It is the big crux of international climate policy: If the climate crisis is to be stopped, fossil fuels cannot continue to be burned. But a new study shows: Oil and gas countries continue to invest in their extraction, consumer countries increase fossil subsidies instead of cutting them. This is the path to 2.7 degrees of warming, the report warns. COP28 could be a failure before it even started. And it is no coincidence that this loud alarm, with harsh criticism of the next COP host, the United Arab Emirates, comes on the day that COP President-elect Sultan Al Jaber visits Bonn.
At the Bonn climate change conference SB58, there is also a struggle over money. Billions are at stake for a loss and damage fund. But many rich countries are using “delaying tactics“, criticizes Harjeet Singh of CAN International. The UN states are also stingy when it comes to funding the UN Climate Change Secretariat – even though it is only a comparatively measly 30 million euros. The sums rich developed countries would have to pay to the countries of the Global South for their historic climate debt are far greater: 170 trillion US dollars, according to a new study. The Maldives also require more money, and are now building new islands to protect themselves from sinking, as their EU ambassador explains in an interview.
In any case, we will be closely observing developments in Bonn and elsewhere.
With an urgent plea to change course and sharp criticism of the countries with fossil raw materials, the Climate Action Tracker (CAT) spoke out at the Bonn Climate Change Conference on the debate about phasing out oil, gas and coal. The CAT is a project of the think tanks Climate Analytics and New Climate Institute, which regularly assesses the climate policies of UN states. In its interim report “Countdown to COP28”, the experts criticize:
The study will be presented at the Bonn Climate Change Conference SB58 this Thursday and has been made available to Table.Media in advance. For their analysis, scientists have compared national and global trends in CO2 emissions, investments and policy decisions to what science demands to meet the 1.5-degree target. According to CAT calculations, the world is on a path to a “catastrophic” temperature rise of 2.7 degrees Celsius by 2100 under foreseeable emission trends.
Behind the scenes, the Bonn conference is also currently discussing whether the fossil phase-out will be decided at COP28 in Dubai in December. To meet the climate targets, CO2 emissions would have to be halved by 2030 and “the production of oil and gas would eventually have to be phased out completely,” the authors reiterate the scientific consensus. Two years ago, the International Energy Agency (IEA) already calculated that no new fossil fuel infrastructure must be built to meet the Paris climate targets.
Against this background, the current CAT report criticizes:
The report also opposes “distractions such as CCS” (Carbon Capture and Storage) and explicitly criticizes the role of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) as the host of COP28. Instead of ending fossil energy, the UAE’s designated COP28 President and Minister of Industry, Sultan Al-Jaber, only seeks to end “emissions from fossils” and propagates the massive expansion of technologies such as CCS.
On the same day Al-Jaber is expected to attend the Bonn conference, the CAT report now states that CCS “does not play a relevant role in decarbonizing the energy sector because renewable energy is much cheaper in comparison and has a smaller environmental footprint.” And “the UAE’s action in support of oil, gas and CCS raises serious doubts about its capacity to negotiate an ambitious deal at COP28. The UAE is clearly pursuing an agenda that will divert attention from phasing out fossils and, if successful, lock in oil and gas production on a large scale for the future.” Thus, the opportunity to negotiate a just phase-out of oil and gas at COP28 that takes into account the urgency of decarbonization is being wasted, the report continues.
The report also sees positive trends. For example, the global phase-out of coal is progressing and the expansion of renewables is gaining momentum. But here, too, CAT urges haste: Even a declared global expansion target for renewables of 1,000 gigawatts per year by 2030, which IRENA has suggested and, for instance, is supported by the EU, is not enough; it must be “clearly greater than one terawatt.”
The report argues that the current system “works for the rich”: The big oil and gas companies reportedly spent a total of 110 billion dollars in 2022 on dividends and buying back their own shares – more than the 100 billion dollars that the developed countries promised poor countries for climate aid and so far have failed to deliver.
