Tag: climate change

CAN Statement given at the UN Security Council Arria meeting on climate change and security

 

CAN Statement at UN Security Council Arria Meeting

15 February, 2013

Given by Wael Hmaidan, Director of Climate Action Network 

 

Thank you Co-chair:

I am making this statement on behalf of Oxfam and the Climate Action Network, a coalition of more than 700 national and international NGOs.

Let me join others in thanking governments Pakistan and the United Kingdom for providing us with this opportunity, and also thank the panel for their excellent input.

For many years, civil society has warned that our collective planetary failure to cut greenhouse gas emissions entails grave consequences. These consequences are already being felt, first and foremost by the poorest and most vulnerable within our societies. They include a heightened risk of poverty, inequality, instability, and conflict that ultimately affects us all; and they demand an unprecedented commitment to collective action to drastically reduce this risk.

Nowhere can this climate risk be more clearly seen than in the global food system. 870 million people will go to bed hungry tonight, a billion more are malnourished. They are among the billions of people in developing countries that are dependant on agriculture for their livelihoods. As net food consumers, many spend more than 50% of their incomes on food. Many are living in post-conflict or fragile States.

Climate change means they are facing increasing uncertainty from rising temperatures and changing rainfall patterns that act as a drag on crop yields. Droughts or floods can wipe out entire harvests, as we have seen in recent years in Pakistan, in the Horn of Africa and across the Sahel. And when extreme weather hits major world food producers – like last year’s droughts in the US and Russia – world food prices rocket. This presents a major risk to net food importing countries, such as Yemen, dependant on imports for 90% of its wheat consumption.

It is clear that mass hunger, exacerbated by climate change, can be a major driver of instability. As the Zulu proverb goes: "Plenty sits still, hunger is a wanderer." The food riots and social unrest seen in the wake of the 2008 food price spikes were not a one-off phenomenon, but a sign of the risks we face through our failure to feed a warming world.

Extreme weather has continued to drive and exacerbate food price volatility in the years since. This week the US seasonal drought outlook warned that severe drought conditions persist in much of the region. With other major producers like Australia and Russia either suffering or barely recovering from extreme heat and drought too, and with world cereal stocks falling again, world food security remains on a knife-edge. 

In addition to these new and increasing pressures on the food system, climate change is also driving scarcity in critical natural resources like water and land. While conflicts between and within countries over such resources are driven by multiple factors, it seems clear that in many cases climate change is a contributing or exacerbating factor, that should be taken into account in our efforts towards prevention and risk reduction, crisis management and peace-building.

Finally, we are gravely concerned by the prospects for mass displacement of people within States and across borders - which the Security Council has already recognised as a threat to international peace and security - driven directly by climate impacts like sea level rise, droughts, desertification and indirectly by its impacts on food and natural resources. For countries such as Bangladesh and many Small Island Developing States, the threat to their people is already visible; but it is a threat which peoples around the world – rich and poor alike – will face in the coming years and decades.

We recognise that the decision to leave one's home and community is often the result of multiple factors, but that climate change impacts are often a critical driver. For example, the thousands of people who were displaced from Somalia into neighbouring countries in 2011 were not only fleeing conflict, but in search of food in the wake of drought. As climate change impacts become increasingly severe and in some cases permanent, unlike migration driven by conflict or natural disasters, climate-forced migrants may have no hope of ever returning home. Without adequate provisions from the international community, the consequences of displacement and landlessness on such a scale for international peace and security will be profound.

For more than 20 years, global civil society has raised the alarm about the diverse consequences of rising greenhouse gas emissions on our international community. We are already seeing the impacts in our work around the world, and we know from scientists that the window to prevent further, non-linear and catastrophic impacts is now rapidly closing. As repeatedly urged by the Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon, leaders must act fast with all the tools available to reduce this risk.

