Today is officially the last day of COP28, but an extension is increasingly likely. A negotiating text published yesterday is a bitter disappointment for the most ambitious and vulnerable countries. Comments range from “unacceptable” to “stunned.” Bernhard Pötter has studied the text and is looking ahead.
Urmi Goswami has taken a thorough look at the G77/China group. The negotiating group includes both the most vulnerable countries and large coal users such as China. Tensions here were already evident at the last climate conference in Egypt. This year, the most vulnerable countries are pursuing a new strategy: Seeking flexible new partnerships with other blocs, while remaining on the side of China and other influential countries on other important matters.
Today’s news features an interesting calculation showing which countries would have to completely phase out fossil fuels in the early 2030s in order to keep the 1.5-degree target within reach – and how much the rich countries would have to pay to mitigate the consequences of a fossil fuel phase-out in poorer countries.
It all started with positive surprises: An agenda without disputes, a decision on the loss and damage fund and a surprising amount of money. It continued with positive statements from heads of government, flawless organization, a pleasant atmosphere in the negotiating rooms and far-reaching declarations – and it ended in a disaster for the moment: The United Arab Emirates’ presidency of COP28 entered the home straight on Monday afternoon with a heavily criticized draft final declaration. And many delegates and observers were left with one thing on Monday evening: confusion about what to do next.
The text of the final declaration was published at around 4.30 pm on Monday, around 18 hours before COP President Sultan Al Jaber announced that the conference would end on time. The Europeans and others who expected ambition saw the paper as the ultimate provocation. And this from a presidency that had gone to great lengths to listen and be “inclusive.” German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock criticized it as “inadequate and unacceptable,” adding that the text was unbalanced and intolerable, “our voices were not heard,” – AOSIS representatives declared – a severe criticism in a UN system based on consensus and the inclusion of all groups.
There is widespread displeasure from the camp that had hoped for more: Besides the EU, representatives of island states, the Latin American group, other developing countries and the Umbrella Group were also outraged. Reports emerged that these groups made many critical comments at a meeting of delegation leaders with COP President Al Jaber late in the evening. However, there was no public communication from India or China.
At the presentation of the text, Al Jaber said in a press release: “The time for discussion is coming to an end.” Judging by the voices from the plenary, the time for discussion has only just begun. Critics are particularly upset by the following formulations:
However, there are also points that the EU welcomes:
Overall, critics complain that the text has internal contradictions and lacks direction. It is also unclear why such a surprisingly unbalanced text was presented in the first place. It can hardly be due to a lack of experience on the part of Al Jaber’s team. Over the past year, the UAE has recruited a high-profile team of advisors for the presidency. So far, this group, which also includes seasoned former UNFCCC experts, has mastered all the procedural challenges of COP28 with flying colors.
This makes Al Jaber’s motives for presenting such a text, which has met with fierce resistance from many parts of the conference, all the more puzzling now. A president who was eyed with suspicion because of his background in the oil business, but then spent a year traveling the world to listen and organize the most inclusive COP ever, is presenting a text that makes many countries feel unheard. On the last official day of COP28, pressing questions now arise:
The only thing that seems certain is that the conference will hardly end on time on Tuesday.
COP28 in Dubai is something of a rollercoaster ride for vulnerable and poor developing countries – which are part of the G77 group and China in UN climate negotiations. They experienced highs when the loss and damage fund, with an initial capitalization of over 700 million dollars, finally began its work. They had to accept defeats, such as the blockade during negotiations of climate change adaptation and the still unresolved decision on phasing out fossil fuels.
But one thing is clear: The strategy of poor countries united in the group of “least developed countries” (LDCs) and small island states (SIDS) has changed. They have become more flexible and more diverse. In this way, poor countries have fuelled the dynamics within the G77 – and yet kept the group together.
The small island states and the least developed countries have learnt from the past two years: They must pull out all the stops through strategic partnerships and cooperation with other countries to maintain the 1.5-degree limit. But they cannot rely solely on the protection of the G77 group and China, but must seek support and recognition for their “special circumstances.” John Silk, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade of the Marshall Islands, told Table.Media: “Partnership and co-operation will get results.”
It is also a strategy against the traditional policy of the big countries: In the past, both the established developed countries and the influential emerging economies have attempted to exploit the poor and vulnerable countries for their own benefit in climate negotiations. The countries from the Global North tried to use them to break up the bloc of the G77 and China. The G77 and China, in turn, brought them onto their side to exert more influence in the negotiations as a larger bloc.