At the same time, however, global CO2 emissions from the energy sector reached a new peak of 36.8 billion tons in 2022, so a trend reversal is not yet in sight. “The state of global climate policy,” the authors write, “has not changed much since the UN Secretary-General warned at COP27 that the world was on its way to climate hell.”
The expectations for the next world climate conference are tremendous. This is not least evident at the interim negotiations of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change currently underway in Bonn (SB58). Here, preparations are being made for COP28, which will take place in Dubai in late November. But so far, it is not entirely clear what needs to be prepared. The negotiations started with a still-ongoing dispute about the agenda, and may not even be resolved by the end of the conference.
The conflict revolves around a demand made by the EU countries that the so-called Mitigation Work Program, which is supposed to set the path to achieving the 1.5-degree target, should also be discussed at the more technical and less political negotiations in Bonn. The EU and other progressive countries wish to discuss global emission reductions not only once a year at the COPs.
A group of countries in the UN – the so-called Like-Minded Developing Countries, which also includes China, India and Saudi Arabia – strictly rejects this. Officially for formal reasons, but there is a never-ending debate about if the developed world, as the main culprit of climate change, can impose CO2 reduction requirements on developing countries. And especially if new mitigation targets for developing countries are not backed up by financial aid.
When COP28 President-designate Sultan Ahmed Al-Jaber of the United Arab Emirates arrives at the World Conference Center in Bonn today, Thursday, he could help settle the dispute – even though he is not yet in office. If he clearly outlines his priorities for COP28, this could also help determine the composition of the agenda in Bonn to adequately prepare for fall’s COP.
So far, Al Jaber is not expected to hold a speech in Bonn. Instead, a meeting with representatives of young climate activists is scheduled. At the Petersberg Climate Dialogue in Berlin in early May, Al-Jaber caused some surprise when he said that the focus should be on the gradual phase-out of “fossil fuel emissions” – not fossil fuels themselves. Since then, negotiators and environmental organizations have feared that Al-Jaber could make CO2 capture, storage and use (CCSU) the focus of his efforts and significantly dilute the phase-out of fossil fuels in the process.
After yesterday’s meeting in Brussels between Al-Jaber and EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, green deal commissioner Frans Timmermans and foreign affairs representative Josep Borrell, it is not much clearer where the fossil fuel path is headed. COP28 is supposed to deliver “progress towards a just energy transition that includes a scaling-up of renewables in particular, and policies and investments to transition towards energy systems free of unabated fossil fuels,” the joint statement reads.
It is a return to a wording also used by the G7, akin to the discussions at last year’s COP27 in Sharm el-Sheikh. There, more than 80 countries supported India’s proposal to phase out all fossil fuels. The EU was also among the supporters and will continue campaigning for the fossil fuel phase-out in Dubai. The fact that the upcoming COP leader now supports such a formulation could indicate that the positions of Al-Jaber and the EU are not as far apart as believed – nothing more, but also nothing less.
According to the World Bank, sea levels are expected to rise by 10 to 100 centimeters by 2100. Based on these estimates, the Maldives could be completely submerged. How is your country preparing for this?
By 2050, 80 percent of the Maldives will be uninhabitable. The Maldivian government has set itself the goal of creating new islands protected from rising sea levels and tsunamis. These islands, for example, have strong coastal protection and are between five and six meters above mean sea level.
What is the purpose of this new island program?
Essentially, it is about creating safer habitats, as population consolidation is inevitable in these difficult times. We are already seeing the migration of small populations from their home islands to safer areas.
How do you plan for these new islands to be energy independent?
All islands have their own independent power supply based on fossil fuels, mainly diesel generators. The Maldives plans to become carbon neutral by 2030. However, there is not enough land or rooftop space in the Maldives to install solar panels. The more viable option is floating solar arrays, which could be easily placed in the Maldives’ many shallow lagoons.
These projects obviously need to be financed. How difficult is it to access climate finance?
