Climate and Development

Without ‘additionality’ of climate funds, Copenhagen adds up to nothing

Dec 19th, 2009 1:59 PM UTC
By David Cole

As world leaders fly home from the climate change summit, the agreement reached in Copenhagen could add up to nothing unless the funding offered is not double counted from existing aid promises.

Late last night an agreement was brokered by the US, China, South Africa, India and Brazil. This included $10bn a year in so called ‘fast track’ financing for the next 3 years and $100bn a year by 2020 for poor countries to cope with climate change. But currently these sums will largely be subtracted from promised resources to help these same countries fight poverty.

ONE has been campaigning hard against this dangerous double counting, which undermines both sustainable international development and a good global deal on climate change. Last week we handed over a petition from more than 80,000 ONE members to the Danish government, as chair of the summit, and the US delegation. We called on them to ensure that new funding is additional to existing and promised aid flows and that development promises are kept in full.

Here’s what ONE’s Executive Director Jamie Drummond had to say on the agreement that was reached last night:

“Climate change is putting additional stress on poor countries – which is why they need additional funds to cope with it – on top of existing and promised aid levels.

Promises of aid made by the G8 in Gleneagles in 2005 must not be lost in Copenhagen. Without a clear commitment that these climate funds are additional, the dollar amounts are next to meaningless.

This debate over ‘additionality’ might seem arcane, but within the details lie billions of dollars – and very real impacts on millions of lives. Without this additionality, Copenhagen adds up to nothing.

It is not clear how a cap on 2 degrees will be achieved, but it is very clear that much more can and must be done, including harnessing the potential of African and other developing countries to be renewable energy hubs and help capture carbon through growing trees.”

ONE supports the African proposal for an interim target of US$50bn by 2015 on top of existing and promised aid to help the poorest countries – many of them in Africa – with pressing adaptation needs. The “Copenhagen Accord” mentions a High Level Panel to assess how alternative sources of funding can contribute to raising genuinely additional funds.

This urgent High Level Task Force should be convened immediately to look into alternative sources of climate finance to complement additional public funding from rich countries. These sources could include: revenue from aviation and shipping, international auctioning of emissions allowances, a financial transactions tax and the proposal to use the IMF’s own currency, known as Special Drawing Rights. The need for accountability and transparency for these new funds is also paramount.

With the agreement in Copenhagen weaker than we hoped, we now know we have much more work ahead of us.

Baaba Maal Talks Climate

Dec 18th, 2009 5:44 PM UTC
By Jessica Gomez-Duran

Yesterday I had the honour of speaking to Senegalese singer and guitarist Baaba Maal after he had performed at a special event here in Copenhagen.

Watch the video:

Baaba Maal, one of Africa’s most famous musicians, is attending the Copenhagen summit as the climate change ambassador for Africa Talks Climate, a ground-breaking research and communication initiative that explores the views of African citizens on climate change.

Baaba Maal performing at the event in Copenhagen last night

Yesterday in Copenhagen

Dec 18th, 2009 12:59 PM UTC
By Jessica Gomez-Duran

At 6am yesterday morning I found myself tramping through deep snow on my way to the Bella Centre where COP15, the global climate change negotiations, are taking place. After waiting in line outside in subzero temperatures (I don’t think I’ve ever felt so cold in my life), I finally got into the building, which is hosting over 100 Heads of State, 5,000 journalists and plenty of others in a vast cavernous building.

In the morning UK Prime Minister, Gordon Brown presented the Mexican President, Felipe Calderón, with the GLOBE Award for International Leadership on the Environment. Accepting the award Calderón called for a renewed effort to reach an agreement in Copenhagen.

This was immediately followed by a press conference by the Africa Group, who stated their support for Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi, who is leading the African delegation, and emphasised that the Africans are all here speaking with one, united, voice. As this was going on, the room was steadily filling up with more and more people. I soon realised why. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrived to announce a US commitment to long-term financing for adaptation, mitigation, and deforestation for the world’s poorest people.

