By Elisa Jiménez Alonso
Unsurprisingly, the urgency to settle on the so-called “Paris rulebook” meant adaptation and climate risks were not front and centre on the agenda of the 24th Conference of Parties (COP24) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). While some progress was made on adaptation finance and how countries report their adaptation efforts, loss and damage fell short once again.
Mixed feelings in coal country
With a little delay, COP24 ended on Saturday evening in Katowice, Poland. The UN climate conference took place in the heart of Poland’s coal mining industry and was not without controversy. This ranged from coal being used as decoration in one of the pavilions to the US, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait joining forces to water down the impact of the findings of the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report on the impacts of 1.5 degrees of global warming.
The overall reactions to the outcomes of the conference so far have been mixed. On the one hand, the Paris rulebook was agreed upon, which is seen as an important step given that the document sets out the implementation of the Paris Agreement. However, after a year of unprecedented climate-related extreme events and very stark warnings from the IPCC, many criticise the lack of climate ambition coming out of this year’s climate talks.
Naoyuki Yamagishi, climate and energy lead for WWF Japan, said about the lack of ambition that he was “slightly disappointed because it’s not clear from that decision that the parties are supposed to increase their ambition by 2020. There are bits and pieces in the entire decision which as a package conveys the message of enhancing ambition by 2020, but the key paragraph doesn’t say that in one package.”
Communicating adaptation progress
Parties agreed on how countries should report their adaptation efforts, noting that adaptation is intrinsically linked to sustainable development, including agreements such as the Sustainable Development Goals and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction. The text notes that the purpose of adaptation communication is to:
- Increase the visibility and profile of adaptation and its balance with mitigation;
- Strengthen adaptation action and support for developing countries;
- Provide input to the global stocktake; and
- Enhance learning and understanding of adaptation needs and actions.
While the decision outlines the elements of adaptation communications, which range from climate risks and adaptation plan implementation to gender-responsive adaptation action, it also requests the Adaptation Committee and the IPCC Working Group II (adaptation) to provide supplementary guidance on adaptation communication for the voluntary use by parties by June 2022.
Increasing adaptation finance
It was confirmed at COP24 that the Adaptation Fund would serve the Paris Agreement. A total $129 million were pledged to the fund, with the largest share coming from Germany and leading to the highest annual fundraising the fund has ever seen. Germany was also the first country to announce a concrete amount for the replenishment of the Green Climate Fund, pledging $1.5 billion.
During this year’s conference World Bank also announced that it will significantly boost its adaptation spending for the period 2021-2050. The Bank aims to double its current level of climate spending, committing US$ 200 billion to support countries to take ambitious action on climate change. The new plan significantly increases support for adaptation and resilience, matching adaptation and mitigation spending for the first time.
Acclimatise also organised a side event together with the European Investment Bank and the Global Reporting Initiative on adaptation finance and the recommendations released by the Financial Stability Board (FSB) Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD). The event discussed how physical climate-related disclosures are part of an iterative process and constitute a learning exercise for corporations and financial institutions. Multilateral development banks have a role to play in ensuring that emerging economies are not left behind as new regulatory and market practices on climate-related disclosures emerge.
Loss and damage – acknowledged but not with the necessary weight
Always a contentious issue at the UN climate conferences, loss and damage was added to the rulebook, though with less weight than vulnerable countries had hoped. The global stocktake rules, which track countries’ progress towards the long-term goals set out in the Paris Agreement, also include loss and damage. The section, which almost ended up being a footnote, now says countries “may take into account, as appropriate…efforts to avert, minimise and address loss and damage associated with the adverse effects of climate change.”
The issue was also picked up in the transparency rules, which describe the frequency, level of detail, and type of information countries need to report back. However, this section is also rather weak in its wording stating countries “may provide, as appropriate, information related to enhancing understanding, action and support, on a cooperative and facilitative basis, to avert, minimize and address loss and damage associated with climate change impacts, taking into account projected changes in climate-related risks, vulnerabilities, adaptive capacities and exposure…”
Where is the real change coming from?
As mentioned before, many argued that the progress in this year’s COP was somewhat lukewarm even though the Paris rulebook was agreed. Real and urgent ambition to mitigate and adapt to climate change gets watered down in an effort to appease delegations from almost 200 countries. And while these negotiations are important in order to solve a global issue and shape policies around the world, change is also likely to come from efforts away from the UNFCCC talks. Be it cities building their resilience around the world or companies starting to follow the TCFD recommendations – more specialised initiatives have great transformative potential.
However, this should not imply that countries at next year’s COP, which will take place in Chile, should not raise their climate ambitions, on the contrary. Climate change can only be managed properly if all levels of society pursue the same goal.