Of COP26, Africa and climate adaptation

By Mark Mwandosya   The 26th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Convention on Climate Change (COP26) met in Glasgow this November 2021. The expectations are high. I must add that it depends on one’s perception of success when it comes to global negotiations on climate change. My anticipation is measured and is […]

By Mark Mwandosya

 

The 26th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Convention on Climate Change (COP26) met in Glasgow this November 2021. The expectations are high. I must add that it depends on one’s perception of success when it comes to global negotiations on climate change. My anticipation is measured and is borne out of a long experience of participating in a number of Conferences of the Parties. I had the unenviable, yet the unique task of chairing the group of 133+ countries, the Group of 77 (G77) and speaking for the G77 and China in 1997 during the negotiations, which led to the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol, a multilateral instrument that was the precursor to the Paris Agreement.

In 1985, scientists from across the world met in Villach, Austria under the auspices of the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the International Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU), in order to discuss the effect of greenhouse gases on the climate. They concluded that climate change was plausible and its occurrence a serious probability. From then onwards, a number of studies and meetings have supported these conclusions. Policies for the reduction of greenhouse gases (mitigation), and strategies to minimise the impact of climate change (adaptation) were proposed. These efforts led to the establishment of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 1988 and the inception of World Climate Conferences. The United Nations took the lead in the matter and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was signed by 154 states in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil at the ‘Earth Summit’ held in June 1992.

The main objective of these negotiations is to arrive at a global consensus on the setting of and agreeing upon, the temperature increase beyond which the earth would be propelled into catastrophic circumstances, and how to adapt to the impacts of climate change that are now discernible.

The ongoing multilateral discussions on climate change have resulted from the decisions taken at COP1, and specifically Decision 1 of COP1 (the Berlin Mandate). COP1 reviewed the implementation by member states of their obligations under the Convention and found them to be inadequate in the quest to stabilise the global climate system. The Conference, therefore, decided to kick-start a process to strengthen the commitments of developed countries, through the setting of quantified limitation and reduction objectives, within specified timeframes. 

The negotiations during the subsequent COPs have centred on the review of the commitments and obligations of member states in furtherance of the objective of the Convention, and informed by science. The foregoing provides the context for the COP26 meeting in Glasgow.

The industrialised world is responsible for historic emissions concentrations. The Kyoto Protocol did set quantified limitation and reduction objectives within specified timeframes for them. However, even at that early stage, it was realised that emerging nations, such as China and India, were on a trajectory to overtake developed nations in ‘current emissions’.  The Paris Agreement has as its goal to limit global warming to well below 2 degrees, preferably to 1.5 degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial levels. Greenhouse gas emissions peaking before, and neutrality by 2050, are central to the achievement of the temperature goal. Unlike the Kyoto Protocol, which targeted industrialised countries only in greenhouse gas mitigation, the Paris Agreement embraces all nations, within the remit of the Convention. 

Poverty reduction is the paramount objective of Africa, and developing countries in general. Climate change has become an added burden. Greenhouse gas emissions from them are minimal. According to the Brookings Institute, Africa contributes about 3.8 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. The consequences of climate change, however, are more marked and more severe in developing countries due to their inability to meet the costs of vulnerability and adaptation. 

The Paris Agreement adopts the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities among nations by recognising that peaking, and greenhouse gas emissions neutrality, will take longer for developing countries to achieve.

Central in the discussions in Glasgow is the authenticity of goals set by industrialised countries to attain greenhouse gas emission peaking and neutrality.  The phasing out of coal is bound to feature prominently. Low to zero-carbon technologies (and the transition to renewable energy technologies) and other solutions, which are required in mitigating climate change, should form an important part of the negotiations. It is worthwhile to bear in mind that the development and ownership of the technologies is largely the preserve of developed countries. 

Developing countries comprise of a disparate group. They include, among others: India and China; highly populated, huge economies and high greenhouse gas emitting countries; and the continent of Africa. The classification also includes petroleum-producing countries, mainly members of the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and associated petroleum producers. The main concern of the latter group relates to the sustainability of their economies in the light of the future drop in demand for petroleum. Small island states are highly vulnerable to seawater level rise. They are, and rightly so, the conscience of the world when it comes to forcing the pace of negotiations. They are likely to demand, as they have done so often, that nations have to take drastic actions, urgently, in order to avert a looming catastrophe. 

Many foreigners consider Africa to be or think that it is a country. Perhaps it should be. It is a continent comprising of 55 countries of different sizes, geography, natural resources, and wealth and poverty levels. According to the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 46 countries are categorised as Least Developing Countries (LDCs). Of these, 33 countries are in Africa. LDCs are, “low-income countries confronting severe structural impediments to sustainable development. They are highly vulnerable to economic and environmental shocks and have low levels of human assets”.

Manifestations of long-term climate impacts in Africa are many. They include: the steady expansion of the Sahara Desert; the shrinking of Lake Chad by a staggering 95% between 1963 and 1998; the severe floods of Sudan and South Sudan; the drying up of the Lake Faguibine system in Mali; the disappearance of Maziwe Island in the Indian Ocean in coastal Tanzania; the shrinking of the glacier on Mount Kilimanjaro; and other impacts. Internecine conflicts are now more climate-related than in the past, taking the form of clashes between cattle herders and farmers.

Africa has been resilient to disasters, human -induced and natural. However, climate change, resulting from human-induced global warming is upsetting life patterns and livelihood.

Adaptation to climate change has to be the priority of African governments at national and local levels. Climate change should not be treated as a subject or a discipline that requires separate considerations. It should be part of sustainable development. Mainstreaming climate change throughout the entire economy is imperative.

A financing mechanism has been established through the Paris Agreement framework, in order to assist developing countries to build the resilience to adapt to the impacts of climate change. Africa, however, has to be wary of the prospects of benefitting from the arrangement. Examples of developed countries reneging on their commitments are many. Through the United Nations, and the Monterrey Consensus, in particular, they have committed to set aside 0.7 percent of their Gross National Product (GNP) for development assistance to developing countries, and 0.15 to 0.2 percent to least developing countries.  Thus far, only a handful have done so. If the global COVID-19 vaccine and vaccination disparity and inequity is anything to go by, in order to create resilience and adaptation to climate change, Africa has no choice but to pull itself by its own bootstraps.

 Prof. Mwandosy is a  former Minister of the United Republic of Tanzania, and currently Chairman of Stanbic Bank Tanzania Ltd.