Dr. Arvind Kumar*
We are in a race against time in this climate emergency. Governments must use the time and opportunity to prepare for an ambitious outcome at COP28 that is in line with the scale of the climate crisis we face. This means a clear plan to end the dependence on fossil fuels – oil, gas and coal – and to deliver support to those impacted by climate disasters by delivering more adaptation finance and ensuring the operationalisation of the Loss and Damage fund. The Global Stock take must serve as a moment of accountability and lay out a roadmap for updated and enhanced national climate targets that will keep global warming below 1.5 degrees. Here at the Bonn Climate Change Conference 2023 (SB58), “transformational adaptation” and “Just trasition” is the phrase echoing around the corridors and assembly rooms. Everyone recognizes the challenges associated with planning and implementing these actions, such as the inaccessibility of finance and the short-term nature of project-based cycles. These issues result in efforts that, being incremental and small in scale, often fall far short of what is needed to manage escalating climate risk in our interconnected world.
At SB 58 the climate Mitigation Work Plan’s co-chairs have announced that “accelerating just energy transition” will be the topic of focus in 2023. Deliberations began with a Global Dialogue, followed by an Investment-Focused Event. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is clearly setting out what needs to happen at a collective level, but the MWP ought to advance multilateral discussions on the “how” and dive in deeper into countries’ experiences. These first events aim to provide a new setup, broadening the participation beyond traditional negotiation circles to make space for the practitioners in charge of the domestic energy transition, civil society experts and financiers. They also innovate in terms of facilitating matchmaking to help countries get their projects off the ground or providing space for regional discussions. But developing countries face specific barriers which must be brought to the fore. Discussions around the falling costs of renewable energy around the world often neglect the high cost of capital, for example, that makes it unaffordable in many developing countries.
Just Transitions
Estimates suggests that unsubsidised solar power costs ~140 per cent more in Ghana than in the US solely because of differentials in cost of capital. According to the IEA, financing costs can be up to seven times higher in emerging and developing economies compared with the US and Europe. The financial barriers to the energy transition including cost of capital were discussed in specific breakout groups on the second day of the Global Dialogue to allow more interaction between participants. These discussions will be reflected in reports under the MWP, but there is nothing preventing us from connecting the dots with efforts led in other fora — for instance highlighting the IRENA-led work on cost of capital for clean energy for India’s G20 Presidency, or other ideas discussed in the run-up to Summit on a New Global Financial Pact taking place in Paris in June.
While the focus on a just energy transition is a good start to the year’s first major climate negotiation, there is scope for agreements to deviate away from equity considerations once we start discussing pathways, financing packages, and collective goals. First and foremost, the energy transition itself must be equitable. Many rich countries, who are also historical polluters, have transitioned from coal to natural gas — which is cleaner but is still a fossil fuel. Developed countries must rapidly reduce their use of coal, oil, and natural gas, and also reduce energy demand through efficiency measures and appropriate behaviour change. Large developing countries like India, South Africa, Vietnam, and Indonesia derive more than 75 per cent of their primary energy from fossil fuels today. It is not easy to transition away from them, especially when energy demand is still growing. Moreover, these countries have lower per capita energy use than the developed world and must balance their need for economic development with their commitment to reducing emissions.
Road to COP28
The challenge is to find a way to accommodate energy needs without compromising development goals or exacerbating climate change. For this, they must domestically create sectoral pathways for decarbonisation, for not just the power sector, but also for hard-to abate industrial sectors and transport. This will enable the creation of clear asks or projects where international financing can be demanded and directed. We have to support the setting of a global renewable energy target. The developed world needs to take the lead and add vast amounts of RE capacity while simultaneously phasing out fossil fuels. The developing world cannot sit back — it needs to scale up RE as well, but to make that possible adequate finance and technology support is required from developed countries. Concessional financing with as little dependence on debt-creating instruments as possible is needed to accelerate the transition in developing countries. This will help developing countries reduce fossil dependence, and also cushion their economies from taxation regimes like carbon border taxes that can reduce the competitiveness of commodities made from dirty power. Thus, rather than primarily placing demands or sticks on phasing out coal, JET-P deals must become the carrot to grow clean energy infrastructure in the developing world.
The informal consultations on the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) have hit major roadblocks by the end of the first week of negotiations, even after a decently successful sixth workshop under the Glasgow Sharm El Sheikh (GlaSS) Work Programme for GGA on June 4 and 5, 2023 at the Subsidiary Bodies 58 in Bonn, Germany. The path towards the adoption of the GGA framework at the 28th Conference of Parties (COP28) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Dubai, also essential for the Global Stock Take (GST) process, looks muddier than before. This, even when many developing countries are calling for a text to come out of SB 58 on GGA, for it to be adopted at COP28. The GGA is being framed as a global target for countries and communities to aspire and take guidance from, similar to the temperature target of 1.5 degrees Celsius under the 2015 Paris Agreement. It is challenging to frame a singular global target for measures taken by communities and countries to adapt to the ongoing impacts of human-induced climate change.
Way Forward
We need strategies that coherently address the risks to our economies, societies and ecosystems. Such a strategy requires comprehensive risk and vulnerability assessments that illuminate the projected impacts of climate change on every sector of society. Whether it is health plans, trade relationships, agriculture, diplomacy, investment portfolios, shared ecosystems, or jobs and wellbeing – everything is intertwined. To achieve this, we may need to consider institutional reform within regional bodies and governments to elevate the political importance of adaptation and facilitate centralized decision-making about policy trade-offs. Crucially, it calls for a whole-of-government approach where multiple ‘risk owners’ draft and implement adaptation plans, not just environment ministries. This strategy would also emphasize large-scale adaptation actions that transcend time bound projects and aim to manage risks across entire systems and sectors, with associated levels of funding and support. The pivotal role of regional bodies and organizations with mandates to support the coordination of adaptation efforts between their members becomes clear; the African Union, European Union and governments of the Hindu Kush (among others) are already taking steps towards this. It also means a much greater role for international organizations to support enhanced cooperation on adaptation to build resilience to truly global and systemic risks (think WHO on health, WFP on food security, and so on).
Researches on measuring justice in climate change adaptation indicates that transformational adaptation means adaptation plans and strategies that go beyond aiming to maintain the ‘status quo’ and instead aim to tackle the root causes of vulnerability and inequality, particularly for marginalized groups. This requires risk assessments that explore structural dynamics driving system inequalities and power asymmetries. It also calls for inclusive adaptation projects that involve the meaningful participation of the most vulnerable and prioritize their resilience, rights and wellbeing. Building “just resilience” entails anticipating unintended consequences to prevent redistribution risk to other regions, groups or sectors – a form of maladaptation. Adaptation is not inherently benign, and it requires a reflective and deliberative effort to avoid risk transfer and ultimately leave no one behind. We are already developing indicators to assess our progress in this area, so we are not starting from scratch.
If we realize these attributes – strategic, cross-scale and socially just adaptation – we move closer to making adaptation truly transformational and also a just transition. Each dimension provides practical steps to work towards and measure our progress against, including through the lens of the four dimensions of the adaptation policy cycle outlined in the evolving framework for the Global Goal on Adaptation. If the COP28 Presidency wants to leave a legacy, embracing an Emirates Agenda on Transformational Adaptation – working through and building on the framework for the Global Goal on Adaptation to be agreed this year – could be the way forward.
*Editor, Focus Global Reporter