The vulnerable countries now pursue a pragmatic and issue-based approach in Dubai. Internally, they call it the “cafeteria” approach: It means seeking and offering partnerships with countries or negotiating blocs that are best suited to fulfill the demands of the LDCs and SIDS. In Sharm El-Sheikh, they called on larger developing countries such as China and the Gulf oil states to make a financial contribution. In Dubai, they focused on urging emerging economies to show more ambitious climate action.
However, the major developing and emerging countries in the G77 group and China have their own reasons for resisting the call to phase out fossil fuels: Some do not want to have their energy and climate policies dictated to them; after all, their dependence on fossil fuels is often high. Others oppose specific sector targets. And others point out that their energy needs are increasing, but their resources for expanding renewable energies are limited.
Tina Steege, climate ambassador for the Marshall Islands, nevertheless calls for solidarity: “We expect the developing countries to stand by us here at COP28,” she told Table.Media. “Large developing countries like China and India must show solidarity with us. We are a country where continued fossil fuel extraction is not only a threat to our economy, but also to our entire territory. How can you know that an entire country could become uninhabitable and not show solidarity?”
To advance the phase-out of fossil fuels at COP28, the vulnerable countries have now allied themselves with wealthy developed countries. However, this alliance can hardly be translated to other negotiating tracks.
Poor countries recognize that the EU is firmly standing by their side because the Green Deal and its implementation force them to do so. For its part, the US supports the demand for tripling renewable energy capacity and doubling energy efficiency. But the Global South has little trust in them.
One of the reasons is that the United States has always held back when it comes to financing global climate action: At the start of the summit in Dubai, for example, the world’s largest economy announced a contribution of 17.5 million US dollars to the loss and damage fund, while Germany and the United Arab Emirates pledged 100 million each.
However, in the negotiations on adaptation to climate change, the vulnerable countries remain a firm part of the group of developing countries of the G77 and China. The wishes of the developing countries for the global adaptation target to be adopted in Dubai vary. But their demands largely align: They all want clear, time-limited targets for specific adaptation measures, such as early warning systems or adequate water supplies, and more support from wealthy countries, including funding.
Adaptation has traditionally been a priority of developing countries, which are most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change and are rarely able to react adequately. The resistance of developed countries, spearheaded by the United States, against targets and funding for adaptation is holding the G77 together.
Although the EU has made efforts to reach out to the African countries – Germany announced 60 million dollars for the UN Adaptation Fund at the end of the conference and Austria pledged 35 million dollars. However, these efforts have so far not changed the unity of the G77 countries regarding adaptation.
For the poorest of the poor, the SIDS and LDCs, the essence of their strategy remains the same: emphasizing their vulnerability: “Our message to the world is that you cannot build your economy at the expense of the vulnerable,” said Marshall Islands Climate Ambassador Tina Steege.
Africa’s unprecedented renewable energy potential offers an excellent basis for transforming its energy sector. Nevertheless, Africa’s electricity supply is lagging far behind. Most people in sub-Saharan Africa live in severe energy poverty. Almost half of Africans (46 percent) still have no access to electricity in their homes, and one billion have no access to clean, low-emission cooking facilities.
Therefore, efforts to achieve universal access to affordable, reliable and sustainable electricity by 2030 must be at the forefront of African energy transition strategies to effectively combat poverty, open up new economic opportunities and promote gender equality.
For decades, Africa has invested billions of US dollars in fossil fuel-based energy systems. Fossil fuels have failed to provide hundreds of millions of people with access to modern energy.
Africa has more potential for renewable energy than any other continent. Renewable energy is the cheapest option and the best investment for Africa. However, Africa’s current energy generation mix still relies on fossil fuels, while renewable energy sources account for almost 18 percent of electricity generation.
Tripling global renewable energy capacity has received much political support at the ongoing climate conference. To date, over 120 countries have signed the pledge. However, this global renewable energy target must be in line with the principles of equity. An effective global renewable energy target requires new financing mechanisms and alternative business strategies for actors in the value chain, especially for the most vulnerable regions.
Renewable energy systems can create democratic, decentralized, community-owned, fit-for-purpose energy systems for Africa. This is especially true for remote rural communities in Africa. However, developing these renewable energy projects would require both financial and technical support from developed countries.
Expediting substantial, predictable and additional financial and technical resources through appropriate instruments to reduce the costs of the energy transition for the people and modernize the electricity grids – including subsidized loans, guarantees and grants – must be a priority.
