The COP27 which opens this Sunday, November 6 in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, resonates particularly on the African continent, one of the most affected by global warming. Organized each year on a different continent, the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Convention on Climate Change is to be held until November 18. Nearly 200 country representatives are expected to gather around the negotiating table, including a hundred heads of state. On the order of priorities for this twenty-seventh COP, the question of climate change finance figures by far, as well as that of “losses and damages” (or losses and damages). Or the irreversible consequences of climate change which are already affecting a major part of the globe.
The Egyptian presidency has already reiterated its desire to make COP27 the conference for the implementation of the Paris Agreement, adopted seven years ago at COP21, one of the key objectives of which is to reduce emissions emissions of greenhouse gases with the aim of limiting global warming to 2°C this century. Also, the Paris Agreement had formulated the objective of providing developing countries financial resources “to mitigate climate change, build resilience and increase capacity to adapt to the effects produced by these changes”. An increasingly pressing ambition from the point of view of developing countries, which intend to push the issue of financing global warming in the discussions.
Methods of financing global warming, a major issue
“The question of funding is central, it is what will determine the success or otherwise of this COP27”, immediately announced to L’Express Aïssatou Diouf, advocacy manager for the NGO Enda Energie. The subject is not new for a COP, but the expectations are growing, as the commitments made years ago are not respected.
In 2009, during the COP in Copenhagen, the countries of the North took the decision to release an envelope of 100 billion dollars per year, by 2020, to help the countries of the South to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. greenhouses, but also to develop their economy with as little recourse as possible to fossil fuels and support them in their adaptation to climate change. However in 2020, only 83 billion dollars per year were put on the table. “And according to forecasts, the 100 billion dollars should only be reached in 2023”, comments Fanny Petitbon, of the NGO Care. “It’s too slow and not substantial enough. Because in reality, the definition of 100 billion dollars to help developing countries was at the time made with a wet finger,” she continues. As proof, Fanny Petitbon cites a UN report published last week. The document indicates that developing countries need 340 billion dollars a year to adapt to extreme weather conditions. “One of the challenges of this COP on the financing of global warming will therefore revolve around keeping this promise of 100 billion as soon as possible”, explains the specialist. And to add: “There should also be discussions on the fact of transforming this aid into donations from the countries of the North, which are historically at the origin of the largest part of pollution, and to stop the lending mechanism that is now in place”.
In addition, Alden Meyer, a former player in climate negotiations, today at the E3G think tank, recently recalled, during a press meeting of the European climate foundation, that “governments have mobilized hundreds, if not It’s trillions of dollars to respond to the Covid crisis, to the war in Ukraine. Look at the annual budget of the developed countries. It’s not a question of money, it’s above all a question of will Politics”.
Develop a “loss and damage” financing mechanism?
The other major main issue of this COP27, for the moment on the agenda, seems to be that of the question of the financing of “losses and damage”, brought to the forefront at the previous conference of parties in Glasgow last year. “This notion brings us back to the already irreversible impacts of global warming, such as the disappearance of islands and the loss of human lives. It also points to the monumental damage caused by extreme phenomena, which require and will require major investments” , explains Fanny Petitbon.
“This is a subject that we have been talking about for several decades, but of which we only had political recognition during COP26”, recognizes Aïssatou Diouf. In 2021, the participants also launched the “Glasgow dialogue”, supposed to allow developing countries to discuss with developed countries the methods of financing activities aimed at avoiding loss and damage linked to the adverse effects of climate change. , minimize and remedy them. It should last three years. Vulnerable countries are thus asking that loss and damage be considered as the third pillar of the global fight against global warming, after mitigation (or the reduction of greenhouse gases) and adaptation. For many countries requesting this measure, the idea would be to set up a financing mechanism additional to that of the 100 billion dollars per year, and in the form of donations. “It is inconceivable that our countries are going into debt again to deal with losses and damages that they have not caused”, abounds Aïssatou Diouf.
But the countries of the North, led by the United States and the European Union, have always been hesitant about the establishment of such a financing mechanism, mentioned for the first time more than thirty years ago by the Pacific islands of Vanuatu in the face of to the inevitable rising waters. “The red line of the EU and the United States, in particular, is that they do not want to be held legally responsible for paying to offset their greenhouse gas emissions”, assures Fanny Petitbon. Nevertheless, this is the first time that the specialist from the NGO Care has observed real more or less unofficial talks on the issue of loss and damage. “It becomes a political issue. And a subject, which was usually dealt with by negotiators or technical representatives of ministries, has become a subject where heads of state and ministers will have to position themselves”, she opines. .
For its part, France defends an open position on the subject but considers that a consensus must still be found on the most effective means of tackling it. From France’s point of view, opening a new fund might not be the only solution, given that funding already exists for prevention and resilience. For the time being, the subject of loss and damage is not yet officially on the agenda. “But it would be risky for the developed countries to oppose it, because it would contribute to eroding a little more the confidence between the north and the south”, concludes Fanny Petitbon.