Tag: Loss and Damage

How much longer can we Ignore Loss and Damage?

The Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) was set up to address the devastating loss and damage in the most vulnerable developing countries. But 6 years later, it is clear that this international mechanism has become little more than a talk shop with minimal  on-the-ground benefit to the most vulnerable. 

When Typhoon Idai swept through Mozambique, the WIM was not delivering for those on the   front lines, those keeping the storm shelters open and battling flood water to deliver lifesaving supplies to people. Instead, a few Executive Committee (ExCom) members and technical experts were planning their next meeting in Bonn to formulate workplans and review papers. 

The WIM review event of 1 December showed that the current flagship mechanism from the UNFCCC on loss and damage has not yet been fully operationalized and is far from being fit for purpose. In reality, the event confirmed that the WIM has performed very poorly.

The Loss & Damage review at COP25 is critical to ensure that we enhance the WIM to tangibly respond to climate impacts in the real world and support those most affected in vulnerable developing countries. The coming days of negotiations are intended to review how the WIM has performed since its inception, and decide on how it must be enhanced and strengthened. 

ECO  applauds the open and inclusive approach of the Secretariat for the review, and appreciates that civil society and observers were not only invited to listen but also to participate on an equal platform with the Parties present. 

Positively, developing and developed countries agreed that loss and damage is far greater than the WIM, and that the WIM is much more than just the ExCom. 

Unfortunately, most of the Review discussion focused on the ExCom and its expert groups, and failed to consider how the WIM can actually enable action in communities or how it can mobilise the finance necessary to support the poorest and most vulnerable to avert, minimise and address loss and damage. 

ECO heard that right at the start and end of the meeting it was made very clear that Finance, Action & Support is the most critical area for improvement for the WIM.  

Interventions from Parties and observers emphasized that the ExCom has failed to recognise that the people paying the price for inaction are those who are least responsible for causing the crisis.  The review should have dedicated more time to discuss the availability (or the lack) of finance to address loss and damage.

Developing countries, especially those communities on the front lines of climate change, are already on  the edge. If they do not see any progress under the WIM then it is understandable that they may start exploring alternative pathways to seek compensation and climate justice.

 Vanuatu stated that it is “not afraid of the word ‘compensation’” and is already being pushed, due to WIM inaction on Loss & Damage, to explore legal justice pathways for climate finance.   

It is vital that here in Madrid, the Parties take the difficult decisions necessary to strengthen the WIM, and strengthen the multilateral climate regime. 

This includes establishing a Loss and Damage Finance Facility under the WIM, setting up a task force on action and support under the ExCom, establishing an implementation arm for the WIM to reach the national level, and ensuring that loss and damage has a permanent agenda item under both the COP and CMA. Loss and damage is a manifestation of the failure of the climate negotiations and a grim reflection of global inaction. How much longer can the most vulnerable hold hope, while we wait for developed countries to go beyond rhetoric and start supporting developing countries in their efforts to respond to the climate emergency?

Related Event: 
Related Newsletter : 

CAN Submission: View on the Review of the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage, October 2019

Climate Action Network (CAN) International thanks for the opportunity to provide its views on the WIM review in this submission. Agreeing on a further submission at SB50 is important in order to allow Parties and observer organisations sharpen and reshape their positions and contributions along the key criteria and aspects agreed as part of the Terms of Reference (ToRs) for the Review. As a lot of important information was already presented in previous submissions by Parties and observer organisations, CAN would like to recall its contributions as important inputs and which should still be taken into account by Parties when conducting the review, including:

  • CAN International’s briefing paper for the Pre-COP;
  • CAN International’s letter to the Special Envoy for the UN Climate Action Summit;
  • CAN International’s submission “Views and inputs on possible elements to be included in the terms of reference for the review of the Warsaw International Mechanism, February 2019” and
  • CAN Submission on the Scope of the Technical Paper Exploring Sources of Support for Loss and Damage and Modalities for Accessing Support, February 2018
Organization: 

CAN Briefing: UNFCCC SB50, May 2019

In 2019 we only have 11 years left to avoid the worst effects of the climate crisis as warned by the IPCC Special Report on 1.5°C. Outside of the negotiations, people are declaring a state of emergency for their futures. To not fail the people who refuse to accept excuses for inaction, negotiations at SB50 must deliver significant progress and serve as a moment to build momentum to enable greater ambition in 2019.

At COP24, parties agreed largely on common guidelines for the Paris Agreement and a COP decision which clearly highlights the need to initiate national processes to enhance NDCs by 2020. However, COP24 fell significantly short in political will to tackle the emergency of the climate crisis and make concrete commitments to enhance NDCs: The IPCC’s Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C makes clear we need to act now to cut emissions in half by 2030.