The biggest problem we face right now is a lack of information. More specifically, the existing gaps in climate finance tracking and reporting make it difficult to improve access to climate finance. In addition, the distinction between climate finance and adaptation projects must be clearer.
How can this be implemented in concrete terms?
The Maldives receives more funding for climate change mitigation than for adaptation, even though our carbon emissions are low, and we urgently need funding for adaptation. 71 percent of the money is for climate change mitigation, 23 percent is for adaptation, and 6 percent is across sectors. Of the 200 million US dollars the Maldives receive for climate change mitigation, 80 million is earmarked as grants, and another 80 million is earmarked as loans. In comparison, the Maldives receives 70 million dollars in grants and ten million dollars in loans for adaptation.
What would be needed then to facilitate access to climate finance?
We need better data collection. For example, improved reporting on mitigation and adaptation, and improved mechanisms for tracking the financial support we have received and need. We also need data on soil erosion, sea level rise, and health risks. Current data collection mechanisms are inadequate, making risk assessments and predictions very difficult. And we desperately need capacity and technical assistance from donors, development agencies, and NGOs.
Would the loss and damage fund improve access to climate finance?
Yes, it certainly will. The good news is that surveys show that even future generations in Europe and the Western world, who are likely to be hit hard by the climate crisis, seem to support the idea of compensation payments for the consequences of climate change. How the fund and other arrangements for financing damage and loss will be fully implemented has yet to be worked out, but one thing is clear: It will continue to be an important part of the international climate agenda in 2023.
The Bonn climate conference SB58 will also discuss a global renewable expansion target and a cutback on fossil fuel use. Negotiations on reducing fossil fuels are especially tough, with wide-ranging opposing interests. The practical implementation in each country will be even more difficult. At present, the energy transition is moving in the right direction, but far too slowly, as data from the think tank Ember show:
While renewables are being expanded faster and displacing coal from the electricity mix, progress in major emerging economies is partly canceled out by rising energy consumption. In China and India, the share of coal in the electricity mix declined, but overall, more electricity was generated from coal in these countries in 2022 than in 2015. And Indonesia, Russia and Turkey continue to rely heavily on coal. According to Ember, however, there are also signs that these countries will soon reach their coal emissions peak. nib
In recent years, the world has witnessed a series of devastating climate disasters. Severe storms, unprecedented heatwaves, and wildfires have underscored the growing impact of climate change. Coastal regions are experiencing stronger storms and rising sea levels, while inland areas face prolonged droughts and water scarcity.
These disasters illustrate how much the situation has deteriorated due to the global temperature. The consequences are felt globally, with developing countries bearing a disproportionate burden in terms of lives lost, displacement, economic disruptions, and ecological damage.
At COP27 in Sharm-el-Sheikh, a momentous decision was reached to establish a new loss and damage fund to address the impacts of climate change on vulnerable countries and communities. The outcome also recognized the importance of funding arrangements such as humanitarian aid and bilateral and multilateral financing in response to climate disasters.
The Transitional Committee, comprising 24 members with 10 from developed and 14 from developing countries, was established at COP27. Its mandate is to make recommendations on the operationalization of both the new funding arrangements and the Loss and Damage Fund for consideration and adoption at COP28. The committee’s work will be informed by inputs from various events, including the second Glasgow Dialogue during the mid-year session of the UNFCCC in the German city of Bonn.
However, it is disheartening to witness certain parties prioritizing funding arrangements outside the UNFCCC over the crucial operationalization of the Loss and Damage Fund by COP28. This narrow perspective undermines the gravity of the situation and the urgent need for comprehensive support.
The UNFCCC synthesis report has clearly highlighted the staggering financial requirements, projecting the need for 290 to 580 billion US dollars by 2030, rising to 1 trillion US dollars by 2050 in developing countries alone. These figures underscore the substantial funding gap in addressing loss and damage. It is vital to acknowledge that this situation arises from the inaction, obstruction, and delaying tactics employed by wealthier nations regarding loss and damage finance over the past years.
