Other Blog Posts

Wanun Permpibul
Head, Energy and Climate Change Programme
Renewable Energy Institute of Thailand Foundation
Thailand
 

I have been doing research with the Sustainability Watch Thailand, a local think tank focusing on the promotion of alternative and renewable sources of energy, and enhancement of action research on community based vulnerability assessment and adaptation aiming at influencing climate policy in Thailand.  

Power and transport are the two largest sectors contributing to increasing GHGs in Thailand.  High potential sources of alternative and renewable energy are available but they need clear policy framework and supports to utilise these resources effectively.  In these areas we have been working through the Power Development Plan, which is the plan directing power generation for Thailand.  Together with other civil society organisations, we have prepared the alternative plan where renewable sources of energy as well as energy efficiency and savings are the focus, which also reflect the potentials for Thailand’s mitigation measure on this sector.  Additionally, the role and performance in ensuring good governance and promoting renewable sources of energy in the power sector is also investigated and recommendations will be proposed to the government.

With regards to climate impacts, vulnerability and adaptation, we have attempted to combine scientific modeling and forecasts with local observations in order to engage people’s participation in addressing impacts, assessing vulnerability and sectors of vulnerability, and identifying areas where adaptive capacity needs to be strengthened or provided that could lead to long term adaptation.  We have applied the livelihood vulnerability index and participatory techniques with communities.  Through this, we hope to integrate climate change and adaptation into the local plan and subsequently national policy.  

Participating in the climate negotiations would enable and broaden my understanding on the link of climate, both mitigation and adaptation, and sustainable development issues.  I do appreciate the South Capacity Building programme of CAN International, enabling me to understand better on the negotiation process, overall picture of climate politics and deepened my knowledge on the adaptation.  This would strengthen my capacity to better communicate with the Thai government to get a clear national position towards climate negotiations.  Furthermore, the SCB programme has enabled me to better understand how NGOs as a network work effectively and in a powerful manner to influence climate politics, which I could apply to the network in the country.

Climate change presents a profound threat to Indonesia’s vision of a a self-sustaining, self-governing society that secures the health and sustainability of the natural resources and the environment while pursuing socio-economic well-being that is equitable and democratic.

The world’s poorest people are the most vulnerable to climate change though they contribute least to its causes. Without a well-functioning international adaptation regime, they are the ones that will pay the price, and a very high one.  

These poor and developing countries face a quandary on which to prioritize: the development of their economy in an attempt to eradicate poverty, or address the impact of climate change? Poverty is a pressing issue that needs to be tackled immediately. On the other hand, the impacts of climate change should also be addressed promptly because it can increase the severity of the current state of poverty. Indeed, poor people do not have a choice.

Fossil fuel is widely used by developing countries to support their economic growth. In addition to its availability, fossil fuel is also relatively cheap. However, the burning of fossil fuel and its constant use have lead to excessive release of green house gases, resulting in the increase of the global warming hazards.

Based on Indonesia Climate Change Sectoral Road Mapd (ICSSR - 2010) data, Indonesia's total annual GHG emissions of the three major gases, CO2, CH4 and N2O was equivalent in 2005 to about 670 million ton of CO2 (MtCO2e) without LULUCF, or about 1120 MtCO2e if one includes peat fires but not Land Use Change and Forestry (LUCF). Meanwhile, in 2005, Indonesia’s energy sector emitted at a level of 396 MtCO2e, which is about 35.4% of the national total (Second National Communication (SNC) - 2009).

Meanwhile, the Millennium Development Goals aim to halve global poverty by 2015. On the other hand, science tells us that it is necessary for developing countries to join in mitigation efforts.

Thus, how can poor and developing countries continue their economic growth and eradicate poverty, tackling the global impact of climate change at the same time? And the following question then must be: How can the major developing countries like Indonesia can contribute to mitigate when their need to adapt is more important?

This is a challange for developing countries like Indonesia, while mitigation efforts are necessary, this will not be sufficient for it to avoid climate change - given existing emission levels, we will also need to adapt to the consequences of climate change.

Based on the occurrence of disasters recorded  in The Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA)/Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters(CRED) International Disaster Database (2007), the ten biggest disaster events  in Indonesia over the period 1907 to 2007 occurred after 1990 and most of these disasters were weather-related, particularly flooding, followed by drought, forest fire and the increase of endemic diseases.  This shows that weather-related disasters have been  increasing  in terms of their frequency and  intensity.  Economic losses from the ten biggest disasters were almost 26 billion USD, around 70% of which can be attributed to the climate.

Climate change is not another sector, it should be mainstreamed in the development planning. Addressing climate change in the context of development requires effective mitigation efforts, and also a development system that is resilient to long-term climate change  impacts. This effort requires a cross-sectoral approach at regional, national, sub national and local level.

Adaptation efforts must be combined with mitigation, because adaptation will not be effective if the rate of climate change exceeds adaptation capability, and even enhaced action in adaptation will only able to reduce loss and damage fom climate change impact, but not totally eliminate it, thus mechanism to address this residual loss and damage is also important to take place.

This initiative shall be supported by enabling international climate change regime. For a start, two conditions must be met. First, the post-2012 regime must enable greater climate resilience, and adaptation on the necessary scale. Second, it must be designed so that, at the very least, it does nothing to push the critical goals of human development and poverty alleviation further from realization.