Compared to the financing of fossil fuels, current financial flows for climate action in Africa are minuscule. Fossil fuels directly impact the lives of the people of Africa through the pollution resulting from their extraction and combustion. However, the fossil fuel industry is only propagating one side of a complex story by claiming that extraction is a source of public revenue, jobs and access to energy. However, the experiences that African communities have had with oil, gas and coal producers tell a very different story.
Promoting fossil fuels in Africa hinders several sustainable development goals, including ensuring health and well-being for all, gender equality, climate action, ending hunger and poverty, clean water and sanitation for all, and universal access to electricity.
Africa has consistently supported the global goal of limiting global warming to below 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels. This was demonstrated by the fact that 54 African countries supported the 1.5-degree target, which led to its inclusion in the Paris Agreement.
In September, African heads of state and government met in Nairobi, Kenya, and agreed on the goal of increasing the installed capacity of renewables in Africa from 56 gigawatts to 300 gigawatts by 2030. According to estimates, this will cost 600 billion US dollars. Africa is going to need support to achieve this ambitious goal.
However, this requires abandoning the current unbalanced support from countries of the Global North, as seen recently with the Dash for Africa’s Gas. Africa will need genuine support and its partners would have to be responsible cooperation partners to limit global temperature rise and avert a catastrophic future.
At present, only two percent of global investment in renewable energy goes to Africa. Even more alarming is that the cost of capital for renewable energy projects in Africa can be up to seven times higher than in other regions, especially in the Global North.
The ongoing discussions and commitments towards a global renewable energy target must lead to adequate and additional financing to help Africa realize its potential and its primary need to meet the energy needs of its population. This must also help Africa achieve its sustainable development goals and strengthen its resilience to the climate crisis. Those who can pay the most must bear the greatest cost burden, namely the rich countries that have already benefited the most from fossil fuels.
At this COP, discussions on just transitions must ensure that a framework for their funding is created that protects workers, communities and economies from negative consequences.
Developed countries and international financial institutions should refrain from supporting the expansion of fossil fuels in Africa and other developing countries. Instead, they should invest their resources and expertise in promoting decentralized, community-owned renewable energy solutions.
It is essential to actively involve civil society organizations, local communities and indigenous groups in the decision-making processes related to energy projects. They must take ownership of renewable energy initiatives in their countries and ensure that the benefits of the energy transition are harnessed locally.
Amos Wemanya is Senior Advisor for Renewable Energy and Just Energy Transition at the environmental NGO Power Shift Africa.
Climate summits always involve very, very long walks. Especially in Dubai, where more people have gathered than at any other UN climate conference before, and the summit grounds seem like a spacious small town.
The distances are correspondingly long. 10,000 steps a day? Laughable. COP participants easily walk much longer distances. An unofficial survey among colleagues revealed that some fitness trackers show a 50 percent higher calorie burn since the start of the summit. Leaving all other factors aside, COP participation is very healthy in this respect.
In Dubai, the morning walk from your hotel to the metro can take several kilometers. On some days, the queues at the security checkpoint at the summit site entrance stretched all the way back to the metro station. In extreme cases, they even looped around the building several times, guided by barriers and controlled by security staff who shouted instructions to the crowd, telling them which way to go.
Some readers can imagine how this makes you feel. Sheep herds know what it’s like. But, apart from the crowd management, which Dubai has mastered, once you have finally passed the checks, the daily marching inside the summit area is just beginning. And the days are long. It’s not fun for anyone with walking problems.
What helps? You guessed it: proper footwear. Ministers and leading negotiators would certainly confirm this: The best grasp of the latest linguistic intricacies of summit diplomacy – currently all the rage at COP28: “abated” versus “unabated” – is useless if your feet no longer carry you. High heels are thus something for COP newbies (or very, very tough summiteers). However, Team Table rarely saw such impractical footwear in Dubai.
Seasoned COP champs like us wear Birkenstocks, Crocks, trainers or running shoes, often in bright neon colors, some even marathon-tested. Particularly savvy climate summit marchers also swear by supportive insoles and have a pain-relieving ointment in their luggage, just in case. As old summit veterans, we at Table.Media are, naturally, adequately equipped. Otherwise, we wouldn’t get very far – or only very slowly – which would be fatal in Dubai, especially just before the end.
Instead, we are getting ready for the crucial home stretch. When we return to Germany, some of us from Team Table will put our tired feet up for a while. Others – as we know from very reliable sources – can’t help but continue to work tirelessly on climate reporting even after such a UN summit marathon. They are certainly already mentally preparing for the next endurance event. ae
Today is officially the last day of COP28, but an extension is increasingly likely. A negotiating text published yesterday is a bitter disappointment for the most ambitious and vulnerable countries. Comments range from “unacceptable” to “stunned.” Bernhard Pötter has studied the text and is looking ahead.
