister Sommaruga (Switzerland) to lead with a particular focus on whether the final solution will be single time frame or not.

iii. To finalise the ETF, Minister Joseph (Antigua and Barbuda) and Minister Shaw (New Zealand) to lead with a particular focus on elements in the overarching ETF decision text.

iv. On Adaptation, Minister Shauna (Maldives) and Minister Ribera (Spain) to lead with a particular focus on taking work forward on the Global Goal on Adaptation.

v. On Mitigation and the issue of keeping 1.5C within reach, Minister Stiell (Canada) and Minister Jorgensen (Denmark) to lead with a particular focus on identifying tangible actions required from Parties, individually and collectively during this critical decade and beyond to keep 1.5 degrees in reach, using the latest available science as a guide.

vi. On Loss and Damage, Minister Dieschbourg (Luxembourg) and Minister Charles Jr (Jamaica) to lead consultations across relevant aspects of the agenda.

vii. On Finance, Minister Fouad (Egypt) and Minister Bolund (Sweden) to prepare for ministerial consultations on those outstanding issues where it is likely that higher level guidance will be needed. They would begin with chairing the plenary of the CMA High-Level Dialogue on Climate Finance on 8 Nov afternoon and conducting informal outreach to understand Parties’ expectations. Parties would have 8th and 9th of Nov to make progress on substantive issues, particularly concerning Long-Term Finance and the New Collective Quantified Goal, after which COP 26 President Sharma would hold a stocktake with the Ministers and co-facilitators to determine if, and where, Ministerial consultations on specific matters are needed.

Sharma also invited Minister Meza (Costa Rica) to support him and the co-facilitating Ministers, as a number of the issues are “linked, with the need to finalise outcomes in such a way as to ensure coherence”.

Further, he informed that Ministers will carry out the consultations through “informal meetings” to allow for maximum flexibility and they may wish to issue “informal documents” under their own authority, should they feel this will help progress work.

“Our common objective is to adopt consensus decisions and conclusions on Friday [12 Nov] that will constitute the comprehensive, ambitious and balanced outcome of the Glasgow sessions”, said Sharma and hoped that most of the “first texts” will emerge by 8 Nov evening. He also assured that he would take “regular stocktaking meetings” to report on the status of negotiations and progress achieved, as well as issues arising. He emphasised that “the Presidency’s door, my door in particular, remains open to all Parties”.

In closing his remarks, COP 26 President Sharma stressed on his commitment to “adopt all decisions and conclusions by Friday 12 Nov” with full document availability in all UN languages, and expected “only very few issues to remain open by the evening of 10 Nov, when near-final texts” would be presented. He said that his priority for 11 Nov would be to bring the work together and resolve final outstanding issues, leaving time for document preparation.

- Third World Network