Later I heard from the Burkina Faso and Bangladeshi delegations, the Speaker of the US House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, and then from the European Union. I was also lucky enough to catch an update on the state of play from Yvo de Boer, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Executive Secretary. His opening line was about holding tight saying that ‘the cable car is moving’. Over the last few days talks have stalled and progress has been very slow, but yesterday he believed that things were moving forward again at a better pace.

But with the summit now in its final day, time is running out for an agreement to be reached.

Clinton Delivers Big

Dec 17th, 2009 7:39 PM UTC
By Arjun

This morning as weary-eyed negotiators made their way to the Bella Center for the final 48 hour push in the climate negotiations which seemed all but deadlocked, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton caffeinated the room with big news – a US commitment to long-term financing for adaptation, mitigation, and deforestation for the world’s poorest people. One of the key hurdles to the negotiations to date has been this item of long term financing. Short term financing numbers, also referred to as the fast track fund, have been on the table for some time: a $10 billion per year commitment for years 2010, 2011, and 2012. The actual mechanism and its transparency are still being worked out, but commitments have been pouring in from the EU, Japan, and others towards the fast track fund, and the US has stated that it will contribute its fair share.

The long term, and the scale of the long term financing, has however been an issue with varied opinions and much debate. So this morning when the US announced its endorsement of long term financing, with a number attached to it – $100 billion per year by 2020 – the negotiations seemed to get rejuvenated. This number is also in line with the African proposal which calls for $10 billion per year in fast track funding for years 2010, 2011, and 2012; $50 billion per year by 2015; and scaling up to $100 billion per year by 2020. All of this is however, contingent on a global effort.

From Secretary Clinton’s announcement, “And today I’d like to announce that, in the context of a strong accord in which all major economies stand behind meaningful mitigation actions and provide full transparency as to their implementation, the United States is prepared to work with other countries toward a goal of jointly mobilizing $100 billion a year by 2020 to address the climate change needs of developing countries. We expect this funding will come from a wide variety of sources, public and private, bilateral and multilateral, including alternative sources of finance. This will include a significant focus on forestry and adaptation, particularly, again I repeat, for the poorest and most vulnerable among us.”

Read the full statement here:

For immediate release and posting.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Office of the Spokesman
For Immediate Release December 17, 2009
2009/T17-1

Remarks

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton
At the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

December 17, 2009
Copenhagen, Denmark

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you all for coming this morning. I arrived in Copenhagen several hours ago. I’ve just had a briefing on the state of the negotiations. I’d like to give you a brief report on where we stand and then make an announcement.

First, let me thank Todd Stern and the terrific team representing the United States at this conference. Actually, they’ve been representing us ever since the beginning of the Obama Administration over this past year.

We appointed Todd Stern as our first-ever Special Envoy for Climate Change because we understood that this is one of the most urgent global challenges of our time, and it demands a global solution. Climate change threatens not only our environment, but our economy and our security — this is an undeniable and unforgiving fact.

So in addition to the robust actions that the Obama Administration has taken at home — from the historic investment in clean energy included in the Recovery Act to the new efficiency standards for cars, trucks, and appliances — we have pursued an unprecedented effort to engage partners around the world in the fight against climate change. And we produced real results.

President Obama launched the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate which brought together key developed and developing countries. He also spearheaded an agreement, first among the G20 and then the Asian-Pacific Economic Cooperation nations, to phase out fossil fuel subsidies.

And after a year of diplomacy, we have come to Copenhagen ready to take the steps necessary to achieve a comprehensive and operational new agreement that will provide a foundation for long-term, sustainable economic growth. Our U.S. delegation includes not just the President of the United States, but six members of his Cabinet.

We have now reached the critical juncture in these negotiations. I understand that the talks have been difficult. I know that our team, along with many others, are working hard and around the clock to forge a deal. And we will continue doing all that we can do. But the time is at hand for all countries to reach for common ground and take an historic step that we can all be proud of.

There is a way forward based on a number of core elements: decisive national actions, an operational accord that internationalizes those actions, assistance for nations that are the most vulnerable and least prepared to meet the effects of climate change, and standards of transparency that provide credibility to the entire process. The world community should accept no less.

And the United States is ready to embrace this path.