In 2019 countries need to significantly advance progress and deliver a package of ambitious deliveries in three key areas: Enhancing mitigation ambition, providing and scaling up support, and addressing climate impacts.

Organization: 

CAN Submission: Views and inputs on possible elements to be included in the terms of reference for the review of the Warsaw International Mechanism, February 2019

The IPCC report on 1.5ÅãC is a siren alerting humanity to the urgency of the climate crisis. The report shows that, already, some communities and ecosystems are being forced beyond the limits of adaptation.

Five years after the Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) for Loss and Damage (L&D) was established at COP19 insufficient attention has been given so far to addressing the support needs of developing countries and raising additional support, including finance, to address L&D under WIM.

Organization: 

CAN Annual Policy Document, Executive Summary, Spanish: Katowice - Impulsando el Acuerdo de París a la Acción, November 2018

El informe del IPCC sobre 1.5ºC es una alarma de alerta a la humanidad sobre la urgencia de la crisis climática. El reporte refleja que incluso medio grado de calentamiento hace una gran diferencia en términos de impactos, más de lo que se conocía antes. También refleja que algunas comunidades y ecosistemas ya están siendo forzados a superar los límites de la adaptación. El informe muestra además que las herramientas necesarias para alcanzar las metas del Acuerdo de París de limitar el calentamiento global a 1.5ºC están dentro del alcance de la ciencia y de la capacidad humana. Es económica y técnicamente factible, pero necesitamos voluntad política ahora mismo. 

Organization: 

CAN Annual Policy Document, Executive Summary, French: Katowice - Transformer l’Accord de Paris en Action, November 2018

Le rapport du GIEC sur l’objectif de 1.5 ° C apparait comme une sirène alertant l’humanité sur l’urgence de la crise climatique. Le rapport montre que même un demi-degré de réchauffement aurait une énorme différence en termes d’impacts; bien au-délà de ce que qui était anticipé jusqu’à aujourd’hui. Ce rapport met aussi en évidence que certaines communautés et certains écosystèmes ont déjà atteint les limites de leurs capacités d›adaptation. Il démontre également que l’humanité dispose des ressources techniques et humaines nécessaires pour atteindre l’objectif fixé par l’accord de Paris de limiter le réchauffement de la planète à 1,5 ° C. Il s’agit d’un défi économiquement viable et techniquement réalisable, mais pour y arriver l’humanité a besoin d’une volonté politique réelle. 

Organization: 

CAN Annual Policy Document, Executive Summary, Arabic: Katowice - Spurring the Paris Agreement to Action, November 2018

تقرير الهيئة الحكومية المعنية بتغير المناخ الـ IPCCحول 1.5 درجة مئوية هو صافرة إنذار لتنبيه الإنسانية إلى الحاجة الملحة حول أزمة المناخ. ويبين التقرير أنه ومع نصف درجة مئوية من الحرارة، يمكنه ان يحدث فرقا كبيرا من حيث الآثار وأكثر بكثير مما كان معروفا في السابق.

لكنه يظهر أيضا أن بعض المجتمعات والنظم الإيكولوجية فعليا، يتم إجبارها على حدود التكيف.

يوضح التقرير أيضا الأدوات اللازمة لتحقيق أهداف اتفاقية باريس للحد من ارتفاع درجات الحرارة الى 1.5 درجة مئوية.  والتي تعد ممكنة اقتصاديا وتقنيا، ولكن ينقصها الإرادة السياسية في الوقت الحالي.

Organization: 

CAN Annual Policy Document, Executive Summary, Russian Translation: Katowice - Spurring the Paris Agreement to Action, November 2018

Специальный доклад МГЭИК по цели 1,5°C прозвучал тревожным сигналом, предупреждающим человечество о необходимости в срочном порядке принять меры для урегулирования климатического кризиса. Согласно докладу, потепление даже на половину градуса имеет огромное значение с точки зрения воздействий, это – больше, чем было известно ранее. Доклад также свидетельствует о том, что для некоторых сообществ и экосистем ситуация выходит за пределы возможности адаптации. Кроме того, в докладе продемонстрировано, что инструменты, необходимые для достижения цели Парижского соглашения по ограничению роста температуры на планете до 1,5°C, относятся к сфере науки и человеческому потенциалу. Это осуществимо с экономической и технической точки зрения, но нам понадобится политическая воля уже сегодня.

Organization: 

CAN Annual Policy Document, Executive Summary: Katowice - Spurring the Paris Agreement to Action, November 2018

The IPCC report on 1.5°C is a siren alerting humanity to the urgency of the climate crisis. The report shows even half a degree of warming makes a huge difference in terms of impacts; more than was previously known. It also shows that, already, some communities and ecosystems are being forced beyond the limits of adaptation. The report further demonstrates the tools needed to meet the Paris Agreement goal of limiting warming to 1.5°C are within the scope of science and human capability. It is economically and technically feasible, but we need political will right now.

