The fight against climate change is not developing nations vs. developed
ones. It's against the fatal fallout of climate change vs the existence of
humanity.
SHREYA GARG
The global mean temperature of the planet is 1.15 degree Celsius above the pre-industrial average and we have been having the
conference of parties (COP) every year since 1995, wherein world leaders come together to think of solutions to fight the looming dangers
of climate change. This year the summit at Sharm El-Sheikh was attended by world leaders arriving in their respective private jets, close
to 400 of them, contributing significantly to greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. One would think what a great way to kickstart the
discourse around climate change.
Over the last decade or so, green washing has become a norm and we all have assumed that someone else would take care of the
problem of climate change. The corporations have used the issue of climate change to fill in their coffers and the global leaders have done
little to help either. Lip service has been the norm as far as climate change is concerned. Every year, these conferences signal hope.
Eminent leaders from different parts of the world make pledges, talk of achieving net zero emissions by so and so year, promise aid to
emerging economies and so on. But when it comes to progress on ground, the results are invariably dismal. They paint a sorry picture of
our fight towards climate change. It is demoralizing and one can't help but give in to the gnawing cynicism around these summits.
UN Secretary-General António Guterres said, “A third of Pakistan got flooded. We have seen Europe's hottest summer in 500 years.
The Philippines got hammered. The whole of Cuba was in blackout. And … in the United States, Hurricane Ian has delivered a brutal
reminder that no country and no economy is immune from the climate crisis.” All these events serve as a brutal reminder for entire
humanity to get its act together.
The COP27 summit did set its agenda right with focus on mainly four focus aspects of mitigation, adaptation, finance and collaboration.
What needs to be seen is how many countries significantly contribute to the said areas in all earnestness. One of the major themes of
COP27 has been loss and damage. It is only this year that the developed nations agreed to put the subject into the formal agenda. An
important issue for the group of developing nations, called G77, their leaders underscored how they needed aid from the wealthy nations
to mitigate the causes of climate change and prepare against the fallouts of it in future. A positive headway has been made at the summit
in this direction with respect to the creation of a ‘loss and damage' fund. The fund may help the emerging economies to address the
harmful effects of natural disasters like droughts, floods and cyclones etc. However, the details of how it will be used to stop climate
change and who the list of donors would be is still unclear.
Back in 2009, the developed nations had made a pledge to supply $100 billion every year by 2020 to less wealthy nations to help bring
down further rises in temperature. But what happened to that? Wealthy nations have clearly not delivered on the promise to date. The
$100 billion won't even make the cut, as developing nations have clearly outlined that they would need $6 trillion to $11 trillion to meet
climate targets. It is crucial for aid to come through to developing nations, without which they won't be able to make much progress on
reducing greenhouse emissions.
Speaking at a press conference at COP27, John Kerry, the U.S. presidential envoy on climate, asserted that the negotiations won't
end with rich countries signing up for open-ended liabilities. The emerging nations rallied against making a ‘loss and damage fund', but the
wealthy nations shrugged off the idea by saying they favoured existing financial channels.
This year's COP was called the COP for implementation, because pledges alone don't make the cut. One needs a detailed road map
and more transparency with respect to climate finance. A case in point: The US president, Joe Biden, gave an assurance at the summit
that the US would hit its climate targets by 2030 and apologized for pulling out of the Paris agreement. However, he and other world
leaders hardly explained why the promises made earlier were not met to date. Biden rightly said that the world faced a ‘pivotal moment' in
the fight against the climate crisis. But failed to lay out the steps that humanity should take.
With the COP27 having come to an end, some inspiration has been rekindled. What global leaders do in the coming years will be
watched carefully, but at the same time, the citizenry all across the world must also do what they can at individual level. We need more
people actively raising clamour around this subject. Young climate warriors need to come about and for that, introducing climate change
as a subject in school curriculum will prove to be a step in the right direction.
Hope is clearly not a good strategy to adopt in view of climate change. Therefore, one must strive to surpass all hurdles, shun
inhibition, deliberate and make a sincere endeavour to avert the global catastrophe awaiting us. We owe this to our collective future
generations.
(The author writes on news pertaining to women rights, and social and environmental issues. Views expressed are personal.)
