On Tuesday, Senators Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), members of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources held a hearing on the International Aspects of Climate Change.

The hearing included testimony from Dr. Michael Levi from the Council on Foreign Relations, Nigel Purvis from Climate Advisors, Karen Harbert from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Taiya Smith from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and Jake Colvin from the National Foreign Trade Council. As climate negotiations in Copenhagen draw near, the witnesses discussed how domestic and national efforts fit into a broader international agreement.

Witnesses touched on a broad range of climate-change related issues, including the role of China and India and the importance of durable U.S. domestic policy. Panelists generally agreed that while robust U.S. legislation is important, a cooperative international framework is essential, as is working with international partners. They made clear that international efforts should facilitate smart domestic policies and the domestic policies should be transparent, accountable and measurable.

Panelists emphasized that the U.S. must empower those who will work with us. Colvin and Levi both warned against measures such as taxes on carbon which could alienate potential allies, such as China and India. Harbert and Smith agreed, emphasizing that the U.S. cannot solve global climate change problems alone: India, China and other developing countries must be part of the solution.

Witnesses agreed that, as we move closer to negotiations in December, the U.S. should concentrate on incorporating domestic targets into a global framework so to produce a robust, inclusive and nationally-appropriate political deal in Copenhagen.

As the Copenhagen climate change summit draws closer, the question of how to support developing countries in adapting to climate change, and to enable them to access clean technology, is becoming a make or break issue.

On 30 October, the European Union put its numbers on the table, becoming the first climate negotiation partner to do so. The EU estimates that developing countries will need € 100 billion for adaptation and mitigation by 2020. A large part of that sum would be mobilized by the private sector and developing countries’ own resources. The EU says the remaining € 22-50 billion needs to be covered by donors, and the EU is prepared to contribute its share (presumably around 30%). In addition, the EU agrees that so called ‘fast-start’ international public support (of around € 5-7 billion annually) is needed in the 3 years before any climate agreement comes into force.

This is well below the Worldbank estimate that 75 – 100 billion USD is needed annually between 2010 and 2050 for adaptation alone (20% of which is for Africa), whilst African countries are themselves calling for 67 billion USD for adaptation for the continent.

Yet, the EU proposal is the only financing option with concrete figures on the table of climate negotiators at the moment, and ONE has welcomed it as a first step to unlock the negotiations. But much more work is needed.

The final round of pre Copenhagen negotiations concluded in Barcelona on 6 November with very limited progress and hardened positions. So much so that the African delegation – who for the first time in international negotiations are represented through a unified negotiating team and mandate – walked out of the room on the second day in protest.

Elsewhere the G20 finance ministers, meeting on 7 November in St. Andrews, Scotland, focused on climate financing but could not agree on tangible outcomes. The key question remains whether these funds will be additional to both existing and promised overseas development aid levels. The British government is the most progressive saying that not more than 10% of existing or promised aid levels should be spent on climate related activities. But the fact that the UK is the only major economy with such a proposal, shows that the financing figures currently being discussed could be taken from existing programmes to fight poverty.

With less than a month now to go before Copenhagen, time is running out on achieving an agreement that will provide that best possible deal for the world’s poorest people. If Copenhagen is to be successful is critical that policymakers take special consideration of these people, especially in Africa – both to address their disproportionate need to adapt to impending climate change, but also to work with the continent as a mitigation partner going forward.

You’ve heard a little bit from us at ONE about the Copenhagen Climate Change negotiations that will be taking place in December. As policy makers prepare to meet to negotiate a global climate deal next month in Copenhagen, everyone at ONE will be doing their utmost to ensure the best possible deal for the world’s poorest communities, especially in Africa. We want to share what we hope emerges from the Copenhagen negotiations.

In advance of the meeting ONE has released a new policy paper ‘Africa and the Global Climate Deal’ that outlines the key elements of ‘good’ deal for Africa.

On helping developing countries cope with the effects of climate change, we agree that scaling up to the World Bank estimate of $75-100 billion annually is appropriate. This should come from both private and public finance sources, with contributing countries ensuring that the money is truly additional to pledges that have already been made on development assistance.

We also want to see the global community agree to invest in Africa’s potential for clean energy and “carbon sinks.” A carbon sink is a tool that accumulates and stores some carbon-containing chemical compound and can be used to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere (for example, forests and soil). You can read more about the technologies involved and the mechanisms used to invest in these types of resources in our policy paper, but in short, Africa possesses great opportunity to contribute to offset some of the existing carbon emissions.

Climate change is not a crisis of Africa’s making, yet it is Africans, especially the poorest, who will suffer the first and the worst. Not only does it add yet another challenge for those struggling to combat extreme poverty and disease by exacerbating the conditions of poverty, but it threatens to erode the gains that have been made in recent years.

