As the United Nations climate negotiations ended with the world’s nations still to agree on a new global treaty to reduce carbon emissions, others urge: "Stop Talking. Start Planting." Credit: Tinus de Jager/IPS

DURBAN, South Africa, Dec 11 (IPS) – The world is increasingly committed to dangerous levels of global warming with yet another failure by nations of the world to agree to needed reductions in carbon emissions here in Durban. However, as the 17th Conference of Parties ended early Sunday morning, members did agree to talk about a new global treaty to reduce emissions.

After two weeks and an additional 29 hours of intense and even bitter negotiations, the 193 nations participating in the United Nations climate talks agreed to a complex and technical set of documents called the “Durban Platform.” These include the continuation of the Kyoto Protocol, a formal structure for a Green Climate Fund, new market mechanisms, and more.

The biggest development reached at dawn Sunday is an agreement to negotiate a new global treaty to reduce emissions by 2015. While this may look like simply agreeing to more meetings, it is the first time all nations have agreed to be governed by a new global emission reduction treaty under the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

Currently the promised emission reductions by industrialised countries and those of China, Brazil, South Africa, India and others under the 2009 Copenhagen Accord guarantee a world that is at least 3.5 degrees Celsius warmer on average according to climate science. It will be double that over large parts of the world. Some analysis says this global average could be even higher rising to four or five degrees Celsius threatening our species with annihilation.

Despite the political posturing by the United States, Canada and even the European Union, the fact is that developing countries’ promised reductions are greater than the industrialised world that are responsible for 75 percent of the total human emissions in the atmosphere.

“There are still no new pledges on the table and the process agreed in Durban towards raising the ambition and increasing emission reductions is uncertain in its outcome,” said Bill Hare, Director of Climate Analytics, a non-profit climate science advisory group based in Germany.

COP 17 President, South Africa’s Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, and others pleaded with countries to put their self-interest aside “for the greater good of the planet and its people.” Rich countries like the U.S., Canada and Saudi Arabia blocked progress and numerous fronts leaving smaller nations bitter and frustrated.

“The grim news is that the blockers lead by the U.S. have succeeded in inserting a vital get-out clause that could easily prevent the next big climate deal being legally binding,” said Kumi Naidoo, Greenpeace International Executive Director.

Even if a strong legally binding treaty is agreed to in 2015, it will have to ratified by governments before going into force. It took several years to ratify the Kyoto Protocol that the U.S. backed and then failed to ratify following the election of George W Bush.

Waiting until 2020 to make major cuts means those cuts will have to be far deeper and far more costly to have any hope of keeping temperatures below two degrees Celsius, Hare previously told IPS.

“The world’s collective level of ambition on emissions reductions must be substantially increased, and soon,” said Alden Meyer, director of strategy and policy at the Union of Concerned Scientists.

Various analysis show that global emissions should peak between 2015 and 2020 to earn a reasonable chance of less than two degrees Celsius at doable cost. If the peak and decline comes later costs and risks of exceeding two degrees Celsius skyrocket.

“Powerful speeches and carefully worded decisions can’t amend the laws of physics. The atmosphere responds to one thing, and one thing only – emissions,” said Meyer.

It was clear that our governments these past two weeks listened to the carbon-intensive polluting corporations instead of listening to the people, Naidoo said in a statement.

The “Durban Platform” includes a second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol that will begin January 2013, avoiding a gap at the end of the first commitment period finishing next year. The length of the second commitment period is to be decided at COP 18 in Qatar.

Developing countries insisted on this condition because Kyoto is the only legally binding emissions reduction agreement. However, it only asked for small reductions from industrialised countries like those in Europe, Canada, Australia, Japan and a few others. The U.S. opted out and Canada ignored its obligations and increased emissions 24 percent. And now Canada, Japan and Russia have said they will take not take part in the second commitment period.

The continuation of Kyoto “is highly significant” said Christiana Figueres, UNFCCC Executive Secretary. Participating countries are to submit their emission reduction offers by May 2012.

There is no formal adoption of a second commitment period based on the actual wording of the documents, said Pablo Solón, former lead negotiator for the Plurinational State of Bolivia. “The actual decision has merely been postponed to the next COP.” Kyoto remains on “life support” he said.

The only progress on the Green Climate Fund (GFC) was on its design and governance. The GFC is supposed to funnel 100 billion dollars in assistance annually starting in 2020 to help developing nations to reduce emissions and help them adapt to climate change. There were no commitments on where the money would come from. What was agreed is to set up a “work plan” to mobilise significant climate funds from both private and public sources.

Private sources explicitly include carbon markets as governments from the rich countries frequently cited the financial crisis has tied their purse strings. Civil society and some developing nations noted that governments have made trillions of dollars available for the bank and financial sector and that world’s military budget is more than 10 times what is needed for the GFC.

Even though the carbon market has crashed the private sector is considered by the U.S., EU, New Zealand, Japan and other countries to be a key partner in mobilising money for climate change. Creating private markets for the buying and selling carbon offsets remains highly controversial and very complex in terms measurement, ownership carbon in soil or forests and more. Then there the ethics of rich countries offsetting their own emissions by buying up forests or land in poor countries.

“Keep the targets lose the markets” Oscar Reyes of the Friends of the Earth UK urged negotiators in in the final days of COP 17. “We’re worried that when the GCF has money it will lend it to the private sector to drive carbon markets,” Reyes told IPS.

“Durban is a disaster” for a fair and functional Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) programme said experts with Ecosystems Climate Alliance, a coalition of forest NGOs. REDD is by far the biggest potential carbon market.

“From looking at past conferences (climate COPs) it would be more effective if members of the conference would come outside and plant trees for the two weeks. They’d probably make a bigger impact,” said 14-year-old Felix Finkbeiner of Munich, Germany. Finkbeiner launched an organizaton of children called Plant for the Planet that is now working in 70 countries and have planted nearly four million trees in past four years.

Their motto: “Stop Talking. Start Planting.”

(END/2011)

WWF climate scientist Regine Günther. Credit: Kristin Palitza/IPS

Kristin Palitza spoke to REGINE GÜNTHER, climate protection and energy policy chief at the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), about the dangers climate change poses to security and livelihoods.

DURBAN, South Africa, Dec 9 (IPS) - Despite the high risk, it remains difficult to convince politicians to take immediate action to prevent further climate change and make available the necessary funds to do so. Scientists have warned repeatedly of the effects of climate change: If governments will not act fast, they will cause an irreversible catastrophe.

IPS spoke to Regine Günther, climate protection and energy policy chief at the World Wide Fund for Nature, about the dangers climate change poses to security and livelihoods.

Q: What are the consequences if the 17th United Nations climate change summit in Durban ends without firm results and targets?

A: There are several scenarios. If countries stick to the voluntary commitments to reduce carbon emissions they have made during the last two summits in Cancun and Copenhagen, we will see an increase in average temperatures by between three and four degrees Celsius. If they manage to start a process in Durban that will lead to higher emission reduction targets by 2020, we could succeed in not going above a two degree Celsius rise.

But at the moment, it doesn’t look good. If we continue like before and don’t even implement the voluntary pledges, we will reach a dangerous temperature rise of six or seven degree Celsius.

Q: What happens if average temperatures increase by more than two degrees Celsius?

A: An increase of two degrees Celsius already has negative effects. If we go beyond it, climate change will become dangerous. Glaciers will melt, up to three billion people will suffer from severe water shortages, mainly in the developing world, we might lose up to 30 percent of our biodiversity, droughts will lead to food insecurity, large regions will be permanently flooded, including small islands, and so forth. That’s why climate change is not only an environmental problem. It’s a threat to livelihoods and economies.

Q: Everyone is talking about the drastic effects of climate change in developing countries. What will be the effects on the global North?

A: Think back to the major heat wave in Europe in 2003. It was a very hot summer (with several people dying from heat strokes). If we don’t get climate change under control, the summer of 2003 will be regarded as a normal summer in 2040. By 2060 it will be regarded as a cool summer. The United States have also felt the impact of changing weather patterns this year, with an unusual number of hurricanes and storms. So yes, the industrialised world will also experience a lot of change and will have to adapt.

Q: Will masses of people in developing countries have to migrate, as some scientists predict?

A: That is very possible. And this will effect the global North as well. If droughts and hunger increase in the South, people will be unable to continue living there. If there are thousands and thousands of climate migrants, the question is of course who will offer them refuge. Many will look expectantly to the North.

Q: When will it be too late to act?

A: If you measure the dangers of climate change based on the two degree Celsius limit, we will have to reach the peak of global carbon emissions within this decade. Scientists say that a drastic reduction of CO2 emissions by 2020 would still be an option, but the very last one. I believe, by 2020 it will be too late. Nonetheless, we have to continue making every effort possible, because it makes a big difference if we live in a world that is two, five or six degrees hotter.

Q: Why do you believe emission reductions by 2020 will be too late?

A: The later global carbon emissions peak, the steeper the necessary downward trend of reductions needs to be. Achieving this will not only become very expensive but also extremely difficult. There will be a point in time, when not enough can be done to keep climate change under the two degree Celsius limit. Once we have reached that limit, which means that a certain amount of greenhouse gases sit in the atmosphere, the process of trying to lower temperatures will take decades, because the atmosphere reacts to changes only slowly.

Q: Why does it remain so difficult to convince politicians to act, despite the horror scenarios?

A: The biggest drivers for man-made climate change, the coal, oil and gas industries, are the biggest beneficiaries of our current industrialised economies. They work with major lobbies and large amounts of money against the trend to reduce their share of the economy.

It is also important to note that politicians are elected for four or five years, not until 2040. Within four years, the effects of climate change are not felt very heavily. The big changes lie in the future and happen slowly. As a result, there is a gap between today’s reality and the scientific knowledge of the effects of climate change if we don’t act.

Q: Do climate sceptics influence governments’ hesitant commitment?

A: In the U.S., climate sceptics have massive influence in the debate. In Europe, science has the top hand. That climate change is largely man-made is widely accepted. People have understood that something can be done about it and are more willing to take action. In other countries in the world that’s unfortunately not the case.

Q: How expensive will it become to fight climate change if governments continue postponing mitigation and adaptation measures?

A: According to British economist Nicholas Stern, taking no action will cost up to twenty times more than taking immediate action. Countries like Germany and U.S. have been able to mobilise billions of dollars last year to bail out their banks.

Now, they are trying to tell us that the international community is unable to mobilise 100 billion dollars within a decade to finance climate change adaptation in developing countries. If countries would make climate change as much a priority as the financial system, they would reduce other expenditures to drum up the needed funds. Exactly like they did during the economic crisis. (END)

South African Bishop Geoff Davies (L) and Mardi Tindal, Moderator of the United Church of Canada

By Stephen Leahy

DURBAN, South Africa, Dec 9 (IPS) - African and international faith leaders urged governments attending the final day of climate change negotiations to do what is right and necessary to keep global temperature from rising no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius.

“The two degrees Celsius target is unacceptable because temperatures in much of Africa will be far higher,” said South African Bishop Geoff Davies.

Oil and coal companies along with other major polluting corporations are engaged in “crimes against humanity and the planet” because they continue to pollute the atmosphere when they have ability to do otherwise, said David Le Page of the Southern African Faith Communities’ Environment Institute (SAFCEI).

More than 130 African faith leaders have signed a declaration offering specific recommendations based science, honesty, morality and equity. They called on delegates negotiating a new climate treaty here at the 17^th Conference of Parties to live up to the African spirit of “ubuntu” – a way of living focused on people’s allegiances and relations with each other.

The current economic system encourages “people to get as rich as they can and forget about anyone else,” said Davies. “It’s an immoral system.”

“Historic polluters like the United States have to reduce their emissions dramatically” and their position here is “shocking” and “reprehensible”, he said. The children and grandchildren of U.S. congressmen will ask what they were doing to be so selfish and irresponsible, Davies said.

The U.S is the most religious society in the world but their behaviour is “sinful” in their refusal to reduce emissions that causing so much suffering among people, he said.

“When lifestyles of the wealthy hurt the lives of the poor….and future generations it is wrong,” Mardi Tindal, Moderator of the United Church of Canada, the country’s largest Protestant denomination.

“Climate change is a moral, ethical and spiritual issue. We need moral leadership not political leadership,” Tindal told IPS.

“South Africa has had courageous, moral leaders like Ghandi and Mandela. If our leadership shows the same moral courage the people will follow them.”

However, political leaders will have to lead by their deeds and personal examples, not words if they hope to bring people with them, she said.

Davies expressed deep disappointment regarding yesterday’s announcement that South Africa government will invest three billion rand to upgrade the Richards Bay Terminal export 81 million tonnes of coal annually by 2016.

Other countries here are expanding their oil production around the world and that is why climate talks will not bring the agreement we need, he said.

“You cannot underestimate the power and influence of the fossil fuel industry. We know they spend millions of dollars lobbying their governments. They are holding the world to ransom and causing the destruction of the environment.”

The good news is that the economically powerful countries like the U.S., Europe, Brazil, India and China could begin to turn this around in a matter of months with major programmes in renewables and energy efficiency. Money should flow to Africa, who is least responsible for climate change, to help them create low-carbon societies Davies said.

If this doesn’t happen “we all will suffer the consequences.” (END)

DURBAN, Afrique du Sud, 9 déc (IPS) – Les économies émergentes - la Chine, l’Afrique du Sud et le Brésil – ont manifesté leur ouverture aux objectifs légalement contraignants de réduction des émissions de carbone à partir de 2020 lors du sommet des Nations Unies sur les changements climatiques à Durban.

DURBAN, South Africa, Dec 9 (IPS) – For the Laibon community, a sub-tribe of Kenya’s Maasai ethnic group, the 33,000-hectare Loita Forest in the country’s Rift Valley Province is more than just a forest. It is a shrine.

