Parties could not agree on adaptation, mitigation, Global Stock Take and equity among other things
The venue of the climate conference in Bonn. Photo: Akshit Sangomla / CSE The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change’s (UNFCCC) Subsidiary Bodies 58 (SB 58) conference in Bonn, Germany, started off at an unprecedented low on World Environment Day, with countries failing to adopt the agenda for the conference as a result of disagreements on various agenda items.
This is a rare event, according to the representative of China, who made a statement regarding the failure to adopt the agenda at the plenary event. He further said there were major disagreements among countries on the agenda items and that till consensus on them is achieved no negotiations should take place on any substantive agenda items.
The first issue that irked some Groups was the dropping of the agenda item on National Adaptation Plans which was later included after Cuba, on behalf of G77 and China Group, made an addendum to the draft agenda.
“We would like to stress the absolute necessity of maintaining National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) as a standing item on the agenda of the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI). We are quite surprised that this item which has been on the agenda has been dropped,” said Ephraim Mwepya Shitima of Zambia, chair of the African Group of Negotiators (AGN), in a statement made in the Opening Plenary.
Some of the other sticky issues that countries need to agree upon are:
“The new mitigation work programme proposal by the European Union is not in line with what was agreed upon before,” said the representative from China.
“Developing countries battle climate change with one hand tied, while rich nations turn a blind eye to their financial needs. Demanding unreasonable mitigation ambition from poorer nations won’t solve the problem,” Harjeet Singh of Climate Action Network International told Down To Earth (DTE).
At SB 58, the third and final meeting of the Technical Dialogue needs to be completed which would inform and kick off the political phase of the GST process.
This is important for countries to know the status of climate change mitigation, adaptation, finance and technology transfer so that they can make course correction to achieve the goals under the 2015 Paris Agreement.
“What is abundantly clear is that Parties are undertaking climate action. In our case, it is in the context of sustainable development and eradication of poverty. Some parties are pulling their weight; others are failing to,” said Shitima.
“Ultimately, the GST outcome must operationalise fairness and a Just transition for all. For instance, we cannot have deepened fossil fuel use in developed countries further weaken the ability of African countries to transition in light of constrained pathways towards 1.5 degrees. Our expectation of the form of the GST outcome is a negotiated one that is owned by all Parties,” Shitima elaborated.
GST was highlighted as one of the most important outcomes this year by almost all the Groups of countries, Parties and Observer constituencies at the Opening Plenary. Most of them pointed out the principles of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) enshrined in the Paris Agreement should be adhered to.
For instance, Bolivia said on behalf of the Like Minded Developing Countries: “There are attempts being made to sideline equity and CBDR. Many Parties are not sticking to previous mandates and they are making efforts to introduce new mandates. This seriously undermines trust of negotiations under UNFCCC.”
The NCQG is also not part of the agenda items which could be another issue with the adoption of the agenda. The major contention could be around the target for the NCQG which may not be amenable to the developed countries. “Reason is known but cannot be announced in an open session here,” said the representative from China.
“It is high time for the wealthy world to cease pressuring without offering the vital finance and technology required for effective climate action. Actions resonate louder than mere words in the face of the climate crisis,” said Singh.
The discussions on climate change were also sidelined by the trading of statements on the war in Ukraine between Russia and the West (the European Union, United States and United Kingdom).
We are a voice to you; you have been a support to us. Together we build journalism that is independent, credible and fearless. You can further help us by making a donation. This will mean a lot for our ability to bring you news, perspectives and analysis from the ground so that we can make change together.
.png)
Comments are moderated and will be published only after the site moderator’s approval. Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name. Selected comments may also be used in the ‘Letters’ section of the Down To Earth print edition.