This includes a major scaling-up of public investments to help communities and countries adapt to the changing climate. It includes a gear-shift in international efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions to prevent much greater harm. And it includes adequate preparation for permanent loss and damage inflicted by climate change, including the establishment of a new international mechanism under discussion at the UNFCCC and the recognition of new rights for climate-forced migrants.

We stress that many of these initiatives can and must be delivered through the UNFCCC, - in particular through the legally binding global instrument to be adopted by its 2015 conference. The UNFCCC should remain the central locus of fair global efforts to confront climate change. But given the far-reaching consequences of our ongoing failure to take decisive action in that forum, we are grateful for the opportunity to explain again here today the gravity of the risks we see posed to the international community by unchecked climate change.

We Stand With Philippines

As climate talks enter their second week, the reality of a changing climate is striking home. In the LCA Plenary session Monday, a delegate from the Philippines said “instead of getting ready for Christmas, we may be counting our dead”, referring to the impending landfall of Super Typhoon Bopha.

On Monday night, the storm caused over 40,000 people to flee their homes, and many wait to see the impact of the 16th extreme weather event to batter the Philippines this year. 
 
Meanwhile, ambition remains off the table in Doha. The outcome on loss and damage lacks any mechanism necessary to address bigger issues. Policies limiting polluting industries' drive to blow past our global carbon budget are more than dreams of civil society and nations already bearing the brunt of a warmed world.
 
The time for talk has run out. Yet still the talks stagnate, and those responsible for this crisis stand in the way of justice. Blocking ambition and equity on the global scale is a criminal act. It is, at a minimum, the willful destruction of property and the knowing neglect of human life and loss. The parties who continue to defend business as usual are guilty, and history will judge them as such.
 
We stand with the Philippines and the millions of people around the world paying for the ignorance and arrogance of countries and fossil fuel corporations who put the interests of profits ahead of the needs of people. 
 
On ne lâche pas – we won’t back down.
 
In solidarity,
The #ClimateLegacy Team and YOUNGO
Related Newsletter : 

Bring Out the Tequila

Watching the UNFCCC process from afar, one may well feel that the world is trying to address its carbon addiction by developing a new addiction to endless agenda fights. While many of the countries most responsible for climate change provide excuse upon excuse for woefully inadequate mitigation action, others are putting their shoulders to the wheel and getting on with saving our planet.

On this occasion, ECO wants to celebrate the approval of the Climate Change Law in Mexico, which represents not only an important step for the country, but a clear benchmark for others. This new law helps to give political continuity by building on existing efforts to address climate change. It strengthens the institutional structure to address both mitigation and adaptation by setting a common vision for all sectors of the economy.

Central to the law is the recognition of Mexico's COP15 commitments – namely, a 30% pollution reduction below BAU by 2020 and a 50% reduction by 2050. Furthermore, the new law mandates a share of 35% clean energy in the power sector by 2024. The law also promotes the creation of a Climate Change Fund, which recognizes the need for registry instruments to record and efficiently manage funding from international cooperation, and mandates an allocation of federal budget to this fund (the exact amount is still to be determined).

By accepting the Climate Law, the Mexican legislature has achieved something truly remarkable. Through wide participation by all parts of society to develop the law, Mexico has shown the world that it is possible for any country to make a binding commitment to a better, low-carbon future. The message from this example is clear: countries need not wait until 2015, and definitely not until 2020, to embrace the advantages of low-carbon, climate-resilient sustainable development. If a developing country like Mexico can achieve this, ECO wonders – surely the USA, Canada, Russia and Japan can do the same and more. Action is clearly possible, necessary and extremely urgent. The window for limiting global temperature increases to less than 2°C is closing fast, but Mexico has shown that hope remains. Now, it just remains for other parties to stop talking and start doing.

Topics: 
Region: 

Vulnerable groups are making much progress in adapting to climate change, but where we are in Panama through to Durban?