Olonana Ole Pulei’s community is a sub-tribe of Kenya’s Maasai ethnic group. Credit: Isaiah Esipisu/IPS

“It is our shrine. Our Gods live there. We gather herbs from the place. We use it for bee- keeping. It therefore forms part of our livelihood,” said Olonana Ole Pulei, who is in Durban, South Africa, to represent his community at the ongoing 17th Conference of Parties under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

According to Nigel Crawhall, the Director of Secretariat for the Indigenous Peoples of Africa Co-ordinating Committee (IPACC), different African communities have incredible indigenous knowledge that they use in the conservation of forests and biodiversity in general, and this should be recognised during the negotiations in Durban.

“Different communities have different practices that they use in forestry conservation,” he said.

Crawhall gave an example of how the Bambuti and Batwa pygmy communities, in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, conserved the forest using traditional methods. Both communities depend on the biodiversity of animal life in the equatorial forests in order to survive.

“Usually, they know how to identify particular trees that can be cut down in order to create a unique opening on the canopy, which attracts light in the closely-packed Congo forests. The light then attracts animals, birds and insects, thus giving them an opportunity to hunt,” Crawhall told IPS.

This helps conserve the biodiversity, as well as the forests because this method can only work if the forest canopy is intact.

In Kenya, the Maasai culture forbids any community member from cutting down a tree, either for firewood or any other purpose. People are also forbidden from interfering with the taproots or removing the entire bark of a tree for herbal extraction.

According to their cultural belief, one can only use tree branches for firewood, and fibrous roots for herbs. If the bark of a tree has medicinal value, then only small portions of it can be removed by creating a “V” in the bark. The wound is then sealed using wet soil.

“We believe that the soil helps in healing the wound on a tree. This is cultural, and we all believe that it is an abomination for one to injure a tree, and not help it heal,” said Ole Pulei.

It is a practice that has been passed down from generation to generation among Maasai community members. Among the Laibon community, it is this indigenous knowledge that has aided in the conservation of the Loita Forest.

“All logging activities observed on Maasai land, including the destruction of the Mau Forest, are done by foreigners because the Maasai culture does not allow such activities. This is the indigenous knowledge that helps in forest conservation,” Ole Pulei told IPS.

Such beliefs make the forests part of the community, where community members have feelings for the trees, and where cutting down a tree could amount to an offence against the Gods and their culture.

“We have several other communities all over the continent who co-exist with forests. They include the Tuareg community in Algeria, Yiaku community in Kenya’s Laikipia region, the Ogiek community also in Kenya, the Kung community in Botswana among others,” said Crawhall.

Though according to Crawhall, all Africans are indigenous although there are some groups who live by hunting and gathering, while other groups practice pastoralism, and others practice dry-land farming.

Despite the fact that there is no standard definition of indigenous people, the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples recognises that particular communities, due to historical and environmental circumstances, have found themselves outside the state system and underrepresented in governance.

“The Bushmen of the Southern African region, or the Ogiek community in Kenya who live in forests are a typical example of groupings categorised as indigenous,” said Crawhall.

He points out that Africa has more than 40 groupings in different countries that survive entirely on hunting and gathering. However, IPACC works closely with 155 communities from 22 African countries who are recognised as indigenous because of their historical and environmental circumstances.

As a result, representatives from these communities have joined the rest of the world in Durban to have their voices heard, so that their contributions to forest conservation are recognised as part of the climate change mitigation and adaptation efforts.

“We believe that African traditional ecological knowledge is the foundation for appropriate and effective national adaptation policies,” said Crawhall.

Through the IPACC secretariat, the 155 community-based organisations in Africa have drafted their position for the Durban negotiation platform. They want the negotiators to come up with a position that is representative to African parties, indigenous African people’s organisations, traditional institutions, traditional authorities and value systems.

They are calling for the formation of a regional body that is legally binding under the United Nations, to handle issues on conservation that are difficult to deal with at national level.

“One of the prevailing gaps in most of the IPACC-member countries is that there is no land tenure for communities who live in forests, or depend on forests,” said Crawhall.

However, different countries have started responding to the needs of their local communities by including them in their national climate change adaptation strategies, with Kenya taking the lead.

The country is in the process of drafting the Climate Change Adaptation Bill. And the indigenous communities will have their say on the bill because according to the constitution, they must be consulted on draft legislation so that they can make contributions.

“We have traversed the entire country seeking views on this bill, where local communities have been able to give their contributions. Our vision is to participate and lead in the development and implementation of climate change sensitive policies, projects and activities within and outside our Kenyan borders,” said John Kioli, the chairman for the Kenya Climate Change Working Group, who is attending the Durban climate change negotiations.

* This article is one of a series supported by the Climate and Development Knowledge Network (END)

DURBAN, South Africa, Dec 9 (IPS) - The issue of money is still a substantial part of the negotiations at 17^thConference of Parties in Durban, South Africa. IPS spoke to Marcia Levaggi, manager of the Adaptation Fund Board, on the importance of ensuring that developing countries have the funds to deal with the effects of climate change.

Marcia Levaggi, manager of the Adaptation Fund Board. Credit: Zukiswa ZImela/IPS

The Adaptation Fund was established by the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Its aim is to finance adaptation projects and programmes in developing countries.

Q: Talks in the previous COP’s tended to focus on mitigation but now increasingly the conversation is about mitigation and adaptation. Why is it important that developed countries have finance for adaptation plans?

A: First of all adaptation is one of the most pressing needs of developing countries to adapt to climate change. There are things that won’t change. Already the climate globally has changed and that has created difficult conditions for developing countries. There are new conditions in agriculture, there are droughts and food security is threatened. So it is important to address those issues and help those countries.

Q: One of the things stalling establishment and implementation of the Green Climate Fund is the question of where the almost 100 billion dollars per year needed by developing countries will come from?

A: The money comes from the two percent levy on the shares of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). That is an innovative feature of the fund, because it’s a tax on international corporations. We have also received some contributions from developed countries, namely Spain, Sweden and Germany, but our main source remains from the proceeds of the CDM.

Q: Can you give me an example of some projects that have been funded by the Adaptation Fund.

A: The Adaptation Fund started funding projects last year in September and in one year of operation it has funded eleven projects some in Mauritius, Senegal and Eritrea. The project in Senegal is a project about coastal protection. In South Africa we are working the South African National Biodiversity Institute we have heard that they are getting ready to submit a proposal.

Q: The Adaptation Fund relies on agreements made in the Kyoto Protocol. Other countries like Canada, Russia and Japan have already said that they are not going to be signing on for a second commitment period. What will this mean for you in terms of finance?

A:  Well I don’t know, but the situation will not get better if there are no clear signals after this meeting. We really plead with international community to strive for an agreement in Durban to help those countries. (END)

Loopholes in the CDM must be sealed to allow participation of African countries. Credit: Isaiah Esipisu/IPS

By Isaiah Esipisu

DURBAN, South Africa, Dec 8 (IPS) As the United Nations climate change negotiations comes to a close, environmental experts agree that carbon markets could provide the funds for climate change adaptation and mitigation projects, but only if existing loopholes are sealed to allow participation of African countries.

“When the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) was introduced under the Kyoto Protocol, we all knew that it was a fantastic idea because it was, and still is, the only mechanism that enables developing countries to take action against global warming,” said Mithika Mwenda, a climate change expert and the Coordinator for the Pan-African Climate Justice Alliance. The CDM allows emission reduction projects in developing countries to earn certified emission reduction (CER) credits, each equivalent to one ton of CO2. These can be traded.

Currently, there are more than 3,600 registered CDM projects in 72 developing countries worldwide, with about three percent of them in Africa.

However, according to Mwenda, the architectural designs for implementing projects such as the CDM is far beyond the reach to most African organisations, institutions and communities because of the investment cost and the conditions attached.

“It has worked well in other countries like China, but less can be achieved from the African continent, which unfortunately is bearing the biggest burden of climate change,” he told IPS.

Mwenda cautions that there is a danger that the developed world will use carbon credit markets as an excuse to pollute more.

“In many cases under the markets’ architecture, the developed countries are allowed to pollute, and then buy credits from developing countries that sequester carbon from the atmosphere. Yet, what we need first is a commitment to reduce carbon from the atmosphere and to then use the markets as a supplement,” he said.

Lessons about carbon funding projects in Africa can be drawn from the Green Belt Movement, a non-governmental organisation implementing a CDM project in Kenya.

“It is clear that it requires massive investment to kick-start and sustain a CDM project,” Benjamin Kimani Kiuru, the senior project officer in charge of Climate Change and Carbon Projects at the Green Belt Movement, told IPS.

He said there were limiting conditions in the Kyoto Protocol that made it difficult for Africa to benefit from the CDM.

“One of the most limiting conditions as stipulated under the Kyoto Protocol is that the site where trees are to be planted must have been deforested before 1990. Yet given the fact that most forests in Africa have been intact until after the 1990s when people started destroying them, it makes it very difficult for investors to locate appropriate sites suitable for such projects,” said Kiuru.

His sentiments were echoed by David Lesolle, a climate change expert at the University of Botswana’s Department of Environmental Science.

“The way CDM was structured is that you need it only if you are ‘dirty’ (where countries have destroyed their carbon sinks). Yet Africa is not dirty,” he told IPS at the 17^th Conference of Parties.

But he quickly pointed out there is need to continue implementing the CDM because it still plays a role in climate change mitigation.

Also, Africa does not have experts to develop CDM project designs.

“We have to rely on experts from the developed world, which is an extremely expensive affair,” Kiuru said.

Lack of upfront funding from the World Bank for CDM projects was listed as another limiting factor.

So far, the Green Belt Movement has planted 1.5 million trees on 1,500 hectares in Kenya under the CDM, but the first disbursement of money from the World Bank is expected to come through only next year when the project is supposed to be assessed.

“It is important to note that two percent of money generated under the CDM projects worldwide is supposed to be used for adaptation. And today, the Climate Adaptation Fund has over 160 million dollars, which countries and organisations are supposed to apply for – but they haven’t,” said Lesolle.

However, Christiana Figueres, the Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change believes the CDM has been successful.

“CDM is a success story of the Kyoto Protocol. It has incentivised investment in projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and contribute to sustainable development in some 72 countries.

“The object of the dialogue is to reflect on the CDM experience – both the good and the bad – and build on this important mechanism for the future,” Figueres told the media during launch of a high-level policy dialogue on the CDM. (END)

DURBAN, South Africa, Dec 8 (IPS) – The last hours of the 17th United Nations climate change summit in Durban have begun. Since the arrival of almost 150 ministers and heads of state on Tuesday, negotiations have moved to the political level. They are expected to debate the way forward until late Friday night, or even Saturday morning.

Almost nobody believes that a second, comprehensive commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol is still possible. / Zukiswa Zimela/IPS

Hopes for a breakthrough, or at least tangible results, are slim. Almost nobody believes that a second, comprehensive commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol, the only international legally binding instrument to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, which includes all major emitters, is still possible.

For this to happen, emerging economies like China, India, Korea, Mexico and South Africa would have to come on board, as well as the United States, a country which has not even ratified the first period of the protocol. Other major emitters, like Canada, Russia and Japan have already proclaimed their disinterest in a second commitment period.

The initial commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol, under which 37 industrialised nations have committed to an average of five percent carbon emission reductions compared to emission levels in 1990, will expire at the end of 2012.

Earlier this week, negotiations briefly looked somewhat promising, when China’s head negotiator Xie Zhenhua announced his country was open to internationally, legally binding agreements. But his statement soon turned out to be part of a strategic game. But Zhenhua did not say that China was willing to “be part of” those binding agreements as well.

Many climate experts believe the U.S. has played a particularly strong role in slowing down the progress of the negotiations.

“The Obama administration has apparently come to Durban not to be constructive, but to hold other countries back. Their excuses for inaction ebb and flow like the tide. Once one excuse is removed, another emerges,” lamented World Wide Fund for Nature spokesperson Caroline Behringer.

Even U.N. secretary general Ban Ki-moon dampened expectations during the opening of the high-level segment of the summit on Tuesday. A comprehensive, legally binding agreement “could be out of reach”, he said.

While negotiators try to come to a decision, the atmosphere in the corridors of the Durban conference centre, where the summit is taking place, remains tense. Ministers and heads of delegations have retreated to conference rooms to further debate the contents of the 131-page document, the basis for all negotiations. Outside of the closed doors, delegates talk with lowered voices. Until the official announcement of the end-result, everyone is holding their cards close to their chests.

The possibility of concluding with a roadmap for an agreement to negotiate emission reductions from 2015 that will include major emitters and emerging economies, also stands on shaky ground. Under the agreement, all major carbon emitters would agree to internationally legally binding reductions by 2020 at the latest.

“What we are seeing is a lack of political will by some major emitters to reach an outcome in Durban that is fair and ambitious and that saves the lives and livelihoods of millions of poor and vulnerable people who are affected by climate change today,” says Tonya Rawe, senior policy advocate of global humanitarian organisation CARE.

“Some parties are already talking about delaying decisions on a legally binding agreement until 2020. This is a disaster as it can create an entire decade of zero progress,” he added.

Delegates fear that only a non-binding declaration will be reached, through which countries will vaguely declare their willingness to agree to binding reduction goals at some point in the future.

So far, only the European Union (EU) and some other European countries, like Switzerland, have vouched to continue pushing for commitments from major carbon emitters that are currently not part of the Kyoto agreement over the remaining hours of the summit.

“All major economies need to commit, of course respecting common but differentiated responsibilities. If they will not commit to an agreement in the foreseeable future, they take on an unbearable responsibility,” warned Connie Hedegaard, commissioner for climate action at the European Commission who spoke on behalf of the EU.

The negotiations do not only revolve around an extension of the terms of the Kyoto Protocol. Another important subject is the adoption of the Green Climate Fund (GCF) through which financial support for climate change mitigation and adaptation efforts will be channelled to developing countries. By 2020, 100 billion dollars should be mobilised annually from public and private funds.