Urmi Goswami has taken a thorough look at the G77/China group. The negotiating group includes both the most vulnerable countries and large coal users such as China. Tensions here were already evident at the last climate conference in Egypt. This year, the most vulnerable countries are pursuing a new strategy: Seeking flexible new partnerships with other blocs, while remaining on the side of China and other influential countries on other important matters.
Today’s news features an interesting calculation showing which countries would have to completely phase out fossil fuels in the early 2030s in order to keep the 1.5-degree target within reach – and how much the rich countries would have to pay to mitigate the consequences of a fossil fuel phase-out in poorer countries.
It all started with positive surprises: An agenda without disputes, a decision on the loss and damage fund and a surprising amount of money. It continued with positive statements from heads of government, flawless organization, a pleasant atmosphere in the negotiating rooms and far-reaching declarations – and it ended in a disaster for the moment: The United Arab Emirates’ presidency of COP28 entered the home straight on Monday afternoon with a heavily criticized draft final declaration. And many delegates and observers were left with one thing on Monday evening: confusion about what to do next.
The text of the final declaration was published at around 4.30 pm on Monday, around 18 hours before COP President Sultan Al Jaber announced that the conference would end on time. The Europeans and others who expected ambition saw the paper as the ultimate provocation. And this from a presidency that had gone to great lengths to listen and be “inclusive.” German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock criticized it as “inadequate and unacceptable,” adding that the text was unbalanced and intolerable, “our voices were not heard,” – AOSIS representatives declared – a severe criticism in a UN system based on consensus and the inclusion of all groups.
There is widespread displeasure from the camp that had hoped for more: Besides the EU, representatives of island states, the Latin American group, other developing countries and the Umbrella Group were also outraged. Reports emerged that these groups made many critical comments at a meeting of delegation leaders with COP President Al Jaber late in the evening. However, there was no public communication from India or China.
At the presentation of the text, Al Jaber said in a press release: “The time for discussion is coming to an end.” Judging by the voices from the plenary, the time for discussion has only just begun. Critics are particularly upset by the following formulations:
However, there are also points that the EU welcomes:
Overall, critics complain that the text has internal contradictions and lacks direction. It is also unclear why such a surprisingly unbalanced text was presented in the first place. It can hardly be due to a lack of experience on the part of Al Jaber’s team. Over the past year, the UAE has recruited a high-profile team of advisors for the presidency. So far, this group, which also includes seasoned former UNFCCC experts, has mastered all the procedural challenges of COP28 with flying colors.
This makes Al Jaber’s motives for presenting such a text, which has met with fierce resistance from many parts of the conference, all the more puzzling now. A president who was eyed with suspicion because of his background in the oil business, but then spent a year traveling the world to listen and organize the most inclusive COP ever, is presenting a text that makes many countries feel unheard. On the last official day of COP28, pressing questions now arise:
The only thing that seems certain is that the conference will hardly end on time on Tuesday.
COP28 in Dubai is something of a rollercoaster ride for vulnerable and poor developing countries – which are part of the G77 group and China in UN climate negotiations. They experienced highs when the loss and damage fund, with an initial capitalization of over 700 million dollars, finally began its work. They had to accept defeats, such as the blockade during negotiations of climate change adaptation and the still unresolved decision on phasing out fossil fuels.
But one thing is clear: The strategy of poor countries united in the group of “least developed countries” (LDCs) and small island states (SIDS) has changed. They have become more flexible and more diverse. In this way, poor countries have fuelled the dynamics within the G77 – and yet kept the group together.
The small island states and the least developed countries have learnt from the past two years: They must pull out all the stops through strategic partnerships and cooperation with other countries to maintain the 1.5-degree limit. But they cannot rely solely on the protection of the G77 group and China, but must seek support and recognition for their “special circumstances.” John Silk, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade of the Marshall Islands, told Table.Media: “Partnership and co-operation will get results.”
It is also a strategy against the traditional policy of the big countries: In the past, both the established developed countries and the influential emerging economies have attempted to exploit the poor and vulnerable countries for their own benefit in climate negotiations. The countries from the Global North tried to use them to break up the bloc of the G77 and China. The G77 and China, in turn, brought them onto their side to exert more influence in the negotiations as a larger bloc.