Moving forward, it is imperative that we demonstrate greater ambition and creativity, developing new solutions that adequately respond to the needs of the most vulnerable communities. Our actions should not be constrained by the current context or available resources; instead, they should be driven by the imperative to protect the rights of those impacted by climate change. We must not shy away from establishing new systems and institutions to address this crisis effectively.
The operationalization of the loss and damage fund must be guided by principles such as international cooperation and solidarity, historical responsibility, the precautionary principle – which means that people should be protected from possible risks -, and the polluter pays principle.
The fund should provide new and additional, adequate, and predictable finance that meets the needs of vulnerable communities and countries. It should prioritize local ownership, encompass gender responsiveness, ensure equitable representation, and be public and grant-based. The fund must be balanced, comprehensive – covering the range of climate impacts from extreme weather to slow onset events as well as responding to economic and non-economic aspects of losses and damages – and safeguard human rights.
Our goal for COP28 should extend beyond the mere creation or rebranding of institutions for the sake of political gains or media attention. True success lies in establishing an agile and adaptable system that learns from emerging challenges, actively engages affected communities, scales up proven solutions, and develops new approaches as needed.
The allocation of resources to the fund must align with the magnitude of the needs it aims to address. Public finance must serve as the primary source of funding, supplemented by additional avenues such as redirecting fossil fuel subsidies, implementing a levy on fossil fuel extraction, and introducing progressive taxes on financial transactions, shipping, and aviation sectors.
It is crucial that this system is built on the principles of responsibility and accountability towards those confronting the climate emergency.
Time is running out rapidly, demanding our collective rejection of complacency and half-hearted efforts. Establishing an effective loss and damage fund is not an option; it is both a moral and legal imperative. Let us seize this opportunity to create a robust system that provides the necessary support and protection to those most affected by climate change. Our response must reflect the urgency and gravity of the situation, showcasing an unwavering commitment to a fair, just, resilient, and sustainable future.
Harjeet Singh is Head of Global Political Strategy at Climate Action Network International (CAN).
It is the big crux of international climate policy: If the climate crisis is to be stopped, fossil fuels cannot continue to be burned. But a new study shows: Oil and gas countries continue to invest in their extraction, consumer countries increase fossil subsidies instead of cutting them. This is the path to 2.7 degrees of warming, the report warns. COP28 could be a failure before it even started. And it is no coincidence that this loud alarm, with harsh criticism of the next COP host, the United Arab Emirates, comes on the day that COP President-elect Sultan Al Jaber visits Bonn.
At the Bonn climate change conference SB58, there is also a struggle over money. Billions are at stake for a loss and damage fund. But many rich countries are using “delaying tactics“, criticizes Harjeet Singh of CAN International. The UN states are also stingy when it comes to funding the UN Climate Change Secretariat – even though it is only a comparatively measly 30 million euros. The sums rich developed countries would have to pay to the countries of the Global South for their historic climate debt are far greater: 170 trillion US dollars, according to a new study. The Maldives also require more money, and are now building new islands to protect themselves from sinking, as their EU ambassador explains in an interview.
In any case, we will be closely observing developments in Bonn and elsewhere.
With an urgent plea to change course and sharp criticism of the countries with fossil raw materials, the Climate Action Tracker (CAT) spoke out at the Bonn Climate Change Conference on the debate about phasing out oil, gas and coal. The CAT is a project of the think tanks Climate Analytics and New Climate Institute, which regularly assesses the climate policies of UN states. In its interim report “Countdown to COP28”, the experts criticize:
The study will be presented at the Bonn Climate Change Conference SB58 this Thursday and has been made available to Table.Media in advance. For their analysis, scientists have compared national and global trends in CO2 emissions, investments and policy decisions to what science demands to meet the 1.5-degree target. According to CAT calculations, the world is on a path to a “catastrophic” temperature rise of 2.7 degrees Celsius by 2100 under foreseeable emission trends.