But the discussions around the GCF, too, have been staggering, after several countries, including the U.S., Bolivia, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela announced they were dissatisfied with the draft document and would like to re-open the text for amendments.

In addition, the global financial crisis has slowed down progress on the fund: rich countries, that are supposed to partially finance the GCF, are hesitant to make budgetary commitments. As it looks, the fund is likely to be signed off in Durban, if at all, but as an “empty shell”, without tangible plans on how it will be financed.

“We don’t have any more time to lose to safe those who are most threatened by climate change,” urged Mizanur Rahman Bijoy, a researcher with the Network on Climate Change in Bangladesh. “But instead of taking action, governments are mainly concerned about their national economies. That way, no important and necessary decisions will be made. (END)

DURBAN, South Africa, Dec 8 (IPS) – Countries at the United Nations climate change negotiations have publicly acknowledged their current pledges to reduce carbon emissions will not result in limiting global warming to less than two degrees Celsius.

Reducing carbon emissions will not result in limiting global warming to less than two degrees Celsius. Credit: Zukiswa Zimela

To bridge their shortfall, delegates at the 17th Conference of Parties (COP 17) climate talks proposed on Wednesday to address this so-called “emissions gap” at COP 18 in Qatar next year.

Documents under negotiation in Durban, South Africa acknowledge the science-based emissions reduction target of 25 to 40 percent by 2020. Those reductions and that timeline are what is needed to stay below two degrees Celsius. The draft text says this would be the target to be agreed on at COP 18.

“We need agreement on that science-based target next year at the latest,” said Karl Hood, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Caribbean island of Grenada and representing the Alliance of Small Island States.

“And we want those targets to legally come into force before 2017.”

Hood told IPS waiting to close the gap until after 2020 is “unacceptable” and a “disaster for small island states” who are already suffering the impacts of climate change.

The world has months to curb emissions from burning fossil fuels before two degrees Celsius of warming will be impossible to stay below. Delay a few years and the extraordinary emission cuts needed could bankrupt the world’s economy and reverse development gains in most countries, climate experts warned at the largely deadlocked United Nations climate change conference here.

“We’re here to warn policy makers that we are dangerously close to not being able to meet the less than two degrees Celsius target,” said Bill Hare, Director of Climate Analytics, a non-profit climate science advisory group based in Germany.

The current pledges made by countries to cut emissions after the Copenhagen climate talks in 2009 will result in global warming of 3.5 degrees Celsius, said Hare a climate scientist. Two years later, those pledges remain essentially unchanged and that means the world’s options to stay below two degrees Celsius are narrowing Hare said in press conference during the COP 17 negotiations that conclude Friday.

“To put it bluntly, the longer we wait, the less options we will have, the more it will cost …and the bigger threat to the world’s most vulnerable,” he said.

Global emissions of fossil fuels have increased 49 percent since 1990 and reached a record of about 48 gigatonnes (billion tonnes) of CO2 in 2010 and likely 50 gigatonnes (Gt) of CO2 this year, he said. Thanks to the moderating affect of the oceans, the world has warmed only 0.8 degrees Celsius on average, however, many parts of the world are much warmer than that.

The science shows that global emissions need to fall to 44 Gt by 2020 and continue to decline by two percent per year, a rate that our fossil fuel-dependent world will find “extremely challenging” but still doable, he said.

If countries live up to their pledges made in Copenhagen global emissions are likely to rise nine to 11 Gt above the 44 Gt target creating an “emissions gap” that is quite considerable, said Niklas Höhne, Director Energy and Climate Policy of Ecofys, an energy consulting organisation.

“Our results are in agreement with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Bridging the Emissions Gap Report released at the opening of the Durban climate talks,” he told IPS.

The new UNEP report calculates a similar emission gap and outlines the way reductions can be made between now and 2020 to bridge that gap. Shockingly many of the items under intense debate at here at the COP 17 – biofuels, agriculture, carbon credits for forest protection, carbon capture and storage – are not considered important pathways to reduce emissions by scientists.

“With biofuels you have to be very sure they won’t result in a net increase in emissions,” said Höhne.

A number of new studies of palm oil biodiesel and maize ethanol show their net emissions are higher than fossil fuels when their entire lifecycle is calculated.

Biofuels are unlikely to be a significant method for reducing emissions, agreed Höhne. Agriculture is in the same category. Farming practices could be altered to reduce emissions but based on analysis using various reduction scenarios they would only be a small part of the “bridge”.

The emissions gap can only be bridged with a combination of improving energy efficiency in all sectors, significant increase in renewable energy including biomass power and shifting from coal to natural gas. The cost of making this shift is relatively low at 38 dollars a ton of CO2 avoided.

Wait until after 2020 and costs skyrocket. Every every dollar not invested today to reduce emissions from the power sector will require an additional investment of 4.3 dollars after 2020 to compensate for all the additional emissions between now and then said the International Energy Agency in its “World Energy Outlook 2011″ report.

Waiting till 2020 is “a risk we don’t want to take,” said Höhne. Delegates here do understand all this, he believes. “They don’t act as if they understand,” he said referring to the lack of progress on a deal to substantially reduce emissions despite 17 years of negotiations.

These scenarios do not include potential emissions from natural sources — feedbacks — like thawing permafrost as the Arctic region rapidly warms. Permafrost hold huge volumes of carbon and methane accumulated over the past 750,000 years.

The first estimate of the near-term volume of global warming gases from permafrost thaw may be 170 Gt of CO2 over the next three decades a team of 40 scientists reported last week. That means global warming could be “20 to 30 percent faster than from fossil fuel emissions alone,” said Edward Schuur of the University of Florida in a release.

“At the moment climate change is not high on the agenda of all heads of states,” said Höhne.

(END/2011)

DURBAN, South Africa, Dec 7 (IPS) – Carbon pricing will be the core mechanism to finance the Green Climate Fund and with it climate change adaptation projects in developing countries.

U.N. secretary-general Ban Ki-moon said there is a pool of possible financing options for the Green Climate Fund. Credit:Kristin Palitza/IPS

“If you can establish broader and more comprehensive carbon financing, we will attract more private funding,” explained Norway’s Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg, who co-chairs the United Nations high-level advisory group on climate change financing.

Carbon finance puts a price on emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

According to Stoltenberg, putting a price on carbon emissions would have three key benefits: it will encourage industry to reduce harmful emissions (to avoid being charged for them); it will contribute to the development of clean technologies to reduce emissions; and it will generate revenue, which can be used for government purposes but also to take climate action.

There are already a number of countries that have shown that carbon trading systems or taxes can help reducing emissions while promoting economic growth, said Stoltenberg: “The European Union has a comprehensive carbon trading system through an emission scheme. Australia just introduced a carbon tax. China is introducing carbon pricing, and South Africa also wants to develop a carbon tax.”

It was therefore plausible that carbon pricing could assist in providing urgently needed finance for the GCF as well.

“The beauty of carbon pricing is that you will get less pollution but more finance,” Stoltenberg added.

During the past 10 days of the 17th Conference of Parties, which currently takes place in Durban, South Africa, the question on how to generate funding for the GCF has taken centre stage. The global economic crisis and national austerity measures have reduced the willingness of rich countries to commit to filling the coffers of the fund with public monies.

“The financial and debt crisis, especially in Europe and the United States, have developed further. We therefore have to look for both public funding but also private sources,” stressed Stoltenberg who, as co-chair of the advisory group on climate change financing, recently submitted to the U.N. an analysis of how long-term financing should be generated.

“Our main conclusion is that it is challenging but feasible to mobilise 100 billion dollars annually,” he said, referring to an agreement from last year’s climate talks in Cancun, Mexico, that fast-track financing of 10 million dollars per year between 2010 and 2013 should be scaled up to 100 billion dollars annually by 2020.

“There is no sense in having a fund, if you don’t have money for it,” Stoltenberg said.

U.N. secretary-general Ban Ki-moon agreed that short-term and long-term financing goals could only be reached through combination of public and private resources. This would not mean governments lose political control over the financing mechanism of the GCF, a point some countries said they were concerned about during the climate negotiations.

“There is a pool of possible financing options, such as carbon taxes, transport taxes, and so forth. It will be up to each country to decide which regulations it wants to adopt and implement nationally,” said Ban.

However, this did not release governments of rich nations off the hook.

“Industrial countries must show leadership by injecting sufficient capital immediately,” said Ban. “It’s true that governments struggle with austerity crisis, but climate change is not an option, it’s an imperative. Need unambiguous political commitment and transparency.”

There will be no forward movement in the fight against climate change without movement on climate finance, Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi agreed.

“We need to create a price structure that will attract the private sector to invest in climate financing. Carbon pricing will send the signal to the private sector, that green technology will be profitable,” said Zenawi. “The technology of the future is green. There is a race. Who comes too late will be left behind.”

But right now, days of staggering negotiations about the operationalisation and financing of the GCF, have raised doubts among economic experts that governments of industrialised countries are truly willing to make available parts of the finance necessary to fund climate change adaptation in the global South.

“We don’t need any more reports, we need the political will,” said economist and British government advisor Lord Nicholas Stern.

The faster politicians acted, the cheaper it will cost them, agreed Mexico’s President Felipe Calderon, trying to push for the GCF to be operationalised before the end of the climate change summit on Dec 9. “Low carbon economy doesn’t come cheap. It will cost hundreds of millions of dollars a year, depending on how fast we act. The sooner we act, the less it will cost us,” he said.

Caio Koch-Weser, the vice chair of Deutsche Bank, one of the biggest banking groups worldwide, expressed his concern about the slow progress of establishing the GCF. Industry was ready to invest in the green economy, he said.

“Give us a carbon price, give us a reliable policy, and the private sector will do most of the job. We have already seen great vibrancy from the side of the business community in interaction with governments,” he said. “Of course it’s not yet of the scale and the speed we need.”

Koch-Weser further noted that the current global economic crisis also presented an opportunity for governments and businesses to transform, to find new drivers of growth.

To be able to raise 100 billion dollars annually by 2020 to finance climate change adaptation, “we need new private-pubic partnerships that provide transparent, long-lived and certain frameworks. We hope that the GCF will have a strong private sector facility and will be professionally run,” Koch-Weser said.

(END/2011)

SSESE ISLANDS, Uganda, Dec 7 (IPS) – From a distance, Bugala Island in Lake Victoria is a patchwork of green and brown. The pattern is a result of dense forest retreating in the wake of recently planted palm tree plantations.

Workers on Bugala Island work to clear the rainforest to make way for an expanding palm tree plantation. Palm oil production is one of Uganda's rising industries. Credit: Will Boase/IPS

The island, the largest of Uganda’s Ssese Islands, is at the center of one of the country’s newest economic endeavors – palm oil processing – and the formerly lush rainforest has fallen quickly, taking with it some critical jobs for the island’s poorest women.

Now, five years after the first phase of that process was completed, residents are starting to measure the impact of the initiative. Many speak glowingly of the jobs and activity the plantation has created. But for some of the island’s poorest residents – especially widows and the wives of often-traveling fishermen – continued deforestation has robbed them of their sole source of income.

Sarah Namwanje used to collect timber and charcoal from the forests that she could sell to people around the island. Now the 28-year-old mother of seven has no way to make money.

“No timber is seen,” she said. “We’re searching for firewood and trying to get money, but my job has stopped.”

Ahead of the palm oil project’s start, activists had clashed with the government over the potential environmental ramifications of the deforestation. But, with assurances from Bidco –the company behind Uganda’s palm oil industry – that the development would have little environmental impact and a stamp of approval from the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA), the dazzle of a new industry and more jobs eventually won out.

What was never communicated to some of the poorest residents was how the project would affect both their livelihoods and their health. Especially the small groups of women who live on an island mostly populated by fishermen.

Some are widows, their husbands lost to AIDS or fishing accidents. Others are left alone for long stretches of time, their husbands chasing schools of fish around the archipelago of 84 islands. Until the men return with money from their catch, the women must scramble for resources.

The available jobs for these women are scarce and Mary Nampomwa, a local health worker, said it is difficult for many of them to get by without resorting to commercial sex work.

Before the palm plantations arrived, women who refused to turn to sex work had small-scale jobs, like gathering firewood. They had relatively free access to the timber in national forests or on privately held, underdeveloped plots, according to Richard Kimbowa, the programme manager for Uganda Coalition for Sustainable Development (UCSD).

But many of those landowners, offered an opportunity to make good money off of unused land, sold out or cleared the forest themselves to create subsidiary palm plantations.

Now the island’s poor women are “being marginalised,” Kimbowa said, in the “craze for expanding this palm.”

Namwanje said the only thing she knows to do is encourage people to start planting more trees, so that she has renewed access to firewood and charcoal. But that is not going to happen anytime soon. Other women have taken up jobs drying small mukene fish on the sand next to Lake Victoria.

What is particularly galling to Edisa Katusime, a single mother of six children, is that local officials had for years been warning residents about cutting down trees. She was told that the forest was critical for preserving the island’s animal life and she had to be secretive about gathering timber.

But the government is “not preventing Bidco because it’s a company,” she said. “They are allowed to cut when the government is telling us the importance of the trees.”

Kimbowa predicts that the small-scale job loss might be only the first of the problems the palm plantations are going to create. Eventually, he said, there are going to be issues with food security as land previously used for raising crops turns to palm trees. And already some of the women are reporting that the absence of forest covering is creating health issues.

The loss of the forest means there is no longer a shield from the strong winds that sometimes blow across Bugala Island. The wind now “sounds as if it’s going to knock the house down,” Katusime said. The dust it carries sometimes leaves her children in coughing fits and has been particularly dangerous for asthmatic residents.