Wanun Permpibul on flooding in Thailand

Photo 1 - Photo credit: Forests and Farmers Foundation, 2011

Photos 2-4 - Photo credit: HBS Southeast Regional Office, 2011

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

Climate change is already a threat.  Extreme and unprecedented climatic events are affecting poor communities already and they have little capacity to adapt.  They have already been affected by economic and social injustice as well as other difficulties and climate change is adding another burden to their existing problems.  Adaptive capacity needs to be strengthened while longterm adaptation is necessary and must be enhanced.

A few months before the Panama Climate Talks, provinces in the lower Northern Region of Thailand, particularly Pitsanulok Province, were hit severely by floods.  Paddy fields, orchards, houses were flooded and destroyed.  People died and went missing.  Flood levels even rose up to their roofs.  Most of the houses were submerged.  Boats were floating up to the first floor of the house while residents had to stay on the second floor.  Some had to leave their houses temporarily.  Some villagers were bitten by poisonous snakes and scorpions, others were faced with infections on their feet, and other disease.  Not only are their houses and paddy fields inundated, but other resources that could be sources of income are also damaged.

As a matter of fact, villages here are flooded every year during the wet season, but the current floods are extraordinary in the sense that rainfall came two months earlier this year in a very heavy and lasting pattern before the rice could be harvested.  This is the second time for Bang Rakam Subdistrict that the rains have come earlier, the last time was in 2000 and in 1995 for the Jom Thong Subdistrict.  During the floods, villagers could not harvest, and thus were unable to earn any income.  Communities were not warned and informed well in advance enough of the floods and were not able to prepare for it.  Floods have lasted for longer periods of time.  Previously, they lasted for two months, but now it has been almost three months.  The government was trying to solve the floods problem using a traditional top down approach: they flushed out the water from the areas, but then found this created a flooding problem in another area.  

Rather than waiting for humanitarian aid and the government’s help, communities implemented their own responses to the floods and have been adjusting themselves to the climatic changes.  These are their homes for generations and they do not want to leave.  Some couldn’t afford to move elsewhere.  Their responses include changing the crop calendar by starting to grow rice months earlier than usual.  They will have to observe natural signs using their local knowledge to predict the climate pattern each year in order to prevent massive loss to crops.  Some have initiated a rice bank to store traditional rice varieties that are pest and flood tolerant with longer stalks that will not be damaged by floods.  Some have tried to grow different rice varieties in higher land or even in orchard fields.  Some have prepared for food insecurity by recovering endangered food species that are floods resistant.  Also, the pattern of housing architecture has been changed.  Many villagers have lifted their houses higher from the ground to free the flow of water.  Some even have boats to ease their travelling.  They also have learned to store some food and drinking water, and other necessities.

Additionally, they have built their own reservoirs to store water for farm use and nurturing some fish species.  They have looked for alternatives for income generation like catching fish and snakes, during floods.  Some have initiated a communication system to ease information flow during the floods among those located up-, middle- and down-stream river.  The system could also help mobilize immediate needs and supports among each other.  This should be further developed to enhance preparedness and prevent massive losses longterm.  Apart from the immediate responses, communities have been engaged in a planning process for longterm adaptation to future impacts of climatic change.  Initially, they came up with an idea of constructing an improved flood protection, but it would require significant funds and take lots of time.  Also, more research on flood tolerant species is needed.  All these elements for longterm adaptation require funds and external supports.

The Panama Talks are, therefore, important.  The delay in taking ambitious reduction targets would mean more severe and frequent extreme climatic events and poor communities will be hit the most.  As Pitsanulok, Thailand and others are faced now with the impacts, longterm adaptation is really needed.  We need to massively scale-up support for adaptation actions to cover full implementation of National Adaptation Action Strategies and Plans, from immediate to longterm actions, that will deliver regular flows of financial and other support for adaptation planning, implementation and monitoring. These should be in the form of predictable periodic grant installments and help is needed to facilitate, enable and support generation, gathering and dissemination of data, knowledge and experiences, including traditional knowledge on adaptation planning and practices.  Building upon what was agreed in Cancun – the Cancun Adaptation Framework – the creation of an Adaptation Committee under the UNFCCC will have to provide an oversight of streams of adaptation work, where the Committee should comprise members of civil society and experts in each necessary field.  This will have to be achieved in Panama so that it can be finalized in Durban in December.  