Behind the scenes, the Bonn conference is also currently discussing whether the fossil phase-out will be decided at COP28 in Dubai in December. To meet the climate targets, CO2 emissions would have to be halved by 2030 and “the production of oil and gas would eventually have to be phased out completely,” the authors reiterate the scientific consensus. Two years ago, the International Energy Agency (IEA) already calculated that no new fossil fuel infrastructure must be built to meet the Paris climate targets.
Against this background, the current CAT report criticizes:
The report also opposes “distractions such as CCS” (Carbon Capture and Storage) and explicitly criticizes the role of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) as the host of COP28. Instead of ending fossil energy, the UAE’s designated COP28 President and Minister of Industry, Sultan Al-Jaber, only seeks to end “emissions from fossils” and propagates the massive expansion of technologies such as CCS.
On the same day Al-Jaber is expected to attend the Bonn conference, the CAT report now states that CCS “does not play a relevant role in decarbonizing the energy sector because renewable energy is much cheaper in comparison and has a smaller environmental footprint.” And “the UAE’s action in support of oil, gas and CCS raises serious doubts about its capacity to negotiate an ambitious deal at COP28. The UAE is clearly pursuing an agenda that will divert attention from phasing out fossils and, if successful, lock in oil and gas production on a large scale for the future.” Thus, the opportunity to negotiate a just phase-out of oil and gas at COP28 that takes into account the urgency of decarbonization is being wasted, the report continues.
The report also sees positive trends. For example, the global phase-out of coal is progressing and the expansion of renewables is gaining momentum. But here, too, CAT urges haste: Even a declared global expansion target for renewables of 1,000 gigawatts per year by 2030, which IRENA has suggested and, for instance, is supported by the EU, is not enough; it must be “clearly greater than one terawatt.”
The report argues that the current system “works for the rich”: The big oil and gas companies reportedly spent a total of 110 billion dollars in 2022 on dividends and buying back their own shares – more than the 100 billion dollars that the developed countries promised poor countries for climate aid and so far have failed to deliver.
At the same time, however, global CO2 emissions from the energy sector reached a new peak of 36.8 billion tons in 2022, so a trend reversal is not yet in sight. “The state of global climate policy,” the authors write, “has not changed much since the UN Secretary-General warned at COP27 that the world was on its way to climate hell.”
The expectations for the next world climate conference are tremendous. This is not least evident at the interim negotiations of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change currently underway in Bonn (SB58). Here, preparations are being made for COP28, which will take place in Dubai in late November. But so far, it is not entirely clear what needs to be prepared. The negotiations started with a still-ongoing dispute about the agenda, and may not even be resolved by the end of the conference.
The conflict revolves around a demand made by the EU countries that the so-called Mitigation Work Program, which is supposed to set the path to achieving the 1.5-degree target, should also be discussed at the more technical and less political negotiations in Bonn. The EU and other progressive countries wish to discuss global emission reductions not only once a year at the COPs.
A group of countries in the UN – the so-called Like-Minded Developing Countries, which also includes China, India and Saudi Arabia – strictly rejects this. Officially for formal reasons, but there is a never-ending debate about if the developed world, as the main culprit of climate change, can impose CO2 reduction requirements on developing countries. And especially if new mitigation targets for developing countries are not backed up by financial aid.
When COP28 President-designate Sultan Ahmed Al-Jaber of the United Arab Emirates arrives at the World Conference Center in Bonn today, Thursday, he could help settle the dispute – even though he is not yet in office. If he clearly outlines his priorities for COP28, this could also help determine the composition of the agenda in Bonn to adequately prepare for fall’s COP.
So far, Al Jaber is not expected to hold a speech in Bonn. Instead, a meeting with representatives of young climate activists is scheduled. At the Petersberg Climate Dialogue in Berlin in early May, Al-Jaber caused some surprise when he said that the focus should be on the gradual phase-out of “fossil fuel emissions” – not fossil fuels themselves. Since then, negotiators and environmental organizations have feared that Al-Jaber could make CO2 capture, storage and use (CCSU) the focus of his efforts and significantly dilute the phase-out of fossil fuels in the process.
