MOHAMED EL-ASHRY 7/12/2015

Climate change, once considered an issue for the future, has now moved firmly into the present. A few days before a new climate change deal is due to be agreed in Paris, the question is no longer whether there will be an agreement but what shape and how strong it will be. Compared to the debacle in Copenhagen in 2009, the negotiations in Paris, while contentious at times, seem to be on track toward a deal. The major breakthrough during the first week was China’s acceptance of a review of progress every 5 years, and the United States’ acceptance of some sort of legally binding agreement. The details are to be hammered out this coming week.The Kyoto Protocol divided the world into rich and poor. Rich countries would pursue emission cuts, while developing countries were not obliged to take action. Since then, it has become clear that carbon emissions of rapidly growing economies, such as China’s and India’s, were increasing at a pace that would offset emission cuts by developed countries. In fact, China replaced the U.S. as the world’s largest emitter of carbon-dioxide. It became clear that all countries needed to contribute to a solution.

To reach a new agreement, almost 180 countries, representing about 95 percent of global Greenhouse Gases (GHG) emissions, have submitted national climate action plans known as “Intended Nationally Determined Contributions” or INDCs. These cover the period between 2020, when the agreement will enter into force, and 2030. Almost all Arab countries submitted their pledges, conditional on receiving compensation and technology transfer. The INDCs will make up the core of the final agreement.

Almost 30 core issues in the draft agreement remain unresolved. The five major contentious problems are:

First, a long-term global target: In Cancun in 2010, the international community agreed that the rise in temperature until the end of the century should stay below 2 degrees Celsius. Since climate change is a long-term problem, it cannot be addressed successfully through short-term voluntary actions. The draft agreement contains a number of proposals for a long-term mitigation goal, ranging from “de-carbonization” of the global economy by the end of the century to a move toward 100 percent renewable energy by 2050.

Second, establishing a carbon price: Putting a price on carbon is an essential foundation for the transition to a low- or zero-carbon, climate resilient economy. This would create incentives to save energy and promote a shift to greener investments, especially in renewable energy. Revamping subsidies on electricity and fuel not only would promote efficiency, but would also give certainty and predictability for long-term investment in climate-friendly development. Carbon pricing policies already exist in about 40 countries, including China. While oil exporting countries have embarked, at different levels, on energy efficiency programs and a review of subsidy systems, they are still resisting the idea of carbon pricing.

Third, monitoring, review and assessment: A critical element of a climate agreement’s effective implementation is an independent and transparent framework for tracking progress in implementation of the INDCs as well as financial pledges. Developing countries, led by China, had objected to a formal, independent mechanism for monitoring and reviewing implementation of national plans as well as progress in achieving long-term goals. However, China recently announced that it would accept five-year reviews of overall progress toward agreed goals and strengthened action as needed. Arab negotiators are generally opposing independent monitoring, while Europeans are leading the drive for a binding deal.

Fourth, climate finance: Finance is the most contentious issue for finalizing an agreement in Paris. Developing countries want wording that clearly establishes the responsibility of developed countries to achieve the goal of $100 billion annually by 2020. Developed countries on the other hand have proposed language that is short on details with less focus on their responsibilities. Meanwhile, pledges to the Green Climate Fund by developed countries amount to about $20 billion, a fraction of the pledged target. It is interesting that one-fourth of the proposed emission reductions by some developing countries are conditional on receiving finance and technology from developed countries.

Fifth, loss and damage: Equally contentious is the issue of loss and damage from climate change. Island states and other vulnerable countries, as in sub-Saharan Africa, are currently experiencing adverse impacts from extreme weather events that experts say are worsened by carbon emissions already in the atmosphere. They want a binding agreement with high targets and provisions that would allow them to seek compensation. This puts the group of most vulnerable countries in confrontation not only with the U.S. and some developed countries, but also with China-led states within the Group of 77.

Whatever the shortcomings may be, the Paris agreement will be a key step for collective action on climate change. That is precisely why it is essential as part of the agreement to periodically review implementation results and for nations to commit to new emission reduction plans every five years.

Reports of the Arab Forum for Environment and Development have repeatedly shown that the Arab region is most vulnerable to the diverse impacts of climate change, especially drought, dwindling freshwater resources and sea-level rise. Those findings were confirmed recently in a study by researchers from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who warned that if the increase in global temperature was not halted, the Arab region, especially the Gulf countries, would suffer heat waves beyond the limits of human survival by 2070. This is enough reason for Arab countries to support a strong climate deal, as they have much to benefit from.

Mohamed El-Ashry is a senior fellow at the UN Foundation, deputy chairman of the Arab Forum for Environment and Development, and a former CEO of Global Environment Facility (GEF). Najib Saab is secretary general of AFED and editor of its annual reports on the State of Arab Environment.

http://www.afedmag.com/english/mountada-albia-details.aspx?id=63