And despite assurances from Bidco that it is following the plan laid out by NEMA to minimise environmental impact, UCSD is still monitoring the situation, concerned about issues like soil erosion and seepage of agrochemicals into Lake Victoria. Despite the jobs that Bidco has brought, most of the people on Bugala still live and die by fishing. If fish stocks are reduced, there will suddenly be a lot more people on the island without a source of income.

For now, the warnings of environmental groups and the complaints of women like Katusime and Namwanje are muted by widespread enthusiasm for the island’s palm oil industry. And it’s still growing. According to Bidco, the palm oil plantation will eventually cover 40,000 hectares and be the largest plantation in Africa.

There is division even within the small group of women infected with or affected by HIV/AIDS that Katusime and Namwanje belong to. Unlike those two women, Annette Nnamukasa was able to harness enough money to take advantage of the palm oil boom. She bought about two acres of land and had it cleared. In its place she planted palm trees and now sells the crop to Bidco.

“It is almost the same,” she said. “The palm trees are almost forests.” (END)

DURBAN, Afrique du Sud, 6 déc (IPS) – A quelques jours des négociations des Nations Unies sur les changements climatiques, de profondes divergences sur les questions clé de la conférence ont surgi. De sérieux doutes sur l’adoption du Fonds vert pour le climat sont apparus, tandis qu’une deuxième période du Protocole de Kyoto semble être de plus en plus improbable.

Un certain nombre de pays d’Amérique du sud, les Etats-Unis, l’Arabie Saoudite, l’Egypte, le Nigeria et le Venezuela ont exprimé des réserves par rapport à la signature du Fonds vert pour le climat (FVC), évoquant la nécessité de revoir certaines de ses clauses. L’Union européenne (UE), qui continue de soutenir le projet de document du fonds, a exhorté les pays à ne pas retarder ses progrès, avec pourtant peu de succès jusqu’ici.

“Il devrait être possible de s’entendre sur le projet d’instrument tel qu’il est. Il est un bon compromis. Dans sa forme actuelle, il attirerait des fonds importants”, a déclaré le négociateur de l’UE, Tomasz Chruszczow. “Ce serait contreproductif d’entreprendre de nouvelles discussions techniques sur cet instrument”.

Des organisations non gouvernementales et des militants du climat conviennent que la réouverture du texte de négociation compromettrait sérieusement les chances de finaliser le FVC avant la fin du sommet de la 17ème Conférence des parties (COP 17) en cours à Durban, en Afrique du Sud.

“Cela signifierait qu’il n’existe aucun instrument dans lequel l’argent pourrait entrer. Nous comprenons qu’il y ait des inquiétudes provenant de certaines parties, mais ce texte de négociation représentait un compromis politique bien équilibré et a mis des mois avant d’être finalisé”, a déploré Tasneem Essop, le directeur de la stratégie internationale sur le climat du Fonds mondial pour la nature.

Plus de 190 pays participant aux négociations climatiques mondiales à Durban étaient censés signer le FVC, qui est destiné à aider les pays en développement avec 100 milliards de dollars par an, d’ici à 2020, à s’adapter aux effets des changements climatiques.

Dans un effort pour réaliser un consensus, la présidente de la COP 17, Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, a indiqué qu’elle contacterait les différents pays à travers “des discussions transparentes et informelles” dans les jours à venir. Il n’existe, cependant, aucun processus ou délai définitif pour ces négociations. Les partisans du FVC attendent maintenant avec impatience la présentation de son rapport.

Certains experts suggèrent qu’au lieu de rouvrir les négociations, il devrait exister un texte supplémentaire pour le projet de document qui résout certaines des préoccupations les plus pressantes, tandis que d’autres questions pourraient être discutées par le conseil du FVC, une fois élu.

Economie d’adaptation

Un financement immédiat pour l’adaptation et l’atténuation permettra non seulement d’aider les pays à faire face aux changements climatiques, mais aura aussi un bon sens économique. La Banque mondiale et la ‘United States Geological Survey’ (Enquête géologique américaine) ont estimé que des pertes économiques à travers le monde dues aux catastrophes naturelles dans les années 1990 auraient pu être réduites de 280 milliards de dollars, si seulement 40 milliards de dollars avaient été investis dans la prévention des catastrophes.

Mais deux ans après s’être engagés à mobiliser 100 milliards de dollars par an pour l’atténuation et l’adaptation aux changements climatiques, lors de la COP 15 à Copenhague, les pays développés n’ont pas encore indiqué la source de provenance de ces fonds publics promis. Ils se sont plutôt concentrés sur les moyens de mobiliser le secteur privé.

“Si ce fonds vient avec un coffre vide, il n’aura pas de sens”, a averti Ilana Solomon, conseillère politique à ‘ActionAid’ aux Etats-Unis. “Nous savons que les temps sont durs pour une aide financière et que les budgets sont serrés”, a-t-elle déclaré, en référence à la crise dans la zone euro, “mais la vérité est que les pays riches peuvent réunir cet argent”.

Les difficultés à obtenir un financement pour le FVC sont alarmantes, car même si les pays finalisent en fin de compte tout le budget, il ne sera pas suffisant. Des estimations récentes effectuées par la Commission européenne et la Banque mondiale montrent qu’au moins le double du montant qui sera réuni pour le fonds est nécessaire pour l’adaptation et l’atténuation dans les pays en développement. D’autres experts soulignent que le monde aura besoin de 5,7 trillions de dollars d’ici à 2035 pour faire face aux effets des changements climatiques.

Des experts des changements climatiques indiquent également qu’une action est désormais nécessaire, parce qu’il faudra sept fois plus de temps pour inverser les effets négatifs des changements climatiques, que d’investir dans la prévention.

“Il semble que nous parlons beaucoup d’argent, mais le coût de l’inaction est bien plus élevé que celui de l’action”, a affirmé Kelly Dent, conseillère politique sur les changements climatiques à ‘Oxfam International – Australie’. “Nous avons besoin d’argent pour approvisionner le fonds. Et nous voulons qu’il soit disponible et rapidement opérationnel”.

Jusqu’à présent, les pays n’ont pas pu s’entendre sur un mécanisme unique pour attirer des fonds publics.

Kyoto – une COP morte?

Au milieu des discussions houleuses sur le fonds pour le climat, les chances que les pays acceptent une deuxième période d’engagement du Protocole de Kyoto, qui expirera à la fin de 2012, sont devenues aussi faibles. En dehors de l’UE, aucune autre nation industrialisée ne soutient actuellement l’idée d’une extension.

Les Etats-Unis, la Russie et le Japon ont clairement affiché leur désintérêt, tandis que le Canada a provoqué un tollé général il y a une semaine lorsque tout le monde a su qu’il veut abandonner le protocole, probablement pour éviter de payer des amendes pour n’avoir pas atteint ses objectifs de réduction des émissions.

“Nous ne pouvons pas laisser la distraction de la manœuvre du Canada détourner notre attention sur de très réels progrès qui peuvent être faits avec l’UE et d’autres, comme un pas crucial e avant pour un régime juridiquement contraignant et des réductions des émissions”, a exhorté Dent.

Même l’UE est en train de changer légèrement de tactique. Elle veut désormais que les plus grands émetteurs du monde s’accordent d’ci à 2015 sur un pacte contraignant à mettre en vigueur d’ici à 2020 au plus tard et offre en échange une extension de ses objectifs de réduction du carbone conformément au Protocole de Kyoto. L’UE a déclaré qu’elle espère sortir les négociations de l’impasse et trouver un “terrain d’entente” avec la Chine et d’autres économies émergentes.

Mais des experts des changements climatiques croient qu’attendre jusqu’en 2020 pour définir des objectifs fermes de réduction des émissions fera qu’il sera trop tard. “Nous avons besoin d’ambition pour augmenter les objectifs de réduction des émissions à partir de 2012. 2020 est trop tard”, a souligné Dent. (FIN/IPS/11)

Access to water is an urgent issue here in the Southern Africa region. Credit: Mantoe Phakathi/IPS

By Joshua Kyalimpa

DURBAN, South Africa, Dec 5 (IPS) – Efforts to establish water as an agenda item in its own right in climate change negotiations are gaining momentum in Durban, South Africa. Water experts say doing this will lead to a greater focus on developing policy, and attract more resources into the water sector through adaptation programmes.

“For every one of us, the first thing you use when you wake up in the morning is water, and when we are going to bed, it is water. Yet, it’s taken for granted,” says Chris Moseki, research manager at the Water Research Commission (WRC) in South Africa. WRC is a member of the Global Water Partnership (GWP) – a global alliance of organisations working on water issues.

Access to water is an urgent issue here in the Southern Africa region, where nearly 100 million people lack adequate access to water. Modelling by the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) in South Africa shows the region will become hotter and drier over the next 50 to 100 years, putting farms, industry, domestic water supply and natural ecosystems at risk.

International water experts and policy makers are concerned that planning for changes to water availability is not getting the prominence it deserves. Bai-Mass Taal, the Executive Secretary of the African Ministers’ Council on Water (AMCOW), says they are working to raise the profile of water within the framework of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

“We are saying to the parties, look: we appreciate what you are doing in other sectors, but without addressing water directly, all of that will be in vain,” says Taal.

At this point, water issues are being discussed by treaty negotiators as part of wider planning, prioritising and implementing of adaptation to a changing climate.

Dr. Ania Grobicki, GWP Executive Secretary, says that with growing numbers of countries expected to experience water scarcity, the current position of water in climate talks is inadequate.

“The GDP of many countries in the least developed countries is dependent on water. More than 50 percent of food for the world will come from Africa in the future, and this is dependent on availability of water,” she says. “That is why this discussion should go beyond where it’s now.”

More than 70 percent of the Southern African Development Community’s population depends directly on farming, overwhelmingly on rain-fed agriculture. The CSIR’s projections are among many drawing attention to how predicted changes to rainfall, limited resources for adaptation and a lack of institutions and capacity to regulate river and stream flow will leave people in Southern Africa and across the continent extremely vulnerable.

Similar challenges are predicted not only for Africa, but across the world as weather patterns change, but Africa’s lack of irrigation and other infrastructure is a factor that magnifies the need for urgent intervention.

Africa’s response

As rainfall patterns change, Africa is facing major crises. Millions faced famine in Niger and Mali in 2010 after drought hit farmers and herders. This year, the Horn of Africa has been facing its worst drought in 50 years and millions are suffering from hunger. According to the U.N. World Food Programme, some 12.3 million people in the Horn are in need of emergency assistance.

Rhoda Peace, the African Union Commissioner for Rural Economy and Agriculture, points out that when African leaders talk about climate change; they invariably talk about droughts and floods’, showing that water is already a high priority.

In 2008, African heads of state agreed to make water and sanitation a priority.

“Leaders agreed to allocate at least 0.5 percent of their national budget to water,” says Peace. “Now whether that is actually the case is another story, but some countries are doing very well and may reach their targets.”

Providing adequate access to water across Africa will cost billions of dollars. And for the many African governments which are failing to honour earlier commitments will not be able to raise the required amounts without support.

Simon Thuo, the Eastern Africa coordinator for GWP, says he is surprised that despite the clear need, even the African negotiating group’s proposals mention water only in passing. Along with other experts, he believes that if climate negotiations address management of this essential commodity specifically, it will not receive the necessary attention and funding.

(END/2011)

Nalifu Yussif holds a few Bolga baskets at the ongoing COP 17 in Durban, South Africa. Materials for making these hand woven baskets are becoming more difficult to source due to climate change. Credit: Isaiah Esipisu/IPS

By Isaiah Esipisu

DURBAN, South Africa, Dec 5 (IPS) – Talata Nsor, a 54-year-old woman from Bolgatanga community in Northern Ghana, has been weaving the cultural Bolga baskets, which are named after her community, her entire life.

It has been a successful enterprise for her, and she has even managed to put her children through school with proceeds from her sales.

However, she is concerned that soon her community may no longer be able to continue making the baskets, which are famous in the entire West African region, with a market in Europe and America.

This is because the raw material used to make the baskets, commonly known as elephant grass or Veta vera as it is known scientifically, is becoming extinct due to what Nsor refers to as changing climatic conditions.

“Just 10 years ago, I would walk to any nearby wetland area within Northern Ghana and harvest the grass free of charge. But today, I have to walk very far, or travel to Kumasi, about 400 kilometres away, in order to buy the raw material,” said Nsor.

The elephant grass can only grow in wetlands. But according to experts from the area, people are converting wetlands into agricultural land as a means of coping with the lack of rain and rising food insecurity.

“People prefer turning wetlands into horticultural zones because rain-fed agriculture is failing. Rain patterns are no-longer reliable, and people need to farm in places where they are assured of water for irrigation,” said Nafisatu Yussif, Programme Officer at ABANTU, an organisation that engages policies from a gender perspective in Africa.

She is one of the many women representing their communities from all over the world who have made their way to the ongoing United Nations climate change negotiations in Durban, South Africa, in order to have their voices heard.

“We are hosting different women from different walks of life,” said Samantha Hargreaves of ActionAid International, one of the conveners of the Rural Women’s Assembly running alongside the 17th Conference of Parties.

“More than 500 women in this forum are sharing experiences from different countries, suggesting the way forward, and showcasing their best practices. The outcome of the assembly will be presented to the African Group of Negotiators as a common position of women from the world’s poor countries,” said Hargreaves.

However, according to the assembly’s participants, women from poor countries have predicaments that are almost similar.

“In my country, women toil on the farms, but when it comes to harvesting, the men take the responsibility of collecting the money. I have just learnt that the situation is the same in Africa and other Asian countries,” said María Estela Jocón González, who is representing rural women from three rural regions in Guatemala.

The western, southern and northern regions of Guatemala are areas prone to floods, a situation which has worsened in the recent past, González said.

“When the floods come, the water wells get soaked up with dirty flooding water. Yet according to our culture, it is the sole responsibility of a woman to ensure that the family has enough safe water for drinking and other domestic uses,” she told IPS.

She is calling for the international community meeting in Durban to ensure systems are put in place to keep in check the increasing floods.