So here we are now, in Cancun, while the negotiation process just started in the High Level Segment.  As all the Ministers and Heads of State work in the negotiations, they must keep in their minds the grave consequences of a failure. A successful outcome of ongoing climate change negotiations matters for human rights. A new climate change agreement must be fair, sufficiently ambitious and balance to be effective.

If the recognition of the human suffering to climate change is unable to ultimately mobilize us all to action, what else can do it?

Dear distinguished ministers, ambassadors, and delegates,in this remaining time in Cancun please deliver, we need you here to action, not to hide!

Denia Aulia Syam

By Ange-Benjamin Brida

In this UNFCCC negotiation it’s undeniable that cutting emissions and the idea of a review of target from 2°C to 1,5°C are some of the most crucial issues of this process on the way toward a Fair Ambitious and Binding agreement in Durban next year. And we would like to recall parties that we need here in Cancun a package that is more compatible with this objective and in line with science requirement. We need to build a dyke strong enough to save us from the “drowning” of Copenhagen.

The only one way to build this dyke safely is to make a real engineering plan, and then agree what everyone should contribute with, according to their capabilities. After that, everybody can bring their stones to the construction. Meanwhile our delegates, manly those from developed countries, are not using this safe and wise approach here concerning the negotiation. We are building things in the context of climate talk instead of moving according to science-based pledges. Developed countries are still promoting this pledges based on an interests approach which will not fulfill the target.Current mitigation pledges result in a massive 5-9 gigatonne gap per year by 2020. The recent UNEP report indicates that a substantial part of the gap results from loopholes and double counting.

Distinguished delegates: a second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol is an essential part of a balanced outcome in Cancun.Rejecting the one legally binding framework we have for emission reduction commitments is simply unacceptable. We hope that countries opposing a second commitment period will show more flexibility this coming week.We need to have more science-based pledges and more equity in the Cancun package. Please ensure that the following four key elements are included in both the KP and LCA texts:

1. A process to clarify existing pledges

2. Acknowledgement that current accounting is less than what science requires

3. A process to make sure pledges are strengthened before they are cemented into the legal

Text.

4. Long-term Zero and Low Carbon Action Plans

As the ministers are still coming we urge parties to comeup with more pledges. Another drowning could not be acceptable. Delegates: roll up your sleeves and let’s build a strong dyke!

Climate change is affecting the lives of many, especially those that are highly vulnerable, like Africa, Small Island States and Least developed countries. A recent report on the Climate Change Vulnerability Index, released by global risks advisor firm, Maplecroft, has confirmed that Ethiopia is one of the countries with an extreme risk to be affected by climate change.

Impacts of climate change are being felt in different parts of the country already. There are more erratic and heavy rainfalls with short rainy seasons. Vulnerable countries such as Ethiopia have low adaptive capacity to adapt to the impacts of climate change or none. In order to take any actions on climate change first we need to understand the problems by consulting with the affected people and find the best adaptive measures, as indigenous knowledge is very crucial.In Ethiopia, development interventions by different NGOs play an important role by providing resources for adaptation to climate change whose capacity needs to be enhanced. Therefore, it is very important to take lessons from this kind of practices and their impacts for developing and promoting proven and acceptable adaptation strategies.

In Ethiopia’s case, pastoral communities are among the most vulnerable groups who are affected by climate change. Borena zone in the southern part of the country is one of the chronic drought prone areas with underdeveloped infrastructure, harsh, and unpredictable environment. Due to these reasons, the zone has faced increased frequency of seasonal droughts, erratic and insufficient rainfall and flash floods. In turn it has led to feed and water scarcity, bush encroachment, food shortage, migration and human and livestock diseases.

Some of the interventions that the Federal and Regional governments have been undertaking include; range rehabilitation, asset protection, livelihood diversification and the productive safety-net and humanitarian interventions (during emergency situations). Non-governmental organizations have also been supporting the pastoral community through the implementation of projects aiming at ecological restoration, range rehabilitation, social protection and managing disaster risks. However, given the severity of the problem, much remains to be done by taking into consideration the added burden from the impacts of climate change on pastoral assets-livestock, water and pasture.

The major problem faced by this community includes rangeland degradation in the form of bush encroachment (invasion of species), poor pasture and feed scarcity. In order to enhance the management of rangelands, a local NGO operating in the area, Action for Development, has been engaged in bush clearing and water development projects and drought response measures such as destocking, supplementary livestock feeding, water rationing, and emergency livestock health services which has marked a change in the condition of the rangelands (particularly pasture), and in the health and productivity of the livestock. The water development interventions have increased the access to water and guarantee water availability and reduced the workload of women and the stress of livestock and herders from traveling long distance to access water. Since all the interventions were instrumental it ensured the feeling of community ownership and sustainability of water provision among the target communities. 

In order to make ongoing and future development interventions climate resilient these good practices need to be scaled up by empowering the local communities and institutions. Therefore, Parties who are negotiating in Cancun need to take actions now and make serious mitigation and financial commitments so that communities in vulnerable countries better adapt to climate change by scaling up good practices.

Mahlet Eyassu