While I write this blog, there is an intense negotiation happening at the COP 27 with only hours left. The topic of Loss and Damage (L&D) climate finance has made its way into the COP agenda for discussion for the first time. While it became the hot topic of negotiation over the last two days, many may not realize that it has been a point of discussion for over three decades.
The concept of loss and damage first appeared during the global climate change negotiations in 1991, when Vanuatu proposed an international insurance pool. It was rejected back then. But I have to appreciate the persistence of this small Pacific nation as it did not settle to the outcome and instead moved the International Court of Justice. Given what I hear, it will also be moving the UN General Assembly shortly.
Currently, at the COP 27, the G77 Bloc and China have proposed the establishment of a new Loss and Damage Facility to provide finance to countries inflicted by climate disasters. Let us not think of this as charity; it is Climate Justice. While the world had its chance to mitigate climate change, we kept discussing and deferring decisions. The minute we crossed that line, we initiated frantic discussions on limiting global temperature rise to 1.5°C and on adaptation and resilience. But as climate disasters are increasing today and possibly heading towards catastrophic proportions, we are NOW reaching a consensus on funding loss and damage. It was our own making. If my granny was around, while she may not have understood all this, she’d certainly have said “A stitch in time would have saved many”. What happened in Pakistan and in many other countries worldwide in recent times is a result of the 1.1°C warming scenario. So embrace for the next level.
As I sit at the COP 27 venue and listen to what is happening around, I hear that the ask from the G77 Bloc and China is to take a concrete decision on institutionalizing the Loss and Damage Facility while the modalities can be finalized later. But one must bear in mind that it was during the last few hours of the COP 21 in Paris when a commitment was made. We see where we are even after all these years. The individual country commitments does not add up anywhere near the pathway to the 1.5°C. I fear that we do not have a clear collective global political leadership to this effect. I understand that there are far too many suffixes to “Leadership”.
While this COP was supposed to be a COP that chalked out the path from Commitments to Action, till now, it seems more like a procedural COP. If a decision on the Loss and Damage Facility does not happen in the next few hours, we continue to meet, discuss, negotiate and quite expectedly defer our decision.
While Denmark and Scotland became the first countries in the build-up to this COP 27 that de-tabooed Loss and Damage commitments, the voices of other developed countries have not been encouraging enough. While some of them are warming up to this, there are quite a few that are not in favour of this. Bringing this matter into the COP agenda in itself has been a big effort. At this juncture, not coming to a decision to establish the facility will only strengthen the view that COP is primarily dominated by the voices of the Global North.
Loss and Damage needs to be looked at through the lens of responsibility for historical emissions. It is about Climate Justice for those who are impacted and will be impacted. Hope the next few hours will deliver an appeasement with the establishment of the facility. Of course, implementation on several matters established at the COP is still ………….