We need the negotiators at Copenhagen to simply know that they cannot afford to fail the world’s poorest people.

Joseph Powell from the ONE UK office writes about a book launch he recently attended:

Last night ONE was lucky to attend the launch of Camilla Toulmin’s new book Climate Change in Africa, which provides a timely reminder of the damage being done to the continent by shifts in climate. The direct impacts include a rise in harvest failures in recent years as unpredictable water cycles and expanding drylands make the life of African farmers harder. In the Horn of Africa for example there have been 3 crop failures in the last 4 years, meaning in Ethiopia alone 6.2 million people are now in need of food assistance.

Toulmin highlighted the likely rise in conflict as resources such as water become scarcer, and the devastating impact that rising food and fuel prices can have on the poorest sectors of society. More indirectly the global demand for biofuels has seen large tracts of prime African farmland bought up by companies growing non-food crops.

Of course much of the recent debate has been around how Africa can adapt to climate change and that was also high on the agenda. Toulmin suggested realistic interventions such as diversifying farm production and argued that “it is absolutely vital to reach a deal at Copenhagen”. She estimated that anything up to $130 billion may be needed for adaptation costs in Africa alone and that the financing of this will be central to a good agreement.

Discussing the book, former Chief Scientist from the UK’s Department For Overseas Development, Sir Gordon Conway stressed that climate change would affect agriculture more than any other sector, with clear implications for the majority of sub-Saharan Africans. As a development issue, he argued, there will be little of greater importance over the coming decades.

As policy makers prepare to meet to negotiate a global climate deal next month Toulmin’s book provides a powerful case for ensuring that they keep the poorest in mind and take special consideration of Africa. Not only does climate change add yet another challenge for those struggling to combat extreme poverty and disease by exacerbating the conditions of poverty, but it threatens to erode the gains that have been made in recent years.

Last week Senators Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and Bob Corker (R-TN), members of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on International Development, Foreign Assistance, Economic Affairs and International Environmental Protection held a hearing on the Impacts of Climate Change in the World’s Most Vulnerable Nations.

The hearing included testimony from Reverend Jim Ball from Evangelical Environmental Network, David Waskow from Oxfam America, Dr. Kenneth Green from American Enterprise Institute, Peter Driscoll from ActionAid USA, and Gen. Charles Wald from CAN Military Advisory Board. The witnesses discussed the urgent need for scaled-up adaptation financing for developing countries and how to best organize such financing.

Participants agreed that financing for climate adaptation is urgent: Driscoll commented that there is no viable alternative to investing in a climate adaptation fund. Senator Corker noted the importance of streamlined funding to eliminate any wastefulness. Current climate legislation, he added, does not adequately address the problem.

Senator Menendez in his opening statement,outlined 4 key reasons why an adaptation fund is necessary, many of which were echoed by the witnesses:

1. National Interest: Strong adaptation financing gives the U.S. better positioning in international climate negotiations.
2. National Security: Increasing numbers of climate refugees will lead to greater competition over scarce resources, and in turn causing instability and conflict in already unstable parts of the world.
3. Ethics: A fund aimed at helping the world’s poorest people is “the right thing to do.”
4. Economic Growth: An international adaptation fund fosters economic security by helping local businesses and workers.

The participants emphasized that the U.S. must designate significant and meaningful resources to help the world’s poorest people take on the effects of climate change.

Today thousands of blogs are participating in Blog Action Day to spark discussion about an issue of global importance: Climate Change.

I thought this would be a good opportunity to highlight some of the work ONE does exploring how climate change affects the world’s poorest. If you’d like to delve deeper, check out this Climate and Development issue brief that our Policy Team compiled explaining the nexus between climate change and development in clear detail.

And remember that we’re still asking the Senate to invest in helping the world’s poorest people overcome the threats posed by climate change. Please add your voice here. For more background on the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act, check out the Hot Topic here.

Happy Blog Action Day! As we told you earlier in the week, over 8,700 blogs around the world are taking part by devoting space to discussing climate change. Arjun Mody offers this great recap about our Climate Campaign:

Over the past several weeks, about 55,000 ONE members raised their hands, and asked their Senators to allocate 5% to helping the world’s poorest people overcome the threats posed by climate change.

Senators John Kerry (D-MA) and Barbara Boxer (D-CA) introduced S. 1733, “A bill to create clean energy jobs, promote energy independence, reduce global warming pollution, and transition to a clean energy economy” on September 30, 2009. The authors however left the allocation of emission allowances blank, so we still do not know how much will be dedicated to helping the world’s poorest people overcome the threats posed by climate change. The news on our efforts should be coming soon though: hearings in Senator Boxer’s Environment and Public Works Committee are slated to begin on October 27.