After yesterday’s meeting in Brussels between Al-Jaber and EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, green deal commissioner Frans Timmermans and foreign affairs representative Josep Borrell, it is not much clearer where the fossil fuel path is headed. COP28 is supposed to deliver “progress towards a just energy transition that includes a scaling-up of renewables in particular, and policies and investments to transition towards energy systems free of unabated fossil fuels,” the joint statement reads.
It is a return to a wording also used by the G7, akin to the discussions at last year’s COP27 in Sharm el-Sheikh. There, more than 80 countries supported India’s proposal to phase out all fossil fuels. The EU was also among the supporters and will continue campaigning for the fossil fuel phase-out in Dubai. The fact that the upcoming COP leader now supports such a formulation could indicate that the positions of Al-Jaber and the EU are not as far apart as believed – nothing more, but also nothing less.
According to the World Bank, sea levels are expected to rise by 10 to 100 centimeters by 2100. Based on these estimates, the Maldives could be completely submerged. How is your country preparing for this?
By 2050, 80 percent of the Maldives will be uninhabitable. The Maldivian government has set itself the goal of creating new islands protected from rising sea levels and tsunamis. These islands, for example, have strong coastal protection and are between five and six meters above mean sea level.
What is the purpose of this new island program?
Essentially, it is about creating safer habitats, as population consolidation is inevitable in these difficult times. We are already seeing the migration of small populations from their home islands to safer areas.
How do you plan for these new islands to be energy independent?
All islands have their own independent power supply based on fossil fuels, mainly diesel generators. The Maldives plans to become carbon neutral by 2030. However, there is not enough land or rooftop space in the Maldives to install solar panels. The more viable option is floating solar arrays, which could be easily placed in the Maldives’ many shallow lagoons.
These projects obviously need to be financed. How difficult is it to access climate finance?
The biggest problem we face right now is a lack of information. More specifically, the existing gaps in climate finance tracking and reporting make it difficult to improve access to climate finance. In addition, the distinction between climate finance and adaptation projects must be clearer.
How can this be implemented in concrete terms?
The Maldives receives more funding for climate change mitigation than for adaptation, even though our carbon emissions are low, and we urgently need funding for adaptation. 71 percent of the money is for climate change mitigation, 23 percent is for adaptation, and 6 percent is across sectors. Of the 200 million US dollars the Maldives receive for climate change mitigation, 80 million is earmarked as grants, and another 80 million is earmarked as loans. In comparison, the Maldives receives 70 million dollars in grants and ten million dollars in loans for adaptation.
What would be needed then to facilitate access to climate finance?
We need better data collection. For example, improved reporting on mitigation and adaptation, and improved mechanisms for tracking the financial support we have received and need. We also need data on soil erosion, sea level rise, and health risks. Current data collection mechanisms are inadequate, making risk assessments and predictions very difficult. And we desperately need capacity and technical assistance from donors, development agencies, and NGOs.
Would the loss and damage fund improve access to climate finance?
Yes, it certainly will. The good news is that surveys show that even future generations in Europe and the Western world, who are likely to be hit hard by the climate crisis, seem to support the idea of compensation payments for the consequences of climate change. How the fund and other arrangements for financing damage and loss will be fully implemented has yet to be worked out, but one thing is clear: It will continue to be an important part of the international climate agenda in 2023.
The Bonn climate conference SB58 will also discuss a global renewable expansion target and a cutback on fossil fuel use. Negotiations on reducing fossil fuels are especially tough, with wide-ranging opposing interests. The practical implementation in each country will be even more difficult. At present, the energy transition is moving in the right direction, but far too slowly, as data from the think tank Ember show:
While renewables are being expanded faster and displacing coal from the electricity mix, progress in major emerging economies is partly canceled out by rising energy consumption. In China and India, the share of coal in the electricity mix declined, but overall, more electricity was generated from coal in these countries in 2022 than in 2015. And Indonesia, Russia and Turkey continue to rely heavily on coal. According to Ember, however, there are also signs that these countries will soon reach their coal emissions peak. nib
In recent years, the world has witnessed a series of devastating climate disasters. Severe storms, unprecedented heatwaves, and wildfires have underscored the growing impact of climate change. Coastal regions are experiencing stronger storms and rising sea levels, while inland areas face prolonged droughts and water scarcity.