“I want to hear of commitments for countries to reduce emissions of gasses that cause global warming. It is good to think about development, but development without a sound environment is useless,” she said.

While there is flooding in Guatemala, southern Senegal is experiencing a lack of rainfall. Faty Khody from Kaulak, a rural community found in the southern part of Senegal, told IPS that rainfall in the area has dropped from an average of 900 millimetres in 2001, to between 300 and 400 millimetres currently.

“We used to grow vegetables and sell them in the local market. But currently, this is not possible unless it is done through irrigation,” said Khody, who works as a promotional officer for Interpench, a community-based organisation that brings together over 7,700 women from rural Senegal.

“The rain patterns have changed, droughts have become extreme, and when it rains, it results in floods, which often cause suffering to the rural people, especially women and children.”

With support from the non-governmental organisation Horizon 3000, Interpench has started a project called “One woman, one fruit tree” as a way of adapting to climate change.

“We say one tree because it is the first step. The seedling for the one tree is given out free of charge, and it is named after whoever plants it as a reminder. However, it is supposed to be a motivation for women to participate largely in not only the planting of trees, but planting fruit-producing trees,” Khody said.

“We are hoping that the deliberations at COP 17 will come up with ideas that will support such women- driven climate change adaptation initiatives,” said Hargreaves.

However, she insists that for such projects to succeed, they must be built on indigenous knowledge systems.

“The African Group of Negotiators must not succumb to the pressure from the developed countries at COP 17,” she said.

Similar views were shares by Elizabeth Kakukuru, the Programme Officer for the Gender Unit at the Southern African Development Community.

“Most negotiations have always been done in boardrooms without involving the person on the ground. Yet the recommendations made are supposed to be implemented by a woman who lives in a rural area. Time has come for the affected parties to be involved directly in such important negotiations,” she said.

With regards to the use of technology transfer for climate change adaptation, Kakukuru observed that all projects must be appropriate, and should be developed in consultation with indigenous communities.

(END/2011)

Only owners of large tracts of land can be expected to benefit from soil carbon credits. Credit: Zukiswa Zimela/IPS

By Stephen Leahy

DURBAN, South Africa, Dec 2 (IPS) – Civil society has warned of the danger of turning Africa’s food-producing lands into “carbon farms” so that rich countries can avoid making cuts in their carbon emissions.

On Friday, they called on host country South Africa to refrain from forcing so-called “climate smart” agriculture into the United Nations climate treaty negotiations known as the 17th Conference of the Parties (COP 17).

South African President Jacob Zuma has stated that agriculture should be part of a new climate treaty. South African officials have previously told IPS they want it included so there will be “specific funds and specific actions” for agriculture under the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change.

“Putting agriculture into a future climate treaty is supposedly a consolation prize to Africa for failure by rich countries to agree to legally binding targets,” said Teresa Anderson of the Gaia Foundation, an international non-governmental organisation based in London.

“This consolation prize is a poisoned chalice. It will lead to land grabs and deliver African farmers into the hands of fickle carbon markets,” Anderson told IPS.

Agriculture is a major source of global warming gases like carbon and methane – directly accounting for 15 percent to 30 percent of global emissions. When the entire food production system is included, total agriculture emissions represent nearly half of all emissions. For those reasons there have been previous efforts to incorporate agriculture under a new climate treaty.

Changes in agricultural practices can greatly reduce emissions.  However, the best way to do that is through regulations, not a climate treaty and carbon credits, said Anderson.

“Why are markets now seen as the only solution when less than 10 years ago they weren’t a focus at all?”

The World Bank and the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization and other organisations favour what they call “climate smart” agriculture that is defined as forms of farming that are sustainable, increases productivity and resilience to changing weather while reducing and/or removing greenhouse gases. It is the latter that civil society objects to.

“This is all about new carbon markets. The North still has not made the necessary emission cuts and want this so they can pretend to reduce their emissions,” said Helena Paul of EcoNexus, an environmental NGO.

“There is a profound danger to agriculture here, with real potential for more land grabbing and expansion of monocultures in order to harvest credits,” said Paul.

African governments see the 144 billion dollars in the European carbon market and think this would be a great source of funding, said Anderson. But in fact very little of this money, much less than one percent, ended up in actual projects, she said.

The very first project to sell soil carbon credits in Africa is underway in Kenya. Funded by the World Bank, some 15,000 farmers and 800 farmer groups are changing their practices to sequester carbon for a 20-year period. The costs to set up the Kenya Agricultural Carbon Project along with the costs involved in measuring the carbon and marketing the credits are estimated at more than one million dollars, said Anne Maina of the African Biodiversity Network in Kenya.

At current carbon prices, farmers will get just a dollar a year for their efforts when they were promised much more, said Maina. Only owners of large tracts of land can be expected to benefit. Large landowners and the consultants and other experts will get most of the money, she told IPS.

“Africa is already suffering from a land grab epidemic – the race to control soils for carbon trading could only make this worse.”

The Kenya Agricultural Carbon Project does promote sustainable farming practices such as agroforestry that are good for the land and have increased food production she acknowledged. However, it would be far better to fund these with the adaptation funding that has been promised by developed countries.

“Carbon markets are highly volatile,” said Steve Suppan of the Institute for Trade and Agriculture, a United States-based civil organisation focused on agriculture.

In November the carbon price was just six dollars a tonne, 50 percent of what it was in January largely as a result of the European financial crisis. Carbon prices are simply too unreliable for most investors to consider as long-term investments, said Suppan.

Moreover, measuring how much carbon has been sequestered is extremely technical and uncertain over the long term and so investors like the World Bank discount the value by 60 percent.

“Soil carbon credits will only generate tiny revenues for farmers and allows biggest polluters to continue to pollute,” Suppan said.

What African agriculture needs, is real emissions reductions along with substantial adaptation funding, he said.

“Soil carbon credits are a false solution,” to climate change, agreed Nnimmo Bassey, chairperson of Friends of the Earth International.

Bassey called on rich industrialised countries, which are responsible for the climate crisis, to reaffirm their commitments “to legally binding emissions cuts in line with science and equity.”

At a press conference at COP 17, Bassey and other members of African NGOs called on African delegates to stand together to make sure this meeting ends with radical action to legally binding emissions cuts in line with science and equity.

“South African President Jacob Zuma must stand with Africa and be uncompromising…. We need deep and drastic binding emissions cuts by the rich countries and real, public climate finance, not a mandate for a new wave of financial colonialism through a private sector “facility” in the new Green Climate Fund,” said Bobby Peek of Friends of the Earth South Africa said in a statement.

(END/2011)

DURBAN, Afrique du Sud, 2 déc (IPS) – La Communauté de développement d’Afrique australe (SADC) veut que l’eau soit présentée comme un point distinct dans les négociations sur les changements climatiques – la décrivant comme étant trop importante pour être laissée à la périphérie.

L’eau – dont l’agriculture est le plus grand consommateur – a été identifiée par des scientifiques comme une victime des changements climatiques. La croissance démographique, la pollution et la distribution inéquitable en ont également rajouté au stress de l’eau en Afrique australe.

“L’adaptation est la principale priorité”, a déclaré le ministre sud-africain de l’Eau et des Affaires environnementales, Edna Molewa, aux délégués lors du lancement de la ‘SADC Climate Change Adaptation (CCA) Strategy for Water’ [Stratégie d’adaptation de la SADC aux changements climatiques (CCA) pour l'eau] durant la 17ème Conférence des parties (COP 17) des Nations Unies à Durban, en Afrique du Sud.

“Nous savons que les discussions sur l’atténuation sont importantes, mais nous croyons que nous devons faire beaucoup plus de travail par rapport à l’adaptation afin qu’en tant que continent et en tant que SADC, nous puissions nous adapter aux effets des changements climatiques dont nous commençons à voir les impacts quotidiennement”, a indiqué Molewa.

Molewa a appelé pour des actions globales et intégrées afin de s’attaquer à l’effet des changements climatiques sur la précieuse ressource en eau. Certaines de ces actions comprennent la gestion des inondations et l’utilisation de l’eau.

La stratégie de la SADC sur l’eau est destinée à améliorer la résistance aux changements climatiques dans la région et guidera les Etats membres dans les négociations à la COP 17 où la pression monte sur les dirigeants du monde pour qu’ils mettent un frein au réchauffement de la planète en réduisant les émissions de dioxyde de carbone.

“Nous ne pouvons pas rester derrière et dire que nous voyons les effets des changements climatiques sans pouvoir faire quelque chose”, a déclaré Molewa, ajoutant que “quelque chose doit être faite dans les négociations, la COP 18, et la COP 19 et… nous espérons que nous n’atteindrons pas la COP 28 sans une solution. Mais, en attendant, nous devons nous adapter”.

La Convention-cadre des Nations Unies sur les changements climatiques (CCNUCC) est responsable du cadre global des efforts intergouvernementaux visant à faire face au défi des changements climatiques. Elle reconnaît que le système climatique est une ressource partagée dont la stabilité peut être affectée par les émissions industrielles et autres de dioxyde de carbone et de gaz à effet de serre. Après 17 années de discussions, les émissions de carbone continuent d’augmenter.

Le professeur Mark New, directeur de la ‘Africa Climate and Development Initiative’ (Initiative sur le climat et le développement en Afrique), à l’Université du Cap, a déclaré que bien que l’eau soit importante et doive être mise en évidence, elle doit être intégrée dans d’autres questions.

“Je pense que le désir de séparer la question de l’eau découle d’une perspective importante que l’eau est l’un des facteurs importants autour de l’adaptation aux changements climatiques. La rendre distincte signifie que l’eau est séparée de beaucoup d’autres questions auxquelles elle est liée”, a souligné New à IPS.

“L’eau est importante pour l’énergie et l’agriculture. En Afrique, spécialement en termes de maîtrise de l’évolution démographique pendant que nous passons d’une société rurale à une société plus urbaine, nous devons être en train de penser de manière intégrée à la façon dont les changements climatiques affecteront (l’eau) et comment les décisions que nous prenons dans un domaine, autour de l’eau, interagiront avec d’autres secteurs qui nous intéressent”.

New a indiqué que le principe fondamental de la convention sur le climat est d’éviter des changements climatiques dangereux et que l’eau était donc implicitement prise en compte parce que les effets des changements climatiques auront une incidence sur l’eau, ensemble avec tous les autres secteurs.

Au cours de septembre 2011, les ministres de la SADC chargés de l’Eau ont instruit le secrétariat de l’organisation de faire pression pour que l’eau soit un point distinct dans les négociations avec la CCNUCC. Il y a un débat sur les défis et les possibilités d’avoir l’eau comme un élément séparé dans les négociations.

Phera Ramoeli, directeur des programmes, des infrastructures et des services de l’eau au sein du secrétariat de la SADC, a déclaré à un groupe de discussion, après le lancement de la stratégie de la CCA, que le fait d’avoir l’eau comme un point distinct pour les négociateurs de la CCNUCC, renforcerait son profil pour attirer des financements pour l’adaptation.

“Nous pensons qu’il est important que l’eau soit un point spécifique dans le débat sur les changements climatiques, car l’eau est un moteur et un catalyseur pour le développement socioéconomique et est liée au PIB (produit intérieur brut) dans la plupart de nos pays où le PIB augmente de trois pour cent là où il y a plus d’eau, et de moins d’un pour cent là où il y en a moins”, a souligné Ramoeli. (FIN)

Zambian dairy farmer, Effatah Jele, does not believe in farming luck. Credit: Busani Bafana/IPS

By Busani Bafana

DURBAN, South Africa, Dec 1 (IPS) – Zambian dairy farmer, Effatah Jele, does not believe in farming luck but in pragmatism because of climate change.

“Farmers should be taught about good farming practises instead of blaming everything on climate change,” said Jele, who runs a dairy farm in the Luanshya Cooperbelt Province of Zambia and is the vice chairperson of the Dairy Association.

“Changes are there, no doubt, but it is also important for farmers to have the right farming practises for them to survive those changes. For example, some women are growing vegetables and, due to ignorance, dig the soil right up to edge of the river. Then, when it rains, the soil is all washed into the stream and after a few years the stream becomes shallow. And some say this is because of climate change.”

Jele said changes in the weather pattern have serious implications for farmers like her who depend on increasingly scarce water resources to keep a viable dairy herd. Crop farmers, she said, are worse off unless science and practical ideas come the rescue.

“I feel our scientists should go around talking to the farmers and making them understand the difference between climate change and self-inflicted problems through using the wrong ways of farming. That is important, because otherwise we will not find solutions that will ensure food security,” Jele said.

“Some of things we blame on climate change are failures by us farmers to do the right thing at the right time. Because there is a song of climate change, we are all singing ‘climate change, climate change’,” said Jele.

Fears of what climate change will do for African agriculture are real and in southern Africa farmers are taking action to ensure that negotiators at 17th Conference of Parties (COP 17) in Durban get the message.

The Southern African Confederation of Agricultural Unions (SACAU) – granted observer status at the United Nations Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) session – wants the global negotiations to put agriculture firmly on the climate change agenda and establish a work programme that will outline and coordinate necessary responses such as a specific allocation to the sector under the Green Climate Fund.

Climate smart initiatives such as conservation farming, water harvesting will not only help farmers cope with extreme weather but also ensure they curb carbon emissions. According to scientists, agriculture is responsible for between 15 to 30 percent of global emission of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, which affects the earth’s temperature.

Farmers are campaigning for a deal that specifically includes agriculture, which will be heavily affected by climate change in terms of reduced crop yields and low productivity. For them productive and sustainable and farms are the insurance against the risks of climate change.

Noting the close links between the challenges of addressing climate change and feeding a growing global population, the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) President Kanayo Nwanze is to call on COP 17 to focus on helping half a billion smallholder farmers in developing countries to grow more food in environmentally sustainable ways.