The vulnerable countries now pursue a pragmatic and issue-based approach in Dubai. Internally, they call it the “cafeteria” approach: It means seeking and offering partnerships with countries or negotiating blocs that are best suited to fulfill the demands of the LDCs and SIDS. In Sharm El-Sheikh, they called on larger developing countries such as China and the Gulf oil states to make a financial contribution. In Dubai, they focused on urging emerging economies to show more ambitious climate action.
However, the major developing and emerging countries in the G77 group and China have their own reasons for resisting the call to phase out fossil fuels: Some do not want to have their energy and climate policies dictated to them; after all, their dependence on fossil fuels is often high. Others oppose specific sector targets. And others point out that their energy needs are increasing, but their resources for expanding renewable energies are limited.
Tina Steege, climate ambassador for the Marshall Islands, nevertheless calls for solidarity: “We expect the developing countries to stand by us here at COP28,” she told Table.Media. “Large developing countries like China and India must show solidarity with us. We are a country where continued fossil fuel extraction is not only a threat to our economy, but also to our entire territory. How can you know that an entire country could become uninhabitable and not show solidarity?”
To advance the phase-out of fossil fuels at COP28, the vulnerable countries have now allied themselves with wealthy developed countries. However, this alliance can hardly be translated to other negotiating tracks.
Poor countries recognize that the EU is firmly standing by their side because the Green Deal and its implementation force them to do so. For its part, the US supports the demand for tripling renewable energy capacity and doubling energy efficiency. But the Global South has little trust in them.
One of the reasons is that the United States has always held back when it comes to financing global climate action: At the start of the summit in Dubai, for example, the world’s largest economy announced a contribution of 17.5 million US dollars to the loss and damage fund, while Germany and the United Arab Emirates pledged 100 million each.
However, in the negotiations on adaptation to climate change, the vulnerable countries remain a firm part of the group of developing countries of the G77 and China. The wishes of the developing countries for the global adaptation target to be adopted in Dubai vary. But their demands largely align: They all want clear, time-limited targets for specific adaptation measures, such as early warning systems or adequate water supplies, and more support from wealthy countries, including funding.
Adaptation has traditionally been a priority of developing countries, which are most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change and are rarely able to react adequately. The resistance of developed countries, spearheaded by the United States, against targets and funding for adaptation is holding the G77 together.
Although the EU has made efforts to reach out to the African countries – Germany announced 60 million dollars for the UN Adaptation Fund at the end of the conference and Austria pledged 35 million dollars. However, these efforts have so far not changed the unity of the G77 countries regarding adaptation.
For the poorest of the poor, the SIDS and LDCs, the essence of their strategy remains the same: emphasizing their vulnerability: “Our message to the world is that you cannot build your economy at the expense of the vulnerable,” said Marshall Islands Climate Ambassador Tina Steege.
Africa’s unprecedented renewable energy potential offers an excellent basis for transforming its energy sector. Nevertheless, Africa’s electricity supply is lagging far behind. Most people in sub-Saharan Africa live in severe energy poverty. Almost half of Africans (46 percent) still have no access to electricity in their homes, and one billion have no access to clean, low-emission cooking facilities.
Therefore, efforts to achieve universal access to affordable, reliable and sustainable electricity by 2030 must be at the forefront of African energy transition strategies to effectively combat poverty, open up new economic opportunities and promote gender equality.
For decades, Africa has invested billions of US dollars in fossil fuel-based energy systems. Fossil fuels have failed to provide hundreds of millions of people with access to modern energy.
Africa has more potential for renewable energy than any other continent. Renewable energy is the cheapest option and the best investment for Africa. However, Africa’s current energy generation mix still relies on fossil fuels, while renewable energy sources account for almost 18 percent of electricity generation.
Tripling global renewable energy capacity has received much political support at the ongoing climate conference. To date, over 120 countries have signed the pledge. However, this global renewable energy target must be in line with the principles of equity. An effective global renewable energy target requires new financing mechanisms and alternative business strategies for actors in the value chain, especially for the most vulnerable regions.
Renewable energy systems can create democratic, decentralized, community-owned, fit-for-purpose energy systems for Africa. This is especially true for remote rural communities in Africa. However, developing these renewable energy projects would require both financial and technical support from developed countries.
Expediting substantial, predictable and additional financial and technical resources through appropriate instruments to reduce the costs of the energy transition for the people and modernize the electricity grids – including subsidized loans, guarantees and grants – must be a priority.
