TWN  |  THIRD WORLD RESURGENCE |  ARCHIVE
THIRD WORLD RESURGENCE

Greater emission cuts needed to avert disaster - NGOs

The carbon emission cuts pledged at the Paris conference and embodied in the climate treaty that emerged are wholly inadequate to meet the grave threat from global warming facing the planet. This was the consensus view of civil society groups at the Paris conference. Chee Yoke Heong examines a civil society report released before the conference which articulated this concern.


THE world is moving towards a climate disaster unless countries around the world commit to cutting their carbon emissions beyond what has so far been pledged under the United Nations climate regime.

Based on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) scenarios, there is a global carbon budget that will be consumed in 10-20 years at current emission levels. A large number of civil society groups working with scientists and economists stress that a commitment to keep at least within this limited budget, and to share the effort of doing so equitably and fairly, has to be at the heart of the international debate around climate change.

Ambitious targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions are urgently needed, but without an equitable sharing of the efforts and the recognition of the right of development of developing countries, a climate disaster cannot be avoided. Negotiations of the Paris Agreement did not include any clear reference to a global carbon budget as a basis for targets and effort sharing. Instead, governments were invited to put forward voluntary pledges in 2015 in the form of 'intended nationally determined contributions' (INDCs).

A report on 'Fair Shares: A Civil Society Equity Review of INDCs' was released in June 2015 by an unprecedented group of civil society organisations from around the world. The review assessed the voluntary climate target commitments by countries in their respective INDCs which were submitted under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in the lead-up to the meeting of Parties last December. A total of 146 countries, representing about 87% of global greenhouse gas emissions, have so far submitted their climate targets to the UNFCCC. These are to be implemented under the newly concluded Paris Agreement that is expected to enter into force in 2020.

The conclusion is that there is still a big gap between what it will take to avoid catastrophic climate change, and what countries have put forward so far in terms of their commitments.

'Together, the commitments captured in the INDCs will not keep temperatures below 2OC, much less 1.5OC, above pre-industrial levels. Even if all countries meet their INDC commitments, the world is likely to warm by a devastating 3OC or more,' with the danger of tipping the world's climate into catastrophic runaway warming.

The current pledges also represent only about half of the reduction in emissions required by 2030 and this is a 'tiny fraction' of what is needed to avoid such a catastrophe.

The report assesses countries' INDCs by judging their commitments against their 'fair share' of the global mitigation effort needed to maintain a minimal chance of keeping warming below 1.5OC-2OC.

The method used by the report to determine the 'fair share' that each country needs to contribute is based on historical responsibility and capacity, which correspond directly with the core principles in the UNFCCC of 'common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities' and the right to sustainable development.

Based on this benchmark, the report finds that all major developed countries fall well short of their fair shares. Those with the widest gap between their climate commitment and their fair share are: Russia, whose commitment represents zero contribution towards its fair share; followed by Japan, which committed about one-tenth of its fair share; the US at one-fifth; and the European Union at just over a fifth.

On the other hand, the majority of developing countries have made mitigation pledges that exceed or broadly meet their fair share, but they also have mitigation potential that exceeds their pledges and fair share. These include China, India, Indonesia, Kenya and the Marshall Islands. Brazil's commitment represents slightly more than two-thirds of its fair share. However, these countries still have the potential to take on greater mitigation efforts with commitments beyond their fair share subject to international support.

'Even if countries' pledges exceed their fair share, they will have to do more - with international support' - if the world is to avoid a climatic breakdown, according to the report.

It added that 'most developed countries have fair shares that are already too large to fulfil exclusively within their borders even with extremely ambitious domestic actions.' As such, in addition to domestic reductions, the remainder of their fair shares that account for almost half of the reductions that need to take place globally must come from reductions in developing countries. This will require a vast expansion of international finance, technology and capacity-building support (collectively referred to as means of implementation) for developing countries.

However, the report noted that 'there is a striking lack of clear commitments' in terms of climate finance from developed countries to support developing countries to meet their commitments. In addition, there is a great need for increased public climate finance to meet the cost of adaptation and to cover loss and damage in developing countries. 

For a fully equitable climate agreement, the report said, substantial finance for mitigation must be delivered both to fulfil developed countries' fair share and to enable greater commitment from developing countries.

The report called for the Paris Agreement to include a strong mechanism to increase the pledges made thus far, as the world cannot afford to proceed with the collective ambition contained in the current INDCs, which will see a catastrophic 3C level increase in world temperature.

Importantly, the climate agreement must come up with a framework that ensures that domestic commitments and global targets are set in accordance with science and equity, the report stressed.

In the final agreement, Article 2.2 states, 'This Agreement will be implemented to reflect equity and the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, in the light of different national circumstances.'

Article 4.1 provides that 'Parties aim to reach global peaking of greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible, recognising that peaking will take longer for developing country Parties, and to undertake rapid reductions thereafter in accordance with best available science, so as to achieve a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases in the second half of this century, on the basis of equity, and in the context of sustainable development and efforts to eradicate poverty.'

Article 4.3 further states, 'Each Party's successive nationally determined contribution will represent a progression beyond the Party's then current nationally determined contribution and reflect its highest possible ambition, reflecting its common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, in the light of different national circumstances.'

So while equity has been reaffirmed as an operating principle, the voluntary nature of the Paris Agreement emissions reduction commitments continues to provide an 'escape' for developed countries from doing their fair shares. An Ad Hoc Working Group on the Paris Agreement has been set up and its work that begins in May 2016 will include the development of modalities, procedures and guidelines for reviewing all climate actions of Parties.

Separately, a 'facilitative dialogue' among Parties will take place in 2018 to take stock of mitigation efforts of Parties - whether developed countries will take on their fair shares and commit themselves to providing the required international support to developing countries remains to be seen.

The full report and summary is available at http://civilsocietyreview.org/.                  

Chee Yoke Heong is a researcher with the Third World Network.

*Third World Resurgence No. 305/306, January/February 2016, pp 40-41


TWN  |  THIRD WORLD RESURGENCE |  ARCHIVE