First, we have announced our intention to cut our emissions in the range of 17 percent below 2005 levels in 2020 and ultimately in line with final climate and energy legislation. In light of the President’s goals, the expected pathway in pending legislation would extend those cuts to 30 percent by 2025, 42 percent by 2030, and more than 80 percent by 2050.

Second, we also recognize that an agreement must provide generous financial and technological support for developing countries, particularly the poorest and most vulnerable, to help them reduce emissions and adapt to climate change. That’s why we joined an effort to mobilize fast-start funding that will ramp up to $10 billion in 2012 to support the adaptation and mitigation efforts of countries in need.

And today I’d like to announce that, in the context of a strong accord in which all major economies stand behind meaningful mitigation actions and provide full transparency as to their implementation, the United States is prepared to work with other countries toward a goal of jointly mobilizing $100 billion a year by 2020 to address the climate change needs of developing countries. We expect this funding will come from a wide variety of sources, public and private, bilateral and multilateral, including alternative sources of finance. This will include a significant focus on forestry and adaptation, particularly, again I repeat, for the poorest and most vulnerable among us.

So there should be no doubt about the commitment of the United States to reaching a successful agreement here in Copenhagen and meeting this great global challenge together.

But ultimately this must be a common effort. We all know there are real challenges that remain in the hours left to these negotiations. And it is no secret that we have lost precious time in these past days. In the time we have left here, it can no longer be about us versus them – this group of nations pitted against that group. We all face the same challenge together.

I have often quoted a Chinese proverb which says that when you are in a common boat, you have to cross the river peacefully together. Well, we are in a common boat. All of the major economies have an obligation to commit to meaningful mitigation actions and stand behind them in a transparent way. And all of us have an obligation to engage constructively and creatively toward a workable solution. We need to avoid negotiating approaches that undermine rather than advance progress toward our objective.

I am deeply concerned about the consequences for developing countries – from Bangladesh to the Maldives, from the Caribbean to West Africa and the Pacific Islands – if we cannot secure the kind of strong operational accord I’ve described today. We know what the consequences will be for the farmer in Bangladesh or the herder in Africa or the family being battered by hurricanes in Central America. Without that accord, there won’t be the kind of joint global action from all of the major economies we all want to see, and the effects in the developing world could be catastrophic. We know what will happen. Rising seas, lost farmland, drought and so much else. Without the accord, the opportunity to mobilize significant resources to assist developing countries with mitigation and adaptation will be lost.

Over the next two days, we will be discussing these issues further. This problem is not going away, even when we leave Copenhagen. But neither is our resolve. We must try to overcome the obstacles that remain. We must not only seize this moment, but raise our oars together and row in the same direction toward our common destination and destiny. And the United States is ready to do our part. Thank you.

“We will drown if we don’t act.”

Dec 17th, 2009 9:49 AM UTC
By Kara Arsenault

It’s week two of the climate talks. And while world leaders continue to confront the challenges of climate change in Copenhagen, Africans have been gathering together in their communities for months to share stories and search for solutions to help fight the effects.

Throughout the fall, Oxfam conducted dozens of these community-wide climate hearings across the African continent.

In the town of Assella, Ethiopia, over ten thousand people ran, walked, even rode to a local stadium to make their voices heard.

In Hadado, Kenya, a local man told the crowd, “I have never seen the situation this bad—there is no water at all. Cattle are our livelihoods, and when they are gone we have nothing left. Our children can’t go to school because they have to spend all day looking for water for the cattle. We desperately need another borehole and more water here.”

In Cape Town, South Africa, Archbishop Desmond Tutu told a packed room that “We will drown if you don’t act. We are going down the tube together. Some might go in Mercedes Benz, others in local taxis.”

The Climate Hearings are an Oxfam project, as part of the tcktcktck.org Climate Campaign. Find out more about the Oxfam hearings in Africa here (don’t miss the photo essays, too)—and read about their global hearings here.