According to research by the Consultative Group on International Agriculture Research, climate change will shrink agriculture productivity with projections of a rise in temperatures and an increase in droughts and floods, which would alter agricultural seasons and decrease harvests

“Our expectations as farmers of Southern Africa is to have agriculture included in the text that will be agreed at the end of the Durban COP 17,” said Stephanie Aubin, SACAU Policy Development Officer.

“Agriculture must be included in the specific text so that there are specific funds and specific action that are implemented.”

A draft text was discussed and negotiated during the past COP meetings in Copenhagen and Cancun but was dropped because agriculture was lumped together with bunker fuels.

“It is important that agriculture has special treatment at the UNFCCC negotiations because its special in terms of livelihoods for millions of people in Africa and food security for the planet and it’s the most climate sensitive sector which at the same time can contribute adaptation and mitigation efforts,” said Aubin.

“We want a specific chapter on agriculture in the text and long term action as it will unlock funding needed by the agriculture sector in Africa to response efficiently to Climate change.”

Aubin was optimistic that with the COP 17 being held in Africa, African governments will put the required effort to push for agriculture in the final text.

A grouping of 15 global and regional organisations have endorsed a call to action for COP 17 climate change negotiators stating that whilst agriculture is a contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, it has significant potential to be part of the solution to climate change.

“At the upcoming climate change negotiations in Durban, we call on negotiators to recognise the important role of agriculture in addressing climate change so that a new era of agricultural innovation and knowledge sharing can be achieved, said a grouping of global and regional, ” said the statement issued ahead of the Agriculture and Rural Development Day event to be held at COP 17.

“Specifically, we ask that they approve a work programme for agriculture under the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice so that the sector can take early action to determine the long-term investments needed to transform agriculture to meet future challenges.”

Bruce Campbell, Director of the CGIAR Research Programme on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS), told IPS that agriculture has been neglected in the negotiations so far, despite the sector accounting for between 16 to 29 percent of total emissions. Additionally, he said farmers, especially poor farmers in the developing world, are going to be particularly hard-hit by climate change.

“The agricultural sector must be empowered to take early action to determine the long-term investments needed to transform agriculture to meet future food and energy challenges effectively,” Campbell said. “The Agriculture and Rural Development Day will not only reflect this call-to-action, but it will also showcase a series of success stories in agriculture, which specific actions could be further scaled up with further investment and a coordinated approach to implementation.”

(END/2011)

Climate change wreaks damage on infrastructure, ecosystems, livelihoods and lives in developing countries. Credit: Zukiswa Zimela/IPS

By Tim Ash Vie *

DURBAN, South Africa, Dec 1 (IPS) – As climate talks get underway in Durban, South Africa this week, progress on a Green Climate Fund is one of the hottest, most contentious tickets in town. It is also one of the great prizes to be won.

The fund would, in theory, provide a new, substantial source of funds to help developing countries adapt to the negative impacts of climate change and pursue low carbon development; it is meant to be a major vehicle for delivering 100 billion dollars a year in climate finance to developing countries by 2020.

Agreement on the structure of the fund and on sources of cash (at least for the medium term) must be secured in Durban, to keep this ambition on track. Developing country observers believe such an agreement on climate finance is vital. Why is it so urgent?

The Kyoto Protocol’s first commitment period expires late next year, and international leaders have not yet agreed a framework to succeed it. With the clock ticking on this legal deal, there will be a gap until any new version is adopted.

As developing countries press for a new global deal to cut greenhouse gas emissions, caution dictates that they must prepare to adapt to a world in which climate change wreaks damage on infrastructure, ecosystems, livelihoods and lives.

In the words of Professor Robert Watson, former chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, developing country decision makers are calling for a “two degree world” – where the average global temperature is curbed at two degrees above pre-industrial levels – but must prepare to adapt to a “three or four degree world.”

For developing countries, this means bracing for rising sea levels that will make atolls and coastal settlements less habitable. Droughts will become more prolonged and frequent, and rainfall patterns far more erratic.

The current drought in the Horn of Africa, and the devastating floods in El Salvador last month and Durban, South Africa this week are indicative of the weather extremes that will become more frequent by mid-century as climate change takes hold. These impacts will be felt even in a “two degree world”, but in a “three or four degree world” they will become even more severe and unpredictable.

Climate finance is not just a story about preparing for the worst, though. Developing countries also recognise opportunities to attract investment in low carbon technologies, which will increase their global competitiveness.

What could be a more compelling prospect that to leapfrog past soon-to-be obsolete technologies that guzzle fossil fuels, and avoid some of the carbon lock-in experienced by industrialised nations?

The Government of Rwanda will launch its National Green Growth and Climate Resilience Strategy at the 17th Conference of the Parties in Durban next week.

Rwandan President Paul Kagame has said he sees low carbon development as a win-win situation for Rwanda. It could reduce Rwanda’s dependence on foreign imported oil and create an economic stimulus by redirecting payments toward clean energy production at home, as well as reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

However, financial support from foreign governments and the private sector will be needed in order to realise such ambitions.

Developing countries’ hopes for progress on climate finance in Durban are set against a background of frustrated ambition. They are approaching the end of the so-called “fast-start finance” commitment period that was agreed in Copenhagen in 2009.

The aspiration set out in the Copenhagen Accord was to raise 30 billion dollars of new and additional funding over the three years until 2012. Have industrialised countries even delivered on this deal?

The trouble is fast-start finance has no easily identifiable form, being typically delivered through existing channels of delivery and disbursement. Therefore, trying to track that funding has proved difficult and confusing.

Even seasoned observers cannot get an accurate handle on how much money has been allocated, and for what ends. While some “new and additional” funding has certainly been allocated, examples abound of projects being re-branded “fast-start” even when they pre-date Copenhagen and there is a large gap between pledges and good intention, and disbursement.

Chair of the African Group of Negotiators in the climate negotiations, Tosi Mpanu Mpanu has simply put it: “Fast start has not really delivered – only 10 percent of fast start is new and additional.”

A new online portal developed by the United Nations may start to address these issues but in the current circumstances, mistrust pervades.

The 2010 to 2012 fast start period was only ever just that: a start. Currently, we do not know where the money is going to come from to reach the loftier ambition to provide developing countries with 100 billion dollars a year by 2020.

Ideas for specific sources of revenue have been proposed, such as an air passenger levy, a tax on financial transactions and a carbon levy on polluting emissions from shipping.

Yet, mobilising such sources could take several years, which raises the prospect of a serious funding gap after the fast start period ends in 2013.

We know for sure that public sources will not fulfil that promise alone, and private sector money will be needed. In the meantime, developing countries expect public sources to lead the way.

The private sector role in the GCF is not a question of syphoning off scarce public funds. It is about using at least some of this public money to catalyse private investment at scale, to accelerate low carbon development. With public funds under pressure in many Annex 1 countries, the private sector role is going to be critical.

As well as hard cash, the institutional set up for financing climate compatible development is important. A good outcome from Durban would be if the GCF were formally established in line with the recommendations put to theUnited Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change by its Transitional Committee on Finance.

Having the fund’s operational structure agreed would enable commitments made in Copenhagen and Cancun to be taken forward while meeting aid effectiveness principles.

A variety of other climate finance mechanisms already in operation, such as the Adaptation Fund, will also need to be shored up, and this would need to be done in parallel with agreements on the capitalisation of the GCF.

The prevailing economic climate makes discussions of climate finance difficult, but the time to deliver this fund is now.

World leaders must leave Durban with a clearer picture on what climate finance can be delivered between 2013 and 2019, beyond the fast-start period.

The form of the GCF and its capitalisation could be the “crown jewels” of a South African climate conference. They would provide real impetus for developing countries to step up climate action themselves.

* Tim Ash Vie is Head of Negotiations at Climate and Development Knowledge Network.

(END/2011)

DURBAN, Afrique du Sud, 1 déc (IPS) – Les changements climatiques à travers le monde peuvent être désormais observés depuis l’espace grâce aux satellites de l’Organisation des Nations Unies pour l’alimentation et l’agriculture (FAO).

La FAO a lancé une nouvelle technologie qui peut étudier les forêts dans le monde via des satellites et fournir un tableau plus fiable et global des menaces communes à l’environnement, telles que la déforestation, la dégradation ou l’exploitation forestière illégale.

Utilisant une technologie d’étude par télédétection, la FAO a pris et analysé plus de 13.500 images satellitaires à haute résolution dans 102 pays. Ces images aideront les nations à évaluer avec précision l’état de leurs forêts. Le suivi du changement des forêts a des implications importantes pour la conservation de la biodiversité, le stockage du carbone et les moyens de subsistance humaine.

Les pertes de forêts dans le monde entier peuvent être désormais quantifiées pour la première fois, a annoncé la FAO lors de la 17ème Conférence des parties de l’ONU sur les changements climatiques, qui se déroule du 28 novembre au 9 décembre à Durban, en Afrique du Sud.

“C’est une étude très globale des forêts du monde. Pour la première fois, nous avons des données mondiales et régionales à long terme, cohérentes et comparables sur la perte des terres forestières. Jusqu’à présent, la plupart des informations disponibles viennent en nombre, et non sous forme de cartes (sur la base d’images satellitaires)”, a expliqué Adam Gerrand, un scientifique responsable du suivi des forêts à la FAO.

En conséquence, très peu de pays ont pu surveiller, dans le temps, l’effet des changements climatiques et l’intervention humaine sur leurs forêts de façon constante.

“Nous manquons de bonnes informations sur la déforestation et avons d’urgence besoin de plus de détails sur la dynamique de la perte des forêts. Nous n’avons pas obtenu toutes les données jusqu’ici”, a ajouté Gerrand.

Les premiers résultats obtenus à partir des données satellitaires à haute résolution montrent que la superficie forestière mondiale totale a diminué de 14,5 millions d’hectares en moyenne par an, entre 1990 et 2005. Cela s’est largement produit sous les tropiques, probablement en raison de la conversion des forêts tropicales en terres agricoles.

“Le taux de perte de forêts est passé de quatre millions d’hectares dans les années 1990 à six millions d’hectares entre 2000 et 2005″, a déclaré Gerrand. “Nous perdons le stockage de carbone vital, la biodiversité et d’autres valeurs qu’offrent les forêts”.

Toutefois, il existe aussi quelques bonnes nouvelles. L’étude montre que la déforestation ne se produit pas aussi vite que des pays le signalent. Les nouvelles données ont montré une perte nette de 73 millions d’hectares entre 1990 et 2005 par rapport à la précédente estimation de 107 millions d’hectares de perte nette pour la même période.

Pendant ce temps, la perte des forêts était la plus forte sous les tropiques, où se trouvent un peu moins de la moitié des forêts du monde, suivis de l’Afrique. L’Asie était la seule région à afficher des gains nets pour des terres forestières dans ces deux périodes. La déforestation s’est produite ici aussi, mais la plantation extensive d’arbres qui a été annoncée par plusieurs pays d’Asie, principalement la Chine , a dépassé les zones forestières qui étaient perdues.

Toutes les images satellitaires sont prises à des centaines de kilomètres et comprennent une superficie de 10 kilomètres carrés. Elles sont classées, étiquetées, puis transmises aux pays où elles ont été prises, de sorte que les gouvernements puissent examiner et confirmer les données.

“C’est un cadre que les pays peuvent utiliser pour améliorer les ressources forestières”, a expliqué Gerrand.

Certains pays ont déjà bénéficié de la nouvelle technologie satellitaire. En Papouasie-Nouvelle-Guinée, un petit pays en Océanie, par exemple, qui est à 65 pour cent couvert de forêts, 41 images satellitaires ont été prises pour établir l’effet que les changements climatiques ont eu sur sa couverture forestière.

“Notre pays n’avait pas la technologie pour évaluer la dégradation des forêts. Les nouvelles images satellitaires améliorent la crédibilité des données”, a affirmé Dr Joe Pokana, chef du bureau national de lutte contre les changements climatiques en Papouasie-Nouvelle-Guinée. “Nous envisageons désormais d’installer un système de surveillance national solide qui nous aidera à comprendre le niveau de dégradation et développer des politiques”.

De même, l’Angola a commencé à étudier la menace de déforestation grâce aux cartes photographiques fournies par les satellites. Les forêts constituent actuellement 43,4 pour cent de ce pays d’Afrique australe.

“Nous disposons d’importantes informations sur la façon dont nos ressources forestières sont utilisées, sur les stocks de carbone, les problèmes environnementaux, les causes de dégradation et de déforestation”, a indiqué Mateus Andre, chef du département des forêts de l’Angola. “Pour la première fois, nous avons des informations de qualité sur lesquelles nous pouvons fonder des décisions”.

Les nouvelles données sont particulièrement importantes pour des régions en développement comme l’Afrique, où les informations existantes sont souvent dépassées ou de mauvaise qualité à cause du manque de capacité. Elles diffèrent des précédentes conclusions de la FAO dans le rapport intitulé ‘Global Forest Resources Assessment of 2010′ (Evaluation des ressources forestières mondiales 2010), qui étaient basées sur une compilation de rapports nationaux qui avaient utilisé une grande variété de sources.

“La déforestation prive des millions de personnes de produits et services forestiers qui sont cruciaux pour les moyens de subsistance en milieu rural, le bien-être économique et la santé environnementale”, a expliqué Eduardo Rojas-Briales, sous-directeur général de la FAO , responsable des forêts.

“Les nouveaux chiffres satellitaires nous donnent un tableau global plus cohérent. Ensemble avec la gamme variée d’informations fournies par les rapports nationaux, ils offrent aux décideurs, à tous les niveaux, des renseignements plus précis”. (FIN/IPS/11)

Geoffrey Ndung’u earns a living growing watermelons on his dry land. Credit: Isaiah Esipisu/IPS

DURBAN, South Africa, Dec 1 (IPS) – On a Sunday evening, a track loaded with 10 tonnes of watermelons leaves Geoffrey Ndung’u’s homestead in Kanyonga village in semi-arid Eastern Kenya. It travels past a village shopping centre were people have formed a queue to receive food aid because of a prolonged drought in the area.