Organization: 

CAN Annual Policy Document, Full Version: Katowice - Spurring the Paris Agreement to Action, November 2018

The IPCC report on 1.5°C is a siren alerting humanity to the urgency of the climate crisis. The report shows even half a degree of warming makes a huge difference in terms of impacts; more than was previously known. It also shows that, already, some communities and ecosystems are being forced beyond the limits of adaptation. The report further demonstrates the tools needed to meet the Paris Agreement goal of limiting warming to 1.5°C are within the scope of science and human capability. It is economically and technically feasible, but we need political will right now.

2018 brought together numerous leaders from states and regions, cities, business, investors and civil society at the Global Climate Action Summit (GCAS), to underline the transformational action they are already pursuing. The Virtual Climate Summit convened by the vulnerable countries reinforced efforts to fight climate change in solidarity with all those facing this threat on the frontline. The baton has now been passed on to all governments.

This year, Parties engaged in a facilitative dialogue (Talanoa Dialogue) to take stock of the collective efforts towards the Paris Agreement’s long-term goal and to inform Parties on the preparation to update their Nationally

Determined Contributions. The Talanoa Dialogue also considered pre-2020 action and support. At COP24, during the High-level Ministerial Talanoa Dialogue, governments will commit to step-up their national ambition and review and enhance their NDCs by 2020.

Tools for implementation are essential for enhanced implementation of climate action. Predictable, sustainable and transparent finance — both public and private — is at the core of climate action and it is necessary for developing countries to fully implement their NDCs and instill trust in the Paris regime.

Clarity on the delivery of finance is vital. The Green Climate Fund board meeting in October agreed to a replenishment process in 2019 and sent a clear signal that the fund is back on track with a commitment to deliver US$1 billion for climate action in developing countries. At COP24 we need additional signals and concrete agreements on predictability and accountability to make the Paris Agreement work. The Paris Agreement is a promise to the people that governments will take collective climate action to protect us. At this year’s United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Conference of the Parties (COP 24) governments are working towards a December 2018 deadline to adopt the key elements of the implementation guidelines to operationalize the Paris Agreement. The Agreement is the most collaborative piece of legislation in human history and it has sparked real hope. This year is the time to embrace multilateralism and spur the Paris Agreement into action by agreeing on robust, fair and cohesive rules. The rules will expand on the Paris Agreements ability to act as a foundation for countries’ collective action to tackle climate change and to increase ambition over time.

At COP 24, Parties to the UNFCCC must realize the vision of Paris by:

• Agreeing on a robust, fair and cohesive set of implementation guidelines to solidify the Paris regime and a roadmap to finalize outstanding issues;

• Stepping up and committing to enhancing their NDCs by 2020 in line with climate science;

• Reaffirming their climate finance commitments, agree to robust accounting standards and concrete ways to enhance predictability of funds from the contributor countries. Several elements will be necessary to enable both immediate and longer-term action:

 

RAISING AMBITION FOR THE PROTECTION OF PEOPLE AND PLANET:

• Informed by the IPCC Special Report on 1.5°C, the Talanoa Dialogue must send a strong signal to step-up climate ambition: through a COP Decision recalling paragraph 23 and 24 of Decision 1/CP.21 to enhance current NDCs by 2020; taking into account the discussions and outputs of the Talanoa Dialogue in the process of updating their NDCs and reflecting progression over time; and through a Co-Chairs of the process report on the Pathways to Action outlining specific and actionable key steps, responding to each of the questions raised in the Dialogue separate from a more technical summary by the UNFCCC Secretariat;

• While urgent action is required to avoid the worst impacts the vulnerable countries already face severe damages and displacement that require urgent support. Five years after the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage (WIM) was established at COP19, it is time to fully operationalize it. COP 24 must deliver highlevel guidance for the review of the WIM in 2019, including a need-assessment for loss and damage finance.

SUPPORT FOR ACTION TO ENABLE INCREASED AMBITION:

• Contributor countries should strongly reaffirm the collective commitment to scale up climate finance to $100bn per year by 2020, and back it up with concrete commitments, including the reaffirmation of their commitment to the GCF through sending political signals towards an ambitious replenishment and agree on accounting rules for climate finance which are robust and provide full transparency on actual assistance provided to developing countries for mitigation, adaptation and L&D. This needs to include agreement on accounting rules which ensure contributor countries report grant equivalent amounts for loans and other non-grant instruments; that non-concessional instruments are not counted as climate finance; and that only the climate-specific part of finance provided is counted.