These disasters illustrate how much the situation has deteriorated due to the global temperature. The consequences are felt globally, with developing countries bearing a disproportionate burden in terms of lives lost, displacement, economic disruptions, and ecological damage.
At COP27 in Sharm-el-Sheikh, a momentous decision was reached to establish a new loss and damage fund to address the impacts of climate change on vulnerable countries and communities. The outcome also recognized the importance of funding arrangements such as humanitarian aid and bilateral and multilateral financing in response to climate disasters.
The Transitional Committee, comprising 24 members with 10 from developed and 14 from developing countries, was established at COP27. Its mandate is to make recommendations on the operationalization of both the new funding arrangements and the Loss and Damage Fund for consideration and adoption at COP28. The committee’s work will be informed by inputs from various events, including the second Glasgow Dialogue during the mid-year session of the UNFCCC in the German city of Bonn.
However, it is disheartening to witness certain parties prioritizing funding arrangements outside the UNFCCC over the crucial operationalization of the Loss and Damage Fund by COP28. This narrow perspective undermines the gravity of the situation and the urgent need for comprehensive support.
The UNFCCC synthesis report has clearly highlighted the staggering financial requirements, projecting the need for 290 to 580 billion US dollars by 2030, rising to 1 trillion US dollars by 2050 in developing countries alone. These figures underscore the substantial funding gap in addressing loss and damage. It is vital to acknowledge that this situation arises from the inaction, obstruction, and delaying tactics employed by wealthier nations regarding loss and damage finance over the past years.
Moving forward, it is imperative that we demonstrate greater ambition and creativity, developing new solutions that adequately respond to the needs of the most vulnerable communities. Our actions should not be constrained by the current context or available resources; instead, they should be driven by the imperative to protect the rights of those impacted by climate change. We must not shy away from establishing new systems and institutions to address this crisis effectively.
The operationalization of the loss and damage fund must be guided by principles such as international cooperation and solidarity, historical responsibility, the precautionary principle – which means that people should be protected from possible risks -, and the polluter pays principle.
The fund should provide new and additional, adequate, and predictable finance that meets the needs of vulnerable communities and countries. It should prioritize local ownership, encompass gender responsiveness, ensure equitable representation, and be public and grant-based. The fund must be balanced, comprehensive – covering the range of climate impacts from extreme weather to slow onset events as well as responding to economic and non-economic aspects of losses and damages – and safeguard human rights.
Our goal for COP28 should extend beyond the mere creation or rebranding of institutions for the sake of political gains or media attention. True success lies in establishing an agile and adaptable system that learns from emerging challenges, actively engages affected communities, scales up proven solutions, and develops new approaches as needed.
The allocation of resources to the fund must align with the magnitude of the needs it aims to address. Public finance must serve as the primary source of funding, supplemented by additional avenues such as redirecting fossil fuel subsidies, implementing a levy on fossil fuel extraction, and introducing progressive taxes on financial transactions, shipping, and aviation sectors.
It is crucial that this system is built on the principles of responsibility and accountability towards those confronting the climate emergency.
Time is running out rapidly, demanding our collective rejection of complacency and half-hearted efforts. Establishing an effective loss and damage fund is not an option; it is both a moral and legal imperative. Let us seize this opportunity to create a robust system that provides the necessary support and protection to those most affected by climate change. Our response must reflect the urgency and gravity of the situation, showcasing an unwavering commitment to a fair, just, resilient, and sustainable future.
Harjeet Singh is Head of Global Political Strategy at Climate Action Network International (CAN).