Copenhagen Update

Dec 16th, 2009 8:00 PM UTC
By Andreas Huebers

World leaders are arriving in Copenhagen tonight and tomorrow, but there has not been sufficient progress in the negotiations in order to present them a solid document for final negotiations. The current draft text is still full of unsettled issues. (The U.S. and China presumably will not put more ambitious emission cut targets on the table, so a strong deal looks increasingly unlikely.)

Meanwhile, chances to get leaders to agree to “new and additional resources on top of existing and committed” funding are fading. There are two types of wording for additionality in the current draft [no consensus yet], one for fast track and one for long term financing.

Fast track funding (2010 – 2012) is supposed to be “new and additional”, which is to be interpreted as additional to existing ODA (funding) flows, whereas post 2012 funding is “scaled up, predictable new, additional and adequate.”

There will be a figure for 2010 – 2012 climate financing, presumably 10 billion, and an annex specifying the amounts per country. There seems to be relatively wide agreement on establishing REDD, but no intention to use carbon market mechanisms, so funding will come from the (limited) public sources. There is a general placeholder for aviation and maritime bunkers so support of a high level task force to investigate innovative financing seems sensible.

What is the CDM?

Dec 16th, 2009 1:59 PM UTC
By Joseph Powell

In the final post in his series looking at issues being discussed in Copenhagen, Joe Powell looks at the CDM…

The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) was a product of the Kyoto Protocol and is designed to make sure emission reductions are implemented in a cost-efficient way.

The underlying idea is that in many cases emission cuts are cheaper to make in developing countries. Private companies invest in projects in developing countries, which result in lower emissions. Independent institutions then verify the amount of emissions saved and the private companies are given credits (known as Certfied Emission Reductions, CERs) equivalent to the amount of carbon saved. These credits can then be used in order to cut less emissions domestically, which is known as offsetting. The credits can also be traded on a “carbon exchange”. It all sounds a bit technical but the CDM is benefitting developing countries as they receive new investments in in clean technology.  However, in its current form, it has been criticized as being cumbersome and bureaucratic.

Currently over 1,000 projects have passed the rigorous registration process, which requires evidence that “real, measurable and verifiable emission reductions that are additional to what would have occurred without the project” will take place. The vast majority of these projects are taking place in Asia. Despite its tremendous potential to generate renewable energy, Africa is barely benefitting. There are several reasons for this, but I just want to illustrate a particularly striking one: under the CDM rules, a wind park in India will generate several times more carbon credits than a wind park in Ethiopia. The rationale is that India generates the bulk of its power using “dirty” coal, whereas Ethiopia relies overwhelmingly on clean hydropower. So, the CDM argues that the so called “carbon content” of Indian electricity is higher, and replacing it saves more carbon. The result of this rule however is perverse as it gives countries an incentive to “go dirty” first and then be paid to “clean up”. And It penalizes countries that have low emissions.

ONE is therefore calling for CDM to be reformed so that Africa can better take advantage of its potential for offsetting projects and support global efforts to mitigate climate change. Africa can contribute a lot through small-scale projects, but these are currently less attractive to investors. Therefore it needs to become possible to generate CER’s through bundling several small scale interventions together. The mechanism also needs to become more predictable to encourage greater participation from the private sector. Finally, African countries and communities will need support to build up their capacity ,and in some cases start-up finance, to enable them to participate in this scheme. In this way CDM will really be able to take off in Africa and the continent can bring to bear its full potential in stemming climate change

You can read more about ONE’s policy on CDM in our document Africa and the Global Climate Deal.

ONE hands over Copenhagen petition

Dec 15th, 2009 5:51 PM UTC
By Eloise Todd

ONE’s Eloise Todd (right) hands over our Copenhagen petition to Danish Development Minister Ulla Tørnæs.

As the Copenhagen climate change talks continue the issue of ‘additionality’ is becoming ever more important here. Developing countries, including those in Africa, are increasingly worried that development aid is simply being re-allocated to spend on adapting to the dangerious effects of climate change.

Yesterday I was lucky to meet Danish Development Minister Ulla Tørnæs and I handed over our petition calling on world leaders to stop this dangerous double counting. She promised to pass the petition onto Danish Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen, who as host of the Copenhagen talks, is one of the people best placed to make this happen.