Communities are faced with hardship and are simply attempting to survive.  They might or might not know that the disasters and unpredictable patterns of rainfalls are as a result of climate change or anthropogenic emissions, but changes are happening and affecting their livelihoods and most of all, they need to live with these.   Those in Panama are well equipped with all the science, they need to make more progress.  Community voices must be heard.

          
 

Related Event: 

CAN International: Media Advisory – Webcast Notice - December 7th

Negotiations Briefing Update: Cancún Climate Talks

Assessing progress on the Kyoto Protocol, the Climate Fund, and MRV

[Cancún, Mexico] Climate Action Network will host a media briefing to assess progress in the UNFCCC climate negotiations underway in Cancún, Mexico, on Tuesday, December 7, at 10:30 AM local (16:30 GMT), in Room Luna of the Azteca building of the Moon Palace.

NGO experts on the panel will include Alden Meyer, Union of Concerned Scientists; Ailun Yang, Greenpeace China; and Raman Mehta, Climate Action Network South Asia.

What: Briefing update on the UNFCCC climate negotiations in Cancún

Where: UNFCCC Press Conference Room Luna,Moon Palace, Cancún

Webcast Live: http://webcast.cc2010.mx/    (www.unfccc.int)

When: 10:30 AM local (16:30 GMT), Tuesday, December 7, 2010

Who: NGO experts on UNFCCC negotiations

Climate Action Network (CAN) is a global network of over 550 non-governmental organizations working to promote government and individual action to limit human-induced climate change to ecologically sustainable levels.  For more information go to: www.climatenetwork.org.

For more information contact:

Hunter Cutting: +52(1) 998-108-1313

###

Related Event: 

[VOICE] CLIMATE JUSTICE: THE WAY FORWARD FOR LIFE ON EARTH

Climate Change is about survival as well as the right to development. Across Sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, Asia, and the Caribbean, people are facing compounded loss of biodiversity, food insecurity, water shortages, extreme weather conditions, increase in sea level…just to mention a few examples.

The coastal villages in Ghana, the communities living along the bank of the Volta River, dammed at Akosombo are now refuges in their own country. The young kids have to walk several miles searching for water and the list continues…

Here in Cancún, governments will have to go beyond the “business as usual” approach and focus on addressing the root causes of GHG emissions in order to set forward a bold pathway to a fair, ambitious, and legally binding outcome to save mother Earth and allow all the people, particularly children, women and youth to live a life worth living.

The key challenge in Cancún is to continue the process of constructing a strong foundation for a meaningful long term-global action.

Climate sustainability addresses poverty, inequality and environmental degradation through relevant strategies for mitigation, adaptation, finance and technology sharing.

Governments must demonstrate political will and embrace the two track approach: the Convention & Kyoto Protocol for a successful CANCUN outcome. Major long term achievements are needed. CANCUN should be the place where those responsible for climate change commit to reduce greenhouse gases to ensure a sustainable future.

Samuel Dotse

Southern Capacity Building Program Fellow
 

Related Event: 

Christian Aid: It's time for governments to use their financial imaginations - response to UN report on climate change

 

Today’s United Nations report on how to raise $100 billion a year to tackle climate change in poor countries relies too heavily on hopes that the market will help the world’s poorest people cope with global warming and get the clean energy they need, Christian Aid warned today. 



However, the charity also praised suggestions by the UN High-Level Advisory Group on Climate Change Financing that governments should tax the aviation and shipping industries as one way of raising the money needed – and urged governments to back other such innovative sources of public funds. 