While his fellow villagers are feeling the effect of the drought, Ndung’u has turned it into a business and his harvest will earn him 2,000 dollars, from farming just 1.2 hectares of dry land.

“It is now two years since I learnt how to co-exist with the drought, thanks to support from ActionAid International and the Ministry of Agriculture,” says the 56-year-old father of five.

A host of humanitarian organisations in partnership with the government have undertaken to train people from drought-stricken areas in Kenya on how to take advantage of worsening conditions. “We have introduced a new project known as ‘Drought Coping Training’, where we train members of communities from arid and semi-arid areas on how to co-exist with the ever-changing climatic conditions,” says Francis Njoroge, the officer in charge of ActionAid International – Kenya in the larger Embu region.

The need for finance for adaptation measures like this forms part of the African position at the ongoing 17th Conference of Parties (COP 17) under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Durban, South Africa.

“Africa’s commitment to addressing the change is evident across the continent. We have seen people engage in adaptation projects from the grassroots at personal and community level. Yet we are sure that this can be scaled up to national levels and eventually continental levels,” said the Permanent Secretary for Kenya’s Ministry of Environment and Mineral Resources Ali Mohammed.

Kenya’s constitution recognises the importance of protecting the environment. It stipulates that farmers should ensure that at least 10 percent of their farms have trees in order to increase forest cover, while at the same time addressing the issue of climate change mitigation.

“All we need to see in Durban is for the developed world – which consists of countries that hold the biggest responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions – commit themselves to providing funds for adaptation measures, capacity building and technology transfer,” added Mohammed.

The Angolan delegation to COP 17 has also called for funding for adaptation projects. The country wants to focus on agriculture as a means of providing food security, employment and a source of income and is looking for innovative methods of food production that can withstand the changing climatic conditions.

Angola also has an action plan for alternative sources of energy.

“We are championing for the use of alternative sources of energy, especially in rural areas, in order to save forests. We are at the same time encouraging farmers to engage in sustained charcoal farming, so that trees are grown specifically for fuel production,” said Abias Huongo, the head of Angolan delegation. Angola is also seeking funding for climate monitoring mechanisms that will enable the government to put in place early warning systems for climate-related disasters.

However, the African delegation noted that the continent might fail to make further progress if there is no commitment from the developed countries to finance adaptation projects.

“The African Group of Negotiators is concerned by the insufficient transparency and slow disbursement of the financial resources pledged by developed countries as ‘fast start’ finance for the period 2010-2012. To address this, the African Group proposes a common reporting format for finance pledges,” said Seyni Nafo, the spokesperson of the African Group of Negotiators.

Head of Programmes at the Third World Network – Africa, Tetteh Hormek, echoed his sentiments. He said that the developed world should come out clearly to support developing countries to adapt to climate change.

“As the Kyoto Protocol enters into the second phase by the year 2012, we are calling upon the developed world to cut down on carbon financing mechanisms, which are like a double edged sword,” said Hormeku. (END)

David Lessole (left) with Phera Ramoeli

By Busani Bafana

DURBAN, South Africa, Nov 30 (IPS) — The Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) wants water to be tabled as a standalone item on climate change negotiations – describing it as too important to leave on the periphery.

Water – of which agriculture is the largest consumer – has been identified by scientists as a victim of climate change. Growing populations, pollution and unfair distribution have also added to water stress in southern Africa.

“Adaptation is the main priority,” South Africa’s Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs Edna Molewa told delegates at the launch of the SADC Climate Change Adaptation (CCA) Strategy for Water during the United Nations 17th Conference of the Parties (COP 17) in Durban, South Africa.

“We know that discussions around mitigation are important but we believe we need to do much more work in relation to adaptation so that as a continent and as SADC we can adapt to the impacts of climate change whose daily impacts we are beginning to see,” said Molewa.

Molewa called for comprehensive and integrated actions to tackle the impact of climate change on the precious water resource. Some of the actions include flood management and water use.

The SADC strategy on water is meant to improve climate resilience in the region and will guide member states with negotiations at COP 17 where pressure is on for global leaders to put the brakes on global warming by cutting carbon dioxide emissions.

“We cannot sit back and say we are seeing the impact of climate change but we cannot do something,” said Molewa, adding that, “something has to be done in the talks, COP 18, and COP 19 and … we hope we will not reach COP 28 without a solution. But, in the meantime, we need to adapt.”

The U.N. Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is responsible for the overall framework for intergovernmental efforts to tackle the challenge of climate change. It recognises that the climate system is a shared resource whose stability can be affected by industrial and other emissions of carbon dioxide and greenhouse gases. After 17 years of discussions, carbon emissions are still growing.

Professor Mark New, director of the Africa Climate and Development Initiative at the University of Cape Town, said while water was important and should be highlighted, it must be integrated with other issues.

“I think that the desire to make it water stand alone stems from an important perspective that water is one of the important factors around climate change adaptation. Making it stand alone means that water is separated from many other issues it is linked with,” New told IPS.

“Water is important for energy and agriculture. In Africa, specifically in terms of coping with the changing demographics as we move from a rural society to a more urban society, we have to be thinking in a integrated manner about the way climate change will impact and how decisions we make in one area, around water, will interact with other sectors we are interested in.”

New said the underlying principle of the climate convention is to avoid dangerous climate change and water was therefore implicitly included because the impacts of climate change will affect water along with all other sectors.

During September 2011, SADC ministers responsible for water instructed the SADC Secretariat to push for the inclusion of water as a standalone agenda item under the UNFCCC negotiation. There is debate on the challenges and opportunities of having water as standalone agenda in the negotiations.

Phera Ramoeli, Head of Water Programmes, Infrastructure and Services at the SADC Secretariat told a panel discussion after the launch of the CCA strategy that having water as standalone agenda item for UNFCCC negotiators would raise its profile to attract funding for adaptation.

“We feel it is important that water is a specific agenda item on climate change debate because water is an engine and catalyst for socioeconomic development and is linked to the GDP in most of our countries where GDP is increasing by three percent where there is more water and less than one percent where there is less,” Ramoeli said.

However, David Lessole, a negotiator for Botswana, differed. He said there is need to see water as a broad issue before putting up as a major agenda items for UNFCCC.

“For something to become major agenda it has to benefit me as well,” said Lessole. “As a negotiating partner I must see something in it, for example, in the case of agriculture I can sell you technology, you get more food and become climate resilient and therefore it’s a win-win but for water no, why should I do the job that your government should be doing.”

Lessole argued that there was plenty of water but it was being wasted and was not included in development planning. Hence until such a time that water was seen as broad issue and people were ready to talk about water technologies, they should not be pushing it on the UNFCCC agenda.

(END/2011)

Farming in Gabon, West Africa

By Kristin Palitza

DURBAN, South Africa, Nov 30 (IPS) – Global climate change can now be observed from space. The UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) launched a new technology that can survey the world’s forests via satellites and provide a more accurate, global picture of common threats to the environment, such as deforestation, degradation or illegal logging.

Using a remote sensing surveying technology, FAO has taken and analysed more than 13,500 high-resolution satellite images in 102 countries. These images will help nations to accurately assess the state of their forests. Monitoring change in forests has important implications for biodiversity conservation, carbon storage and human livelihoods.

The losses in forests all around the world can now be quantified for the first time, FAO announced at the U.N. 17th Conference of the Parties climate change summit, which is taking place from Nov. 28 to Dec. 9 in Durban, South Africa.

“It’s a very comprehensive study of the world’s forests. For the first time we have consistent and comparable global and regional long-term data on forest loss land use. Up until now, most available data has come in numbers, not maps (based on satellite images),” explained FAO forest monitoring scientist Adam Gerrand.

As a result, very few countries have been able to monitor the impact of climate change and human intervention on their forests consistently over time.

“We have been lacking good data on deforestation and urgently needed more details about the dynamics of forest loss. We didn’t get the whole story until now,” Gerrand added.

The initial findings from the high-resolution satellite data show that the world’s total forest area shrank by an average of 14.5 million hectares per year between 1990 and 2005. It largely occurred in the tropics, likely attributable to the conversion of tropical forests to agricultural land.

“The rate of forest loss has increased from four million hectares in 1990s to six million hectares between 2000 and 2005,” said Gerrand. “We are losing vital carbon storage, biodiversity and other values forests provide.”

There is some good news, too, however. The survey shows that deforestation does not happen quite as fast as countries have been reporting. The new data showed a net loss of 73 million hectares between 1990 and 2005 compared to previous net loss estimate of 107 million hectares for the same time period.

During that time, the loss of forests was highest in the tropics, where just under half of the world’s forests are located, followed by Africa. Asia was the only region to show net gains in forest land-use area in both periods. Deforestation occurred here as well, but the extensive planting that has been reported by several countries in Asia, mainly China, exceeded the forest areas that were lost.

All satellite images are taken a hundred kilometres apart and comprise 10 square kilometres. They are classified, labelled and then passed on to the countries where they have been taken, so that governments can review and confirm the data.

“It’s a framework countries can use to improve forest resources,” explained Gerrand.

Some countries have already benefited from the new satellite technology. In Papua New Guinea, a small country in Oceania, for example, which is to 65 percent covered with forests, 41 satellite images were taken to establish the impact climate change had on its forest cover.

“Our country didn’t have the technology to assess forest degradation. The new satellite imagery improves the credibility of data,” said Dr. Joe Pokana, head of Papua New Guinea’s national climate change office. “We now plan to establish a robust national monitoring system that will help us to understand the level of degradation and inform policy.”

Similarly, Angola has started to survey the threat of deforestation via the photographic maps provided by the satellites. Forests currently make up 43.4 percent of the southern African country.

“We how have important information about how our forest resources are utilised, carbon stocks, environmental problems, causes of degradation and deforestation,” said Mateus Andre, the head of Angola’s forestry department. “For the first time, we have quality information on which we can base decisions.”

The new data are particularly important for developing regions like Africa, where existing information is often out-dated or of low quality due to lack of capacity. They differ from previous FAO findings in the Global Forest Resources Assessment of 2010, which were based on a compilation of country reports that used a wide variety of sources.

“Deforestation is depriving millions of people of forest goods and services that are crucial to rural livelihoods, economic well-being and environmental health,” said Eduardo Rojas-Briales, FAO assistant director-general for forestry. “The new, satellite-based figures give us a more consistent global picture. Together with the broad range of information supplied by the country reports, they offer decision- makers at every level more accurate information.”

Further remote sensing studies are expected to reveal changes occurring since 2005. “Eventually we will be able to assign biomass to each site for the estimation of forest carbon emissions,” explained Frederic Achard, a scientist from the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission who helped to develop the new imaging system.

Until then lies a long way ahead. Currently, the satellite technology can provide some important data, but not all. Admitted Gerrand: “We still have several decades worth of development ahead.”

(END/2011)

In pastoralist communities, mobile phones are crucial for alerting communities to droughts and reducing food insecurity. Credit: Isaiah Esipisu/IPS

By Isaiah Esipisu

DURBAN, South Africa, Nov 30 (IPS) – Francis Mburu used to keep indigenous cattle in Entasopia village in the semi- arid Kajiado region, 160 kilometres southwest of Nairobi. However, increasing temperatures and frequent droughts in Kenya have made this difficult in recent years.

But now, in an area that has never had electricity, where education is not a priority or sometimes not an option at all, residents of Entasopia are using a solar-powered internet facility to adapt to the changing climatic conditions.

The Nguruman community, largely composed of the Maasai ethnic group, now has access to an ICT facility locally known as Maarifa (“knowledge” in Swahili) Centre. Here they are able to access climate adaptation information via the internet, videos and books. The Arid Land Information Network (ALIN), in collaboration with the Kenyan government, founded the project.

According to Samuel Nzioka, the field officer for ALIN, most of the videos shown at the centre are practical lessons in local languages aimed at boosting the understanding of the concepts of climate change and adaptation, and basic dry-land farming knowledge.

“From reading agricultural books, listening to advice from field officers manning the centre, and watching video clips that show what other farmers are doing to adapt to the changing climatic conditions in other arid areas, I have learnt more resilient methods of animal husbandry,” said Mburu, a 56-year-old father of three.

Because of the project, Mburu now keeps a herd of 45 dairy goats, and has a poultry project. He sells the chickens to the ever-growing indigenous chicken markets in urban centres.

The goat’s milk he produces fetches a higher price compared to cow’s milk.

Climate change in East Africa has resulted in higher temperatures and prolonged droughts and has meant that farmers have had to adapt along with these changes.

“We have seen our pastoralists move to higher grounds in Ethiopia in search of greener pastures. We have seen animal species, that we thought could tolerate drought, die as a result of the prolonged drought. It means that it is not business as usual,” said Dr. Miano Mwangi, assistant director for Animal Production at the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute, and the national coordinator at the Kenya Arid and Semi-Arid Land programme.

It is successes like the one in Entasopia that has experts at the ongoing United Nations 17th Conference of the Parties (COP 17) urging the international community to consider technology transfer as one of the main methods of adapting to climate change.

“In Ghana, we call it climate education, where information communication technology is used to educate people of how to adapt to the new phenomenon,” Atsu Titiati, the Tree Programme director at the Ghana office of Rainforest Alliance, an international non-profit organisation dedicated to the conservation of tropical forests, told IPS.

He said that in northern Ghana, communities rely on community-based radio to know what types of seed to plant during a particular season, and for the market value of their crops upon harvest.

“The government also uses community radio to warn people in advance whenever the weather forecast detects floods,” Titiati told IPS in Durban.

In Kenya, pastoralist communities use mobile phones to determine the market value of their animals.