Many other Committees also have jurisdiction over the legislation as well, including the Agriculture Committee, Finance Committee, and Foreign Relations Committee. All of the work on the bill is scheduled to place before Thanksgiving.

Concurrent with the Senate process is the UNFCCC process which will culminate this December in Copenhagen. Recent meetings that took place in Bangkok developed proposals for the best structures to deliver adaptation resources. So our message is getting out there and we are gaining momentum here at home and internationally. Time is short, negotiations are in full swing, and our task is considerable, but this is the time where differences will be made.

-Arjun Mody

The ONE Blog just registered for this year’s Blog Action Day on Thursday… have you? The theme this year is Climate Change, and the idea is that blogs all over the world (over 6,000 at the time of this posting!) will pledge to devote space to the issue.

Here’s a short video produced by the folks at Blog Action Day explaining the event in more detail:

As you know, climate change is not a crisis of developing countries’ making, yet the impacts of global warming will disproportionately hit the world’s poorest people. ONE supports adaptation to help poor countries cope with the impact of climate change, and mitigation to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions and avoid future emissions in developing countries.

So register your blog for Blog Action Day ‘09 here, and check back on the ONE Blog for our contribution this Thursday.

By 2050, the global temperature is expected to rise 2°C above pre-industrial levels causing, among other consequences, more intense and frequent rainfall and droughts, floods, increases in epidemics and water availability. For the world’s poorest and most vulnerable people, adapting to these changes will be costly. However, almost no specific estimates of just how costly exist. To fill this gap, the World Bank launched the Economics of Adaptation to Climate Change (EACC) study in 2008. Last Wednesday, the third day of the climate change talks in Bangkok, the World Bank released initial results from this study, revealing that adaptation costs will indeed be significant.

The initial report found that the cost of adapting to an approximately 2°C warmer world will be between $75 billion and $100 billion a year. This estimate falls in the upper range of existing estimates, which are between $4 billion to $109 billion annually. According to the report, impacts on agriculture and fisheries, health, water availability, flood management and infrastructure will be the most severe. According to the report, sub-Saharan Africa will bear 20-22% of the annual costs of adaptation across sectors. Sub-Saharan Africa also bears by far the highest costs for water supply and flood management and by 2050, will shoulder more than 80 percent of adaptation costs in the health sector.

The report also emphasizes three main points. One, it is necessary to take measures for both mitigation and adaptation to climate change. Adaptation financing, while vital to minimize the impacts of climate change, will not prevent future consequences. Adapting to an even warmer world would cause more costs, including coastal flooding, more malnutrition and disease, and extinction of half of the world’s species. Secondly, development must take on a new form to include adaptation efforts. Development and adaptation goes hand-in-hand, and one cannot be achieved without the other. Lastly, because of the large uncertainties about the future of climate change, flexible policies and more research are needed. These measures and considerations are vital to preventing an increasingly costly world due to climate change.

Such estimates on adaptation costs and research on the future of climate change are especially pertinent now as world delegates look toward the December Copenhagen conference, where leaders will attempt to formulate a global deal on climate change. Check out the full report here.

Today in Bangkok, on the heels of last week’s G20 Summit in Pittsburgh, world delegates embarked on the fourth of five major negotiating sessions before the UN Copenhagen Climate Change negotiations convene in December. The Bangkok meetings, scheduled to run until October 9, were preceded by the high-level UN Climate Change Summit called by Secretary-General Ban ki-Moon last week in New York. Although many of the 100 heads of state and government called for the enhancement of assistance for the world’s poorest and most vulnerable to adapt to the impact of climate change at last week’s UN summit, the G20 leaders in Pittsburgh failed to collectively commit to scaling-up adaptation funds.

In the next two weeks in Bangkok, delegates will try to cut down and clarify a draft of the text that will lay the groundwork for Copenhagen. Further talks are expected on increasing financing for adaptation and mitigation, designing a legal framework and architecture for developing countries to act within and reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries.

In opening of the talks this morning, Executive Secretary of United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Yvo de Boer warned that time to tackle key issues for a global agreement in December is limited. “Time is not just pressing, it has almost run out,” he explained, “But in two weeks, real progress can be made towards the goals that world leaders have set for the negotiations, to break deadlocks, and to cooperate toward concrete progress. As many leaders have said, ‘There is no plan B.’ And if we do not realize plan A, the future will hold us to account for it.”

After the conclusion of the meetings in Bangkok, delegates will gather again in Barcelona in November for one week of talks before convening in December in Copenhagen for the final negotiations. Stay tuned to the ONE blog for more updates.

-Pooja Gupta