‘So far, market responses to climate change have failed to meet the needs of the poorest people in developing countries, who are least responsible but worst affected by climate change,’ said Sol Oyuela, Christian Aid’s Senior Adviser on Climate Change and Poverty. 



‘So it’s important that governments play a key role in funding and regulating climate action. Especially today, when many governments don’t have ambitious climate policies, it is crucial that most if not all the $100 billion comes from new sources of public funding, such as taxes on planes, ships and financial transactions. It’s time for governments to use their financial imaginations.’ 



Christian Aid believes that this is not just a question of who’s most able to protect the most vulnerable families, who lack spending power – it is also a matter of justice. It is rich countries which are overwhelmingly responsible for climate change and it is their governments which should now take responsibility for coming up with the $100 billion. 



Ms Oyuela added: ‘We know that the financial crisis has put huge pressure on public funds around the world difficult but the effects of climate change are so devastating for poor countries – we are talking about worsening  poverty, hunger, conflict and disease – that we cannot ignore their desperate need.’ 



In the UK, Christian Aid believes that there is no excuse for government inaction on climate finance now that the Advisory Group has published its report. If the coalition is committed to tackling climate change and global poverty, then it should take the lead with other rich countries to ensure that the $100 billion comes from innovative sources of public funds. It should also start actually raising the money. 



Ms Oyuela added: ‘We would also like to see the UK government give serious backing to the Advisory Group’s suggestion for a tax on aviation and shipping. Such a tax would have a double benefit: it would put downward pressure on emissions from planes and ships while also raising some of the billions which people living in poverty urgently need.



‘Christian Aid has one other message for the UK government: every penny of the money that we contribute towards the $100 billion should be clearly additional to the funds we already spend on international development. 



‘Climate funding is a matter of justice, not charity. The men, women and children who currently benefit from UK aid spending should not be forced to pay our contribution towards global climate funds, which is what will happen if ministers raid the aid budget to pay for climate change.’ 





- Ends -

For more information and to arrange an interview with Sol Oyuela, please contact Rachel Baird on 0207 523 2446, 07545 501 749 orrbaird@christian-aid.org

Topics: 
Related Member Organization: 

Oxfam: UN report shows climate funds can be raised without costing the taxpayer

A new report from the UN’s High-level Advisory Group on Climate Change Financing (AGF) shows that raising the public money to help poor countries protect themselves from climate change is possible without costing the taxpayer, Oxfam told the UK government today.

“This report clearly shows that money to tackle climate change and help poor communities adapt can be raised without dipping into taxpayers’ pockets. The next step is for political leaders to lay out a clear roadmap for making this funding a reality.” said Tracy Carty, Oxfam Climate Change Policy Advisor.

The AGF was established by the UN Secretary General in February 2010 to advise on how developed countries could deliver on their promise to raise $100bn per year to help poor countries adapt to a changing climate and reduce emissions.

The sources of money identified in the report must now be championed by Chris Huhne, Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, and other members of the AGF group.

“Clear backing from the UK Government will be essential for fair levies on uncapped emissions in international shipping and aviation and a Robin Hood Tax on banks with money earmarked for climate change. But in order to do so the UK must urgently clarify its position on these crucial sources of public finance identified in the AGF report.” said Carty.

Countries meeting at the UN climate change talks in Cancun later this month must now establish a global climate fund to manage this money and agree a process for deciding how they will finance it by the next climate summit in South Africa in 2011. By using these innovative sources, governments can raise enough money from public sources without siphoning from existing development aid money. As some members of the UN panel recognized, private finance cannot meet the needs of developing countries for adaptation.

Carty said: “The $100bn committed to in the Copenhagen Accord must come from public sources of funding rather than private to ensure it reaches communities desperately in need of money to help them adapt to climate change and develop in a low carbon way.”