“We have rolled out a project in Isiolo district with an aim of reducing food insecurity among the communities,” Rahab Mburunga, the data officer at ActionAid International – Kenya, told IPS.

Through the project, information about the market value of various crops and livestock is sent as short messages to subscribers’ mobile phones.

The project has also given mobile phones to community members so that they can distribute the information to other villagers who might not have phones.

“We have tried it and it is working,” Mburunga said.

In February, the Kenyan government developed a National Climate Change Technology Action Plan. One of the main objectives of this was to explore technology transfer opportunities and to establish national technology innovation centres.

In Mozambique, the government and non-governmental organisations use mobile phones to warn residents in flood-prone areas about the possibility of floods to ensure the timely evacuation of people.

“We usually send short messages to particular community representatives so that it is broadcasted to the rest of the community regarding floods, delayed rainfall or any other necessary agricultural information,” said Josh Ogada, the communication expert at Oneworld, a regional environmental organisation based in Cape Town, South Africa.

According to a statement released by the International Telecommunication Union at COP 17, these technologies hold the key to adaptation, but they remain underutilised in most African countries.

“Today’s advanced technologies can transform social, industrial and business processes to effect the changes needed to achieve sustainability. But while the potential of ICTs to make a real difference is widely recognised by the technology community and government ICT ministries, it is still far from being understood and embraced by environmental lobby groups and policymakers,” the statement said.

Meanwhile, Africa is calling for more funding to implement climate change adaptation programmes.

“We have enough resources for adaptation in Africa, and all we need is the technology transfer backed with scientific evidence. However, our people cannot fully exploit them if we do not have access to proper channels of financing such technology transfers for adaptation,” Mithika Mwenda, the coordinator for the Pan African Climate Justice Alliance told IPS. (END)

Tract of rainforest cleared by burning in the state of Acre, Brazil. Credit:Mario Osava/IPS

DURBAN, South Africa, Nov 29 – (IPS) Organisations working with indigenous peoples living in forests say the United Nations programme on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries (REDD+) is just another way for big corporates to reap huge profits.

REDD+ has been touted as a global scheme to conserve forests, enhance carbon stocks and support sustainable forest management.

“It is a system where you pour a lot of money into forests that will attract powerful international investors who will make big profits,” warned Simone Lovera, managing director of the Global Forest Coalition, a worldwide network of more than 50 non-governmental organisations and Indigenous Peoples’ Organisations based in Amsterdam, Netherlands. She spoke during the U.N. 17th Conference of the Parties (COP 17), which is taking place in Durban, South Africa, from Nov. 28 to Dec. 9.

Lovera does not contest that deforestation and forest degradation are key climate change culprits. Caused by agricultural expansion, conversion to pastureland, infrastructure development or destructive logging, they account for nearly 20 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, according to the U.N., more than the entire global transportation sector and second only to the energy sector.

REDD+ is supposed to turn this around. Since it was started in 2005, the programme enables industrialised countries in the North to reward reductions of carbon emissions to nations in the South. It is basically a system of performance-based payments that are financed through global carbon markets. The U.N. predicts that finance for greenhouse gas emission reductions from REDD+ could reach up to 30 billion dollars per year. The money is supposed to go towards pro-poor development, help conserve biodiversity and secure vital ecosystem services.

But indigenous communities say this is not so. It was big, international forestry businesses that ultimately benefited from the carbon deals, not the locals who have lived in and off the forests for many generations. Instead, locals are kicked off their land to make space for large monoculture plantations aimed at offsetting carbon emissions in the north.

Lovera said there are many risks inherent to REDD+ that indigenous communities are unable to address because they lack access to information and education, such as forced, non-transparent contracts and land grabbing. What forest-dependent communities need instead, she argued, are national public policies that support sustainable forest management.

Lovera said the U.N. promise of the scheme generating billions of dollars annually was “a big fairytale”, a way of green washing. “There won’t be big carbon financing for REDD+. Carbon markets are collapsing. It’s a very risky scheme that is creating havoc all over the world,” she cautioned.

Her prediction is likely to be correct. A World Bank draft report, written for a G20 meeting in November and leaked to the Britsh Guardian newspaper in September, confirmed the trouble global carbon markets are in. “The value of transactions in the primary CDM market declined sharply in 2009 and further in 2010 … amid chronic uncertainties about future mitigation targets and market mechanisms after 2012,” the World Bank stated.

In the meantime, the U.N. continues to pump large amounts of finance into REDD+. Last month, for example, Nigeria’s national REDD+ programme received four million dollars in funding, which the U.N. says brought total funding in 14 countries worldwide to nearly 60 million dollars. The funds are aimed at increasing the capacity of national governments to implement carbon-saving strategies together with local groups, such as indigenous peoples and other forest-dependent communities.

“The U.N.-REDD programme’s support is invaluable because climate change is a global problem and the issues of REDD+, sustainable forest management and sustainable livelihoods cannot be handled by the country alone,” said Salisu Dahiru, national coordinator for REDD+ in Nigeria.

But organisations working with forest-dependent communities say the benefits for local people are minimal.

“We say very clearly ‘no’ to REDD+. Under it, people are being expelled from nature so that big industries can profit from carbon storage,” argued Winnie Overbeek, the international coordinator of the World Rainforest Movement, a non-governmental organisation based in Montevideo, Uruguay.

In Uganda, for example, a case was documented where 22,000 people were violently evicted from the Mubende and Kiboga districts earlier this year to make way for the United Kingdom-based New Forests Company to plant trees, to earn carbon credits and ultimately to sell timber. Similar incidents happened to indigenous peoples all over the world, said Overbeek.

“REDD+ is about making more profit, continuing pollution and disrespecting the rights of forest people all over the world. It’s about land grabbing,” he warned. “It’s time to stop thinking about REDD+ and start protecting local populations and their land rights.”

Marlon Santi, a member of the Quichua indigenous community that lives in the Amazon Region of Ecuador, said he has experienced first-hand how REDD+ took away people’s livelihoods. The scheme has led to mega forestry projects that exist to the detriment of local people.

“Forests have become a negotiating space to make money. They are used as business opportunities. That’s unacceptable to us,” said Santi. “REDD+ projects are hypocritical. We need real political solutions that benefit everyone.”

He hoped the negotiators at this year’s COP 17 will grant an open ear to his people’s needs.

DURBAN, South Africa, Nov 28 (IPS) – The European Union plan to save the Kyoto Protocol may meet its greatest obstacle in the developing world.

Durban represents a crucial decision-making point for the world’s fight against climate change. Credit: Nastasya Tay/IPS

Abias Huongo, one of Angola’s negotiators, says developing country blocs of which it is part – including the Africa and Least Developed Countries groups – are not able yet to express support for a global legally binding deal.

“Our partners need to fulfill their responsibilities, and they are running away from their commitments,” he told IPS on the first day of the United Nations 17th Conference of the Parties (COP 17) - the annual international gathering convened to try to make progress on dealing with climate change in Durban, South Africa.

In a curtain-raiser press conference, the EU delegation – viewed as the most enthusiastic about a second commitment period – emphasised it was unwilling to commit unless the rest of the world agreed to a global climate deal.

“The problem is that Kyoto alone cannot tackle the climate challenges we all face,” the delegation’s Tomasz Chruszczow said, “We need 100 percent of global emissions covered by the framework, and 100 percent of those who are emitting.”

The EU wants to see an agreement finalised by 2015, and operational at the latest by 2020.

Durban represents a crucial decision-making point for the world’s fight against climate change – one which many civil society organisations and developing nations regard as a matter of life or death.

“It always seems impossible until it is done.” The words of Nelson Mandela were echoed by U.N. climate chief Christiana Figueres at the opening plenary of COP 17.

In previous years, COPs have been plagued by frustration, mistrust and despair. But last year’s talks in Cancun managed to relieve some of the burden of post-Copenhagen disappointment.

This year, the more than 15,000 delegates have arrived on South Africa’s coast somewhat more hopeful about possibilities. But along with hope comes responsibility.

The first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol ends in December 2012, and in the absence of new commitments from developed countries, the globe will be left bereft of any legally-binding emissions framework.

Developing countries want Kyoto to succeed, Huongo said.

“We’re in Africa, and we don’t want it to die on our continent,” he added.

He said there would be discussions around a new legally-binding agreement, but outcomes remain opaque.

Huongo told IPS that the developed world must also be more flexible with its funding requirements to improve access to climate financing for the countries that need it the most. He said Angola also needs assistance with capacity building to combat its vulnerabilities.

Already, several countries – including Japan, Russia and Canada – have expressed their reticence at signing on a second time. National media reports that Canada is preparing to announce its retirement from the agreement after the COP 17 talks have been met with consternation.

Alden Meyer from the Union of Concerned Scientists says this would be “the third slap in the face Canada’s given the international community”, after reneging on attempts to meet its commitments, and putting forward weak emissions targets at Copenhagen.

Meyer says Canada is attempting to avoid the scrutiny and criticism it would face if it left the Kyoto Protocol at COP 17, and is acting in bad faith by continuing to participate in the negotiations.

The developed-developing country divide is very much alive and kicking.

South African President Jacob Zuma referred to the plight of developing countries in his address at the opening ceremony, urging negotiators to strive to find solutions. But civil society groups including Greenpeace and Oxfam International said they were unhappy about the lack of ambition he expressed.

Faith groups of different religions gathered on the eve of the talks at a nearby stadium, to pray for concrete, fair and balanced outcomes from the negotiations. They were joined by Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu, who called for the world to prepare itself for the battle against global warming.

Tutu criticised those countries refusing to sign the Kyoto. “God wants us to live in a garden, not a desert,” he told the crowd.

Figueres joined Tutu in addressing the rally, promising progress. “No matter what happens in Durban, it is going to be a step forward,” she said, “But let’s remember, it’s only a step… There will be another COP, and another one. This is a long process.”

The U.N. climate chief has emphasised the importance of looking beyond the Kyoto Protocol at the talks, highlighting the need to operationalise parts of the Cancun Agreements.

Amongst the concrete outcomes possible from Durban is the finalisation of the structure of a Green Climate Fund – a mechanism that will manage and account for climate funds, including the 100 billion dollars annually by 2020, promised by developed countries for adaptation and mitigation measures in developing nations.

Also achievable, Figueres believes, is making progress with the Adaptation Framework, also agreed in Cancun, and the improvement of technology transfer mechanisms, which will allow poorer countries to become more resilient with the onslaught of unpredictable and extreme weather events.

On the eve of the negotiations, unseasonably heavy rain left parts of Durban flooded, and resulted in the deaths of at least six people – a tragic, but possibly apt prelude to two weeks of discussions about climate change.

It is a message that developing countries want to make sure their richer counterparts hear: “We’re the ones who suffer. (END)

Tomaz Salomão, the executive secretary for the Southern African Development Community. Credit: Isaiah Esipisu/IPS

Isaiah Esipisu interviews DR. TOMAZ SALOMÃO, the executive secretary for the Southern African Development Community (SADC)

DURBAN, South Africa, Nov 28 (IPS) – African leaders have urged the international community to move the United Nations climate change negotiations, which started in Durban, South Africa on Monday, to a different level, and to prioritise adaptation for the continent.

South Africa’s President Jacob Zuma noted that Africa has come a long way since similar negotiations took place in Copenhagen and Cancun, over the past two years. He said that Durban must take the world forward towards a “solution that saves tomorrow today.”

Many environmental experts have gathered in Durban hoping the conference decides the Kyoto Protocol’s fate. The protocol, which expires in 2012, sets binding targets for 37 industrialised countries and the European community to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Dr. Tomaz Salomão, the executive secretary for the Southern African Development Community (SADC), was at the 17th Conference of Parties (COP 17).

He told IPS why it was important for COP 17 to be held in Africa, and what the region expects from the negotiation platform.

Excerpts from the interview follow:

Q: What is the significance of holding the 17th Conference of Parties in the Southern Africa region?

A: The continent, and in particular the Southern African region, is threatened with the effects of the changing climatic conditions. Experts have said it all. They have predicted an increase in extreme weather conditions, and droughts have evidently become more frequent than what was experienced in the recent past. Everybody is aware of the changes in rainfall patterns, which have (had a) devastating effect on millions of people who depend on rain-fed agriculture, especially in Africa.

It is therefore a commendable achievement for Africa, for the SADC region, and also for South Africa to have COP 17 held in this region. It is a clear indication that we Africans know where we stand, what challenges we are facing, and how to go about them. What is required is to build our capacity so that we are in a better position to face the challenges on our own.

Q: What is the regional expectation of this conference?

A: The expectation is that recommendations will be made to provide the financial support that is required so that Africa is in a better position to face the challenges that are currently devastating the continent. That is my hope, and it is our hope.

Q: Is there any new approach in terms of the regional position to COP 17?

A: I think that we cannot change position from time to time. We need to focus on positions we developed at the Copenhagen conference, also known as COP 15. For the first time, African countries came together to have a common voice and that formed the African position. I hope that the same spirit will prevail in Durban.

Q: What does Africa need at the moment, in order to tackle climate change?

A: We need development. And we cannot be penalised further as a result of climate change, which comes about as a result of problems that were caused by others. That is our starting point. And that is why we are saying that we need support to address those challenges. With this, we are not asking for too much.

Q: Why is it taking so long for negotiators to strike a deal that will last?

A: It is not an easy thing to do because the subject is quite complicated. It touches on other very important aspects that are fundamental to life. They include agriculture and food security, health issues, employment among others. At the same time, asking countries to cut on their greenhouse gas emissions touches directly on their development paths. There is currently an argument that the developing countries should not have their development paths halted because of emissions created by other countries several years ago, while they were on their development path.

Q: What will happen if the Kyoto Protocol fails to survive post COP 17?

A: No I do not think the Kyoto agreement is in a position to die at the moment. What we need to realise is that people have to come together to save humanity, the earth and to ensure that the generations to come have a better tomorrow.

(END/2011)