November 19, 2022
WASHINGTON, DC— As COP27 draws to a close, negotiations have centered around topics including fossil fuels, loss and damage, Article 6, public participation, and States’ climate ambition. Members of the Center for International Environmental Law COP delegation had the following responses:
Nikki Reisch, Director of Climate & Energy on fossil fuels:
“The outcome of this year’s climate talks turned on two central issues: phasing out fossil fuels and funding loss and damage. The colossal failure on the former undercuts progress on the latter. The science couldn’t be clearer: we cannot fight climate change or limit warming to 1.5 degrees without getting off of all fossil fuels — oil, gas, and coal. Until there is concrete action to phase out fossil fuels, it will be impossible to limit the scale of loss and damage. Such doublespeak effectively undercuts hard-fought policy wins for the Global South, civil society, and the most climate vulnerable. In simply restating the inadequate and loophole-ridden language of Glasgow, Parties didn’t just stand still, they took a giant step backward. In a world of rising temperatures and shrinking windows of opportunity, inertia is just another word for failure. Climate change will not wait politely for leaders to finally recognize that human lives matter more than fossil industry profits.”
Sébastien Duyck, Senior Attorney and Human Rights and Climate Change Campaign Manager on public participation:
“Open civic space not only serves as a necessary counterbalance to fossil fuel interests but is also a prerequisite to climate negotiations that center and uphold human rights. This COP has been affected by the striking imbalance in power and voices in this process, as evidenced by the number of fossil fuel lobbyists in these halls, followed by the struggle for language that reflects the need to phase out fossil fuels and the inclusion of false solutions. At the same time, we have seen the power of civil society and its capacity to advance historic decisions. But no matter how many resources are provided to deal with loss and damage, as long as countries fail to effectively phase out fossil fuels and continue to accelerate this crisis, real justice will not prevail. It is the collective responsibility of all Parties to protect — during and after the COP — civic space and the rights of all those who participate.”
Erika Lennon, Senior Attorney on Article 6.4 negotiations:
“States showed yet again that they are willing to sacrifice people in order to postpone meaningful climate action and shield corporate profits. In the text adopted on carbon markets, Parties rightly rejected recommendations on ‘removals’ that would have opened the door to all manner of dangerous removals and human rights violations. Now, even though the Supervisory Body gets a ‘do-over,’ the guidance fails to require alignment with international law and science. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results, this is exactly what happened at COP27. Without reference to human rights, including the rights of Indigenous Peoples, international law, and science in the guidance, there is a high risk that the Supervisory Body will fail people and Indigenous communities worldwide and undermine the integrity of the Paris Agreement.”
Lien Vandamme, Senior Campaigner on Loss and Damage:
“The decision to establish a fund for loss and damage is a major step in upholding human rights and delivering justice for the people at the frontlines of the climate crisis. The next steps must be to ensure that the fund is resourced at the scale required and that it is fit for purpose to deliver rights-based solutions for those who are most affected, such as women and girls, Indigenous Peoples, persons with disabilities, and children and youth. The process of developing modalities leading to COP28 must be ambitious, inclusive, and participatory. Wealthy countries with historical responsibility for the climate crisis must now provide the necessary resources for the fund. Innovative sources of funding based on the polluter pays principle will be particularly critical to delivering resources at the scale required — for instance, through taxing the massive windfall profits of the fossil fuel industry. But no matter how many resources are provided to deal with loss and damage, as long as countries fail to effectively phase out fossil fuels and continue to accelerate this crisis, real justice will not prevail.”
Francesca Mingrone, Staff Attorney on the Right to a Healthy Environment:
“Explicitly mentioning the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment in the COP27 cover decision is an important step that builds upon the UN General Assembly’s recognition of the right earlier this year. The right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment provides an essential framework for rights-based climate action. Including this right in the cover text is the result of the collective mobilization of civil society and Indigenous Peoples’ organizations alongside the strong support of numerous Parties across different negotiating groups. While other COP decision texts failed to include adequate human rights language and standards, the reference here is notable and signals an important step for further inclusion in the context of other international environmental fora.”
###
Press contact
Cate Bonacini, press(at)ciel.org, +1-202-742-5847 (desk), +1-510-520-9109 (WhatsApp/Signal)