Oxfam warned that the report’s inclusion of the World Bank as a potential finance source should not be used to undermine international negotiations on the establishment of a new, independent global climate fund that is fair and accessible. For the fund to be effective poor countries must have a say in decisions on how the money is managed and at least half of the funding should address climate change impacts on the most vulnerable.

Topics: 
Region: 
Related Member Organization: 

CANCUN BUILDING BLOCKS - Summary - Oct 2010

Cancun Building Blocks: Essential steps on the road to a fair, ambitious & binding deal outlines the balanced package of outcomes from Cancun, and the benchmark by which CAN’s 500 member organisations, and their millions of supporters, will judge the Cancun negotiations.

These building blocks were chosen not only because they provide a pathway for preventing catastrophic climate change but also because they pave a road which can be travelled, even taking into account political constraints. 

Success in Cancun will require meaningful progress in each area, agree­ment to work toward a legally binding deal in both tracks, including an indication that the Kyoto Protocol will continue, work plans agreed on each key area, and a long term vision for future negotiations.

Cancun Building Blocks include:

  • Agree a shared vision that keeps below 1.5o C warming, links it to the short and long term actions of Parties.
  • Establish a new climate fund along with a governance structure that is transparent, regionally balanced and ensures the COP decides policies, programme priorities and eligibility criteria. Agree on a process to se­cure sufficient scale and sources of finance.
  • Establish an adaptation framework along with its institutions, goals and princi­ples and a mandate to agree a mechanism on loss and damage.
  • Put in place a technology executive committee and provide a mandate to agree measurable objectives and plans.
  • Agree to stop deforestation and degrada­tion of natural forests and related emissions completely by 2020, and ensure sufficient finance to meet this goal.
  • Implement the roll-out of a capacity building program.
  • Acknowledge the gigatonne gap be­tween current pledges and science-based targets, and ensure the gap will be closed in the process going forward.
  • Agree a mandate to negotiate by COP17 individual emission reduction commitments for industrialised countries that match an aggregate reduction target of more than 40% below 1990 levels by 2020.
  • Agree that each developed country will produce a Zero Carbon Action Plan by 2012.Minimise loopholes by adopting LULUCF rules that deliver emission reduc­tions from the forestry and land use sectors; market mechanism rules that prevent double counting of emission reductions or finance; and banking rules that minimise damage from ‘hot air’ (surplus AAUs).
  • Agree on producing climate-resilient Low Carbon Action Plans for developing countries, and establish a mechanism to match NAMAs with support. Mandate SBI and SBSTA to develop MRV guidelines for adoption in COP17.
  • Commission at COP 16 a technical pa­per to explore the mitigation required to keep warming below 1.5°C, and outline a process to negotiate how that effort will be shared between countries.
  • Agree a clear mandate that ensures that we get a full fair, ambitious and binding (FAB) deal at COP 17 in South Africa – one that includes the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol.
Related Event: 

Estimating least-developed countries’ vulnerability to climate-related extreme events over the next 50 years - 2010

 

When will least developed countries be most vulnerable to climate change, given the influence of projected socio-economic development? The question is important, not least because current levels of international assistance to support adaptation lag more than an order of magnitude below what analysts estimate to be needed, and scaling up support could take many years. In this paper, we examine this question using an empirically derived model of human losses to climate-related extreme events, as an indicator of vulnerability and the need for adaptation assistance. We develop a set of 50-year scenarios for these losses in one country, Mozambique, using high-resolution climate projections, and then extend the results to a sample of 23 least-developed countries. Our approach takes into account both potential changes in countries’ exposure to
climatic extreme events, and socio-economic development trends that influence countries’ own adaptive capacities. Our results suggest that the effects of socio-economic development trends may begin to offset rising climate exposure in the second quarter of the century, and that it is in the period between now and then that vulnerability will rise most quickly. This implies an urgency to the need for international assistance to finance adaptation. 

Pages

Subscribe to Tag: climate change