COP27: World Leaders Haven’t Done Enough
Photo Courtesy: Flickr
Last Sunday saw the conclusion of the Sharm el-Sheikh Climate Change Conference, also known as the 27th Conference of the Parties, or COP27. Hosted in the idyllic Egyptian resort town and attended by delegates from almost 200 countries, the conference commenced on the 6th of November against a backdrop of increasingly dire climate crises, such as this year’s Pakistan floods and the longstanding East African drought.
Egypt based the conference on the theme of ‘implementation,’ stating that it would emphasise putting plans into action, as opposed to empty talk. Climate activists were hoping for more progress from last year’s COP26, which saw commitments being made to phase down coal by 2030, but also revealed the failure of many developed countries to deliver adequate funds to support developing countries in adapting to climate change. COP27, however, might be considered a disappointment on the whole.
The agreement on a ‘loss and damage’ fund has been considered the greatest—and perhaps the only—victory of COP27. This is a fund that will be established to support the most vulnerable lower-income countries in adapting to the ‘loss and damage,’ or adverse impacts, brought on by the climate crisis. This agreement was reached after the European Union reversed its stance on the fund, despite adamantly opposing it at the start of the Conference. Notably, the USA also expressed support for the fund after several years of refusing to cooperate with attempts to curb the effects of climate change, a reversal likely brought on by the departure of Trump.
Countries have only acknowledged, however, that this fund should exist; despite the overarching ‘implementation’ theme of COP27, no details have been agreed on as to who will be paying, or how much. China, currently the greatest CO₂ emitter in the world, has not committed to paying into the fund, with delegate Xie Zhenhua stating that ‘it is not the obligation of China to provide financial support.’ This means that the actual fund remains a distant concept for now.
Other signs of progress have come too late as well. The COP27 final implementation plan includes first-ever mentions of food, tipping points (climate thresholds that will bring about destructive and irreversible changes if crossed), rivers, and nature-based solutions. Climate crises, however, are already in full swing. After the fourth consecutive year of failing rains, 10.7 million people now face extreme hunger across Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, and Somaliland. This late August, torrential monsoon rains killed over a thousand people in Pakistan. Wealthier countries, too, have been unable to escape the effects of climate change, with summer wildfires in Europe incinerating an area of land the size of Azerbaijan. That people would celebrate the first mention of food shortages in the history of COPs, when food crises have persisted for years, seems puzzling.
Still more concerning are the signs of potential regression. Last year in Glasgow, countries aimed to keep the global temperature rise below 1.5°C, but in COP27 this was almost pushed back, with some suggesting the more vague term ‘well-below 2°C.’ In the final deal, the section on energy mentions endorsing ‘low-emissions energy,’ a glaring loophole that allows countries to increase their reliance on natural gas—a fossil fuel that might be considered lower-emissions but is nonetheless unsustainable. The Egyptian presidency also completely ignored calls from over 80 countries to strengthen the language used in the Glasgow agreement from a ‘phasing down of coal’ to a ‘phasing out of fossil fuels,’ and the final implementation plan now reads exactly the same as it did in Glasgow. Several delegates expressed frustration over the refusal of oil-producing states such as Saudi Arabia—a close ally of Egypt—to cooperate with attempts to shift to renewable energy. Tuvalu finance minister Seve Paeniu expressed his ‘deep regret and disappointment,’ and Glasgow COP26 president Alok Sharma walked out of a negotiating room in anger. In terms of energy, COP27 has largely left the world where it was a year ago, and it has proved a struggle to even prevent regressing back to less ambitious plans, let alone make progress.
Overall, COP27 has fallen drastically short of expectations; the historical ‘loss and damage’ agreement is a consolation, but a paltry one. It is discouraging to think that it has taken twenty-seven global conferences to agree on the fact that developing countries should be compensated for situations created by wealthy countries. António Guterres, secretary general of the UN, has stated that ‘our planet is still in the emergency room.’ Rather than resuscitating it, world leaders seem to be playing the role of a dismissive clinic doctor; procrastinating treatment year after year.