Attention Shifts to COP25 to Deliver on Paris and Avert Climate Catastrophe
CIEL PRESS STATEMENT
June 27, 2019
Negotiators at SB50 delivered glacial progress that is wildly out of step with the urgency of the climate crisis, as the UN’s intersessional climate talks conclude today in Bonn, Germany.
Progress. At SB50, countries made progress — such that we can call it that — on Article 6, which sets up market and non-market mechanisms for international cooperation to address climate change.* Though there were two different versions of the text at the start of the discussions, Parties decided to move forward with one non-consensus text as the basis for discussions at the 25th Conference of the Parties (COP25) in Chile. This non-consensus text contains language related to human rights, though it remains in brackets.
CIEL appreciates the many country delegates who have called for including human rights and environmental and social safeguards in Article 6 mechanisms. CIEL remains concerned that others continue to reject them, despite the fact that environmental and social safeguards and independent grievance redress mechanisms are standard practice in international finance and in the financial mechanisms of the UNFCCC, including both the Green Climate Fund and the Adaptation Fund. Moving forward, the language must be considerably strengthened to ensure that it corrects past mistakes made by the Clean Development Mechanism, which lacked safeguards and led to the displacement of indigenous peoples, violations of their rights, and destruction of biodiversity.
“Ensuring environmental integrity and sustainable development requires Article 6 mechanisms to have strong human rights-based social and environmental safeguards, including meaningful public participation of indigenous peoples, local communities, and women, and an independent grievance body that can address harms if they occur. Including these elements is a must and any rules proposed at COP25 without them should be rejected. Anything short undermines the promises made in Paris and further harms communities who are the least responsible for the climate crisis.” – Erika Lennon, Senior Attorney, CIEL
Alongside the negotiations, a growing range of actors – including governments, UN agencies, and civil society organizations – discussed proposals to strengthen the integration of human rights in climate policies – in particular in the context of national commitments under the Paris Agreement. Multiple events explored the links between human rights and various UNFCCC processes. The importance of public participation also echoed through the halls of the World Conference Center in Bonn. With the upcoming COP25 and pre-COP taking place in Latin America, civil society rallied to underline the importance of the Escazú Agreement, a regional instrument dedicated to environmental democracy. Advocates celebrated those countries who have already ratified and encouraged others to do the same to ensure public participation, access to information and justice, and the protection environmental human rights defenders.
“Beyond the language of decisions adopted in the climate negotiations, the key to transformative and inclusive climate action lies in how governments ensure the effective and meaningful participation of civil society and indigenous peoples in climate policy planning and in how such planning is guided by human rights. Three years after the adoption of the Paris Agreement and its commitment to human-rights-based climate action, it is now time for governments to demonstrate they take this imperative seriously and adopt practical measures that translate this vision into action. For the countries from the region, making progress towards the ratification of the Escazú Agreement prior to the Latin American COP would be strong signal to demonstrate their commitment to these issues.” -Sébastien Duyck, Senior Attorney
Anti-progress. Yet, a handful of countries decided to take a decidedly backward stance, questioning climate science and refusing to acknowledge the most current and robust climate science in the IPCC’s Special Report on 1.5°C last year. However, denial only fuels the bogus arguments of actors with vested interests in clinging to business as usual, stalling efforts to tackle climate change head-on, and maintaining our dependence on fossil fuels.
The IPCC report has already begun to serve as a basis for climate policies in countries around the world. Both for countries seeking to address climate change in good faith and the civil society organizations demanding more ambitious action, any efforts to undermine climate science to delay action are unacceptable. Delegates from countries forming the Environmental Integrity Group** of the UNFCCC said it best on t-shirts that they wore on the final day of negotiations: “Science is not negotiable.”
Notes to Editors:
* Under the Paris Agreement, each country submits a national plan called Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), for how it will take climate action, including how it will reach its individual emissions reductions goals within a certain timeframe. Article 6 sets up ways for countries to cooperate to meet their NDCs. Article 6 outlines three approaches for this cooperation: 1. internationally transferred mitigation outcomes, which will set up a market for trading carbon credits; 2. a “Sustainable Development Mechanism” where countries can finance mitigation projects in another country to earn carbon credits; and 3. non-market cooperative approaches to sustainable development, which has been largely undefined, but could include, for example, integrated water management or energy efficiency schemes.
** The Environmental Integrity Group (EIG), formed in 2000, comprises Mexico, Liechtenstein, Monaco, the Republic of Korea, Switzerland, and Georgia.