“Loss and damage” refers to damage caused by climate change to human society and the natural environment that cannot have been avoided by reducing emissions or adaptation. The costs of recovering from this damage, such as the intensification of disasters, are rising. And poor countries are asking rich countries to foot the bill.
The Prime Minister of Barbados, Mia Mottley, the leading advocate of losses and damaged investments at COP27. He argues that climate-vulnerable nations like his “have an ethical and just cause. “
At the start of COP27, he welcomed the inclusion of loss and damage in the negotiating schedule as a popularity that countries that have contributed slightly to global warming do not “choose between funding education and fitness or rebuilding our societies. “
As we approach the end of the summit, it looks like countries will disappoint those vulnerable nations. But it is expected that the negotiations will drag on through the end of the week and that wonderful agreements can still emerge.
Ending in effervescence
Although presented as a conference of “implementation” rather than “ambition”, the inclusion of loss and damage in the COP27 negotiation schedule raised hopes that progress can still be made on this thorny issue.
Powerful speeches calling for climate justice from leaders like Motley, as well as flood-ravaged Pakistan’s minister, Shehbaz Sharif, saw a deal on loss and damage emerge as one of the summit’s main tests of success.
However, rather than the expected action, the negotiations will most likely result in a dead-end discussion. In a draft text outlining imaginable “elements” of a resolution on loss and damage made public Monday in Egypt, two were on the table: the creation of a fund for loss and damage until the end of 2024, or two years of technical studies on whether the factor deserves to be finally resolved through patchpainting of investment agreements.
The first option would be difficult for developed countries to accept. The United States and the European Union said they opposed any language on “reparations,” which could recommend that they shoulder their duty and must compensate for the damage caused by external emissions.
In Europe, one of the biggest parties to the conflict turns out to be Sweden, the country of climate activist Greta Thunberg, which is holding back broader action.
With the recent election of questionable Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson, the country’s environment minister wants a fund for loss and damage (which angered Thunburg on Twitter).
Similarly, major emitters in emerging economies, China and India, are resisting calls from the United States and some climate-vulnerable countries such as Mauritius to also make a cash contribution to a loss and damage fund. China and India argue that the first to assume this duty will be the oldest and most consistent with capital issuers in the evolved world.
We have yet to hear Australian commitments on losses and funding or new commitments on weather funding in general.
But Energy Minister Chris Bowen is now in Egypt leading broader negotiations with India on climate finance for energy transition and adaptation. Therefore, at least it is noted that Australia plays a more constructive role in previous COPs.
There were hopes for the announcement of a German-led Global Shield, which would provide countries with investments for insurance and crisis coverage support.
But this has been strongly rejected by some vulnerable countries, adding Barbados and other members of the Alliance of Small Island States, which count on the effectiveness of the Global Shield as an insurance mechanism. Climate activist Mohamed Adow of Powershift Africa noted:
“We cannot secure our path to climate protection. After all, the climate update is getting so bad that some communities probably wouldn’t be insurable unless we see much more drastic emissions reductions. “
The G77, an organization of more than 130 emerging countries, as well as China, submitted a draft proposal for a loss and damage fund. position ahead of the next COP in Dubai in 2023. However, some evolved countries need to move more slowly than the G77 timetable.
disappointment and bitterness
As appeals for investment loss and damage continue, there will be much sadness and bitterness if nothing really sprawling comes out of Egypt.
Progress on loss and damage is seen as the litmus test for COP27 good fortune in many climate-vulnerable countries. But if nothing happens, other features are explored.
For example, Vanuatu is leading a crusade to enlist the assistance of the United Nations General Assembly in submitting a request for an advisory opinion. This can generate an authority of the International Court of Justice over who is responsible for the damage caused by the climate.
This may simply break any deadlock in negotiations over a loss and damage fund, or lead to further litigation in which countries with large emissions are required to pay reimbursement for loss and damage.
The UN weather meetings are a rollercoaster ride with negotiations to the end and the likelihood of unexpected twists and surprises.
Please indicate the appropriate maximum category to facilitate the processing of your request
Thank you for taking the time to provide feedback to editors.
Your opinion is for us. However, we do not guarantee individual responses due to the large volume of messages.