Aïssatou Diouf is responsible for international policies and advocacy within the NGO Enda Energie based in Dakar, Senegal. Coordinator of the Climate Action Network in West and Central Africa, she has been walking the corridors of climate negotiations for nearly a decade. Feedback on COP26.
Franceinfo Africa: what were, for the African States, the main challenges of this COP26?
Aïssatou Diouf: first of all, reduce global warming on a path of 2 to 1.5 ° C as stipulated in the Paris Agreement. This is already problematic for the continent since we are already seeing the droughts and the consequences on agriculture… Then, concerning adaptation in developing countries and losses and damage, the question of financing is a priority issue. This is my third point, but it was at the heart of the negotiations: carbon market mechanisms. This is Article 6 of the Paris Agreement and we had not yet found an agreement for the rules of implementation and operationalization. All these issues concern States. With regard to civil society organizations, the challenge was to put people at the center of discussions because communities are increasingly vulnerable and lives are at stake.
In the end, for the Africans, there was therefore very little progress in Glasgow if we stick to the trajectory and the question of funding. The 100 billion for adaptation are still not collected …
A few days before the Glasgow COP, the published roadmap indicated that the 100 billion dollars, pledged in Copenhagen, would be reached in 2023. It was already problematic for developing countries to go to Glasgow on the basis of a broken promise, since this sum should have been collected in 2020. There is therefore already a three-year lag. Which is huge when we fight against the effects of climate change. All of this shows that there is no determination. There is always an excuse when it comes to finding a solution to this climate crisis affecting developing countries when the richest nations know how to find the money when they want it. Last example with the health crisis linked to Covid-19.
However, there is some progress. For example, on adaptation which is currently underfunded. The objective of the Paris agreement was to balance climate finance : 50% for mitigation and the other half for adaptation. In Glasgow, there is a commitment to double adaptation funding by 2025, or $ 40 billion. Which is 10 billion less when the calculation base corresponds to the famous 100 billion dollars. This is far from meeting the needs of developing countries, but it remains a significant step forward.
No agreement on loss and damage either …
African countries and small island states have successfully imposed the issue of loss and damage as a political issue at COP26. For me, this is the fruit of the battle of civil society organizations and developing countries. On the other hand, not to set up a financial mechanism as proposed by the G77 and China with regard to loss and damage is regrettable. As a result, climate action is being delayed and the lives of millions of people are further endangered. However, political recognition of loss and damage is a step forward. Scotland and Wallonia have invested money, it is an incentive. Note that on loss and damage, a two-year dialogue will take place from 2022, but there is no guarantee that a mechanism will be put in place at the end of these negotiations although the developing countries intend to push in this direction. All in all, we need more funding for adaptation and loss and damage to finally initiate this ecological transition that our States are unable to make today. We cannot continue to travel around the world to collect so little funding.
Isn’t it time that African countries, instead of waiting for the promised money, find their own way to finance climate action?
Our States are already mobilizing. A considerable part of their GDP is used to deal with the consequences of climate change. Climate justice is at the center of this whole discussion we have today. Therefore, the first question one should ask is: who pays? The answer is quite simple: the people in charge have to pay. Especially since in terms of commitments, African countries have been playing the game from the start. Aligning with a climate-compatible development path is an additional cost to development and our States cannot assume this additional burden. The richest countries must keep their commitments and strengthen the mobilization of financing. Everyone talks about the 100 billion as if this sum would solve the climate issue in Africa. This is not true! To this, we must add that only 30-35% of the funds mobilized to fight against climate change reach the African continent.
We felt a lot of disappointment about this COP among all those who have been mobilizing for years so that States make the right decisions. What do you think ?
People are starting to get tired of the status quo. The United Kingdom has done everything to organize this face-to-face COP despite the pandemic. As a result, real leadership was expected to pull states towards greater ambition. We didn’t see anything. In terms of inclusiveness, the account was not there either. It was very difficult for civil society organizations to attend the negotiations and be present when the heads of state and government were. Speaking of which, people are also fed up with hearing politicians say that they are aware of climate change and that it is not reflected in the negotiating rooms. We see the negotiators of these same countries making no effort. On the other hand, COP26 is one of the most followed COPs. NGOs call it the “people power” (the power of public opinion). All the citizens who were on the streets in Glasgow and around the world no longer want to allow this status quo to flourish.
Can we conclude that if climate action does not take off, it is because of the developed countries which, by not making the necessary funding available, are denying their historic responsibility?
They refuse to take their responsibilities and dilute all the talk about “common but differentiated responsibility” by pointing to emerging countries like India for example. We agree that these countries must make efforts and gradually phase out fossil fuels, particularly coal. But what have developed countries done since? The states historically responsible for this global warming are not taking their responsibilities.
What would be the solution for African countries to have more weight in climate negotiations? ?
We certainly need better coordination between the groups where many developing countries are present, namely the Least Developed Countries (LDCs), the G77 + China and the Africa group. Second, the Conference of African Ministers of the Environment should provide more support to negotiators on complex issues. If the negotiators do not manage to settle them, they must go back to the ministerial level, especially in view of the next COP to be held on African soil, in Cairo, in Egypt. It is hoped that the expectations of the most vulnerable will finally be taken into account and that there will be strong leadership from African countries so that the negotiations deliver results commensurate with the climate emergency. We can criticize the COP, but it is the only process we have that allows The Gambia, the United States, France and Senegal to be gathered around the same table.