We’ll also be handing the petition to the US delegation later this week.

A big, big thank you to the more than 80,000 of you who have now signed the petition. With your help we’re really helping raise awareness of this critical issue.

World leaders are now beginning to arrive here in Copenhagen and the pace of negotiations is heating up. We’ll be closely following developments throughout the rest of week to see what happens.

Eloise

P.S. To find out more about the issue of additionality and why it is so important check out the post from ONE’s Jo Powell who looks into it in more detail.

Additionality

Dec 15th, 2009 5:46 PM UTC
By Joseph Powell

In the second of his posts looking at the issues being discussed in Copenhagen, Jo Powell looks at the question of additionally…

Of all the complex climate change speak it is ‘additionality’ that is the word most on the lips of the developing country negotiators at Copenhagen this week. They are worried that aid, which has already been pledged to help them reach the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), is now being re-allocated to spend on adapting to the effects of climate change. Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi has described this as ‘phoney money’, the result of underhand double-counting and not a genuine commitment to assist those least responsible for the emissions that are already causing such great harm.

It is because of this that we at ONE are pushing the principle of additionality so hard at Copenhagen, and are calling on the negotiators to include the following sentence in any agreement:

Climate financing specified in this agreement will be new funding, additional to existing and promised aid flows. Development promises will be kept in full.

Just this week we handed over our petition of more than 80,000 signatures to the Danish government (as chair of the Copenhagen meeting) and US delegation, calling on them to ensure that this happens.

ONE Executive Director Jamie Drummond describes the situation as follows: “We need guarantees that longer-term climate financing will be firmly additional to both existing and promised money for the MDGs. Without such a pledge, governments will be ‘robbing Peter to pay Paul’, and undermining partnerships with the developing world precisely when trust is needed most to get a positive deal in Copenhagen.”

In short, the results of increased aid have been plain to see in Africa: more children in schools, fewer people dying from preventable diseases, and a reduction of extreme poverty. If a deal in Copenhagen comes at the cost of support for the MDGs it would compound the injustice of climate change for world’s poorest people.

You can read more about ONE’s policy on additionality in our document Africa and the Global Climate Deal.

Week 2 begins in Copenhagen

Dec 15th, 2009 12:07 PM UTC
By Eloise Todd

The second week here at the Bella centre in Copenhagen, where the UN climate change talks are taking place, is looking like a very different proposition to the first. Yesterday morning hundreds of people were stuck in a huge bottleneck from the tiny entrance right back to the steps of the nearby metro station. Eventually it was announced that those accredited (like me) could enter, but it still was impossible to move. I eventually clambered unceremoniously over a metal fence and an hour after joining the throng I was finally inside.

I was lucky, as I was just in time for a meeting with UK Development Minister, Douglas Alexander, who was talking to a group of NGOs to update us on the negotiations and to hear from us. He was due to meet with fellow EU development ministers later and his priority for the day would be to try and get more EU Member States to agree that climate financing must be additional to existing and promised aid flows. Right now many governments are planning to use development budgets for climate financing – something which we’ve been campaigning strongly against.

Later in the day Swedish Development Minister Gunilla Carlsson and Danish Development Minsiter Ulla Tørnæs put forward a strong case for additionality at a civil society meeting in downtown Copenhagen. Gunilla Carlsson made a particularly strong case, stating that this argument would not even be an issue if countries had simply lived up to the promises they had made before. Then all money would be additional. It’s clearly frustrating for countries such as Denmark and Sweden, who have not only met EU aid targets, but surpassed them by quite a margin, and they want other countries to do the same. After the meeting, I went to Ulla Tørnæs’ office to hand over our Copenhagen petition calling for full additionality of climate financing, with over 70,000 signatures from ONE members (thank you!). We’ll now be watching to see what happens on this critical issue.

Whilst we were meeting however, lots was happening elsewhere, with the big story of the day being developing countries forcing a temporary suspension in the negotiations. With pressure rising all round, many poorer countries, including those from Africa, are frustrated on the lack of progress so far. With world leaders now starting to arrive in town, the tension is only going to build in these last few days.