Compared to the financing of fossil fuels, current financial flows for climate action in Africa are minuscule. Fossil fuels directly impact the lives of the people of Africa through the pollution resulting from their extraction and combustion. However, the fossil fuel industry is only propagating one side of a complex story by claiming that extraction is a source of public revenue, jobs and access to energy. However, the experiences that African communities have had with oil, gas and coal producers tell a very different story.
Promoting fossil fuels in Africa hinders several sustainable development goals, including ensuring health and well-being for all, gender equality, climate action, ending hunger and poverty, clean water and sanitation for all, and universal access to electricity.
Africa has consistently supported the global goal of limiting global warming to below 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels. This was demonstrated by the fact that 54 African countries supported the 1.5-degree target, which led to its inclusion in the Paris Agreement.
In September, African heads of state and government met in Nairobi, Kenya, and agreed on the goal of increasing the installed capacity of renewables in Africa from 56 gigawatts to 300 gigawatts by 2030. According to estimates, this will cost 600 billion US dollars. Africa is going to need support to achieve this ambitious goal.
However, this requires abandoning the current unbalanced support from countries of the Global North, as seen recently with the Dash for Africa’s Gas. Africa will need genuine support and its partners would have to be responsible cooperation partners to limit global temperature rise and avert a catastrophic future.
At present, only two percent of global investment in renewable energy goes to Africa. Even more alarming is that the cost of capital for renewable energy projects in Africa can be up to seven times higher than in other regions, especially in the Global North.
The ongoing discussions and commitments towards a global renewable energy target must lead to adequate and additional financing to help Africa realize its potential and its primary need to meet the energy needs of its population. This must also help Africa achieve its sustainable development goals and strengthen its resilience to the climate crisis. Those who can pay the most must bear the greatest cost burden, namely the rich countries that have already benefited the most from fossil fuels.
At this COP, discussions on just transitions must ensure that a framework for their funding is created that protects workers, communities and economies from negative consequences.
Developed countries and international financial institutions should refrain from supporting the expansion of fossil fuels in Africa and other developing countries. Instead, they should invest their resources and expertise in promoting decentralized, community-owned renewable energy solutions.
It is essential to actively involve civil society organizations, local communities and indigenous groups in the decision-making processes related to energy projects. They must take ownership of renewable energy initiatives in their countries and ensure that the benefits of the energy transition are harnessed locally.
Amos Wemanya is Senior Advisor for Renewable Energy and Just Energy Transition at the environmental NGO Power Shift Africa.
Climate summits always involve very, very long walks. Especially in Dubai, where more people have gathered than at any other UN climate conference before, and the summit grounds seem like a spacious small town.
The distances are correspondingly long. 10,000 steps a day? Laughable. COP participants easily walk much longer distances. An unofficial survey among colleagues revealed that some fitness trackers show a 50 percent higher calorie burn since the start of the summit. Leaving all other factors aside, COP participation is very healthy in this respect.
In Dubai, the morning walk from your hotel to the metro can take several kilometers. On some days, the queues at the security checkpoint at the summit site entrance stretched all the way back to the metro station. In extreme cases, they even looped around the building several times, guided by barriers and controlled by security staff who shouted instructions to the crowd, telling them which way to go.
Some readers can imagine how this makes you feel. Sheep herds know what it’s like. But, apart from the crowd management, which Dubai has mastered, once you have finally passed the checks, the daily marching inside the summit area is just beginning. And the days are long. It’s not fun for anyone with walking problems.
What helps? You guessed it: proper footwear. Ministers and leading negotiators would certainly confirm this: The best grasp of the latest linguistic intricacies of summit diplomacy – currently all the rage at COP28: “abated” versus “unabated” – is useless if your feet no longer carry you. High heels are thus something for COP newbies (or very, very tough summiteers). However, Team Table rarely saw such impractical footwear in Dubai.
Seasoned COP champs like us wear Birkenstocks, Crocks, trainers or running shoes, often in bright neon colors, some even marathon-tested. Particularly savvy climate summit marchers also swear by supportive insoles and have a pain-relieving ointment in their luggage, just in case. As old summit veterans, we at Table.Media are, naturally, adequately equipped. Otherwise, we wouldn’t get very far – or only very slowly – which would be fatal in Dubai, especially just before the end.
Instead, we are getting ready for the crucial home stretch. When we return to Germany, some of us from Team Table will put our tired feet up for a while. Others – as we know from very reliable sources – can’t help but continue to work tirelessly on climate reporting even after such a UN summit marathon. They are certainly already mentally preparing for the next endurance event. ae