• To make climate finance more predictable, countries shall fully operationalize Article 9.5 of the Paris Agreement. It requires that Parties at CMA1-3 agree on a process to provide qualitative and quantitative information in accordance to all sections of this article. All contributor countries should agree to provide similar types of ex-ante information for every channel and source to ensure comparability and coherence, including a timeline and the format for submissions.

• Parties must agree to discuss the post-2025 finance goal in a structured, inclusive and balanced way. At COP24, the APA should recommend that the CMA1 adopt a process to discuss this goal and ensure sufficient time for Parties and observers to provide input. This process should include a clear timeline for the agreement of the target and should welcome technical and scientific inputs from all bodies of the Financial Mechanism of the Convention, including an updated needs assessment and review of past climate finance and its effectiveness.

• COP24 must achieve a Technology Framework which ensures the focus of technology development and transfer is on the most climate vulnerable populations, achieving a balance in addressing adaptation and mitigation technology support. The Periodic Assessment must stipulate that the bodies of the Technology Mechanism collect data to assess its impact on technology development and transfer and contribution towards achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement.

PRESERVING THE SPIRIT OF PARIS BY AGREEING ON ROBUST AND FAIR RULES:

A core set of robust and enforceable guidelines — that build on and enhance the existing systems of transparency — will be critical to ensure trust and drive ambition:

• For transparency of action, it is essential that accurate and robust information is provided by Parties in a methodological manner concerning efforts on greenhouse gas inventories, NDC implementation and achievement, adaptation, finance, and allowing for non-state actors to contribute to the framework;

• Flexibility under the Enhanced Transparency Framework should be reflected in each element of the Enhanced Transparency Framework and be used as an enabling vehicle allowing progression over time. Parties should agree on minimum floors for the frequency, scope, and level of detail provided as well as guidelines for how flexibility is applied.

• Parties should adopt constructive guidelines for NDCs, including guidance for features of the NDCs, for the information in the NDCs to facilitate their clarity, transparency, and understanding, as well as for the accounting used in the NDCs. Guidance should include an invitation for Parties to provide information regarding how rights-related considerations, including a gender perspective, have informed the planning of the NDC. Such guidance may be differentiated, but not bifurcated.

• Develop accounting guidance based on inventory reporting under the Convention for REDD+ and LULUCF well before 2020.

• Any transfer of international emissions reductions should help to enhance ambition of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). At COP 24, parties should phase out the Kyoto Protocol’s flexible mechanisms and not recognize Kyoto emissions units for compliance with non-Kyoto mitigation commitments.

• In their transfers of international emissions reductions, Parties should avoid all forms of double counting as well as support and encourage all Parties to move toward economy-wide emission targets as called for in Article 4.4 of the Paris Agreement.

ROBUSTNESS OF THE PARIS AGREEMENT NOW AND OVER TIME:

• Parties need to decide on a single five-year common time frame for NDC implementation at COP24 in line with Article 4.1 of the Paris Agreement to enhance consistency and comparability of NDCs as well as better harness rapidly evolving real-world opportunities and incentivize early action and enable the best synchronization with the Paris climate regime.

• Parties need to finalize the general design of the Global Stocktake (GST) at COP 24. To serve its purpose, to ratchet-up ambition, the design needs to include the following elements:
– sufficient duration of 18-24 months, wherein some phases (e.g. input gathering and technical consideration) can overlap.
– the GST should be organized in workstreams oriented towards the three long-term goals of the Paris Agreement in Article 2 (temperature, resilience, and finance flows) and include a workstream on loss and damage.
– additionally, means of implementation (finance, technology, and capacity building) should be considered a cross-cutting issue of these workstreams.
– for the stocktake to be “conducted in the light of equity” means to treat equity as an overarching issue across all work streams and with regards to the design of the GST.

• Submit long-term greenhouse gas emission development strategies in line with Article 4.19 of the Agreement to transitioning to a future that is compatible with the long-term goals of the Paris Agreement and Just Transition.

ADVANCING WORK BEYOND THE PARIS AGREEMENT WORK PROGRAM:

• The work of the Koronivia Joint Work on Agriculture (KJWA) must enable Parties and other actors to take action that builds adaptive capacity and resilience, contributes to the equitable achievement of the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C goal, and safeguards food security, the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities, gender equality, environmental integrity, and human rights.

• COP24 must now finalize the effective operationalization of the Local Communities and Indigenous Peoples Platform, learning from good practices in other multilateral forums and collectively agreed principles as well as providing it with adequate resources to perform its work.

Organization: 

Pages

Subscribe to Tag: Loss and Damage