ECO Newsletter Blog

Too Many Gaps = One Gaping Political Hole

Dear Ministers,

We, the so-called civil society that observes negotiations, would like to call your attention to the many gaps we need to close to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement on mitigation, adaptation/resilience, and support. ‘Gap’ is amongst the most spoken words in these negotiating halls, maybe no less than ambition. 

So which gaps is ECO talking about? 

They go by many names. We talk of the ‘emissions gap,’ the ‘ambition gap,’ and lately also the ‘commitment gap between what we say we will do and what we need to do to prevent dangerous levels of climate warming’ as the 2019 UNEP Gap Report puts it. 

But maybe the biggest gap this year is between the voices of the youth and people taking to the streets, and what you and your governments are doing to tackle the climate emergency. 

Here in Madrid ECO has sadly faced yet another gap: the civil society participation gap in these processes. One example is that we were not able to distribute our paper edition of ECO in the first week of COP25, at one point even outside the IFEMA. As a symptom of the shrinking space for civil society, globally, this is a cause for concern. 
... Read more ...

Ministers! Save the Second Periodical Review as Science Policy Interface of the Convention

Last week the Global Carbon Project side event reminded us again how small the window is to avoid dangerous climate change.

The pressure to act and incorporate recent science to the Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) is rising. ECO is dismayed that Parties have not yet reached an agreement on the scope of the Second Periodical Review (SPR) working from 2020-2022. Without a decision on the scope, the FCCC would have no impressive science-based advisory body any more – and the science-policy interface of the Convention would be seriously damaged.

ECO fears that the science part of the SPR could become a victim in a political war on other important items like Pre-2020, and calls on ministers to find consensus and make a speedy decision at COP25 so that it will be possible to start the review next year.

As you know the SPR has to evaluate new climate science published since the First Periodic Review (e.g. IPCC three Special Reports) and to analyse all actions based on equity taken by all countries to reach the ultimate goal of the Paris Agreement and to formulate climate policy conclusions.

For ECO, it is helpful to be aware of the new CONSTRAIN report zeroes on the remaining carbon budget by Climate Analytics as well as projected surface warming rates over the next 20 years.
... Read more ...

Article 6.4: Conservative Baselines or “Off Base”?

Achieving environmental integrity in the implementation of Article 6 requires many things; but where to start? For ECO, environmental integrity is impossible to achieve without conservative baselines, set well below business-as-usual (BAU). And even these are necessary, but not sufficient elements. 

ECO is encouraged to see that the text forwarded to the COP Presidency included some principles for conservative baselines in Article 6.4.  However, ECO is concerned to see many of these foundational principles in brackets, and some key principles missing or muddled. Methodologies in the new Article 6 mechanism must require baselines that are well below business as usual. While “best available technology” is listed in the text, it is also important to take into account what is economically feasible without the mechanism, as well as what is legally required.  

Approaches based on projected or historical emissions are not appropriate for a conservative or ambitious benchmark.  ECO urges Parties to remember that historical emissions are how we got into this mess in the first place. We need to do better.  

As the economic, political, and technological contexts in which projects take place evolve, so should the baselines. Ensuring that methodologies are approved for a time-bound period, and requiring the review and update of baselines over time, is necessary in order to reflect the inherently dynamic nature of the viability of various technologies. 
... Read more ...

Eeh… You! – What About Your Ambition?

We, the European Youth, want to remind all country delegates that are already comfortable with the current development at COP25: we did not meet in Madrid for a second-class climate conference, but to decide on the crucial remaining subjects of the Rulebook and – of course – to take the urgently required next steps: increase efforts and reach the ambition we need! 

After one week of polished and largely unproductive negotiations, we are still awaiting proof of your commitment and ambition. There is one thing, civil society and the climate need: a clear promise and decision from member states to enhance their NDCs in 2020 at the latest. 

And we have one Party we want to focus on: what is your next step, EU? Your Parliament declared a climate emergency and you, new Commission, have promised to put climate action at the core of its activities. Yet, here at COP25, no official statement has been made about when you will step up to raise ambition. Come on, we know you just got started, but climate change is not really waiting for you to decorate your offices…

COP25 is the time for the EU to choose whether it wants to be a “Climate Champion” or to slow down action.
... Read more ...

Knowledge without rights is extraction

ECO is pleased to share our platform with the Indigenous Peoples Caucus to amplify their unique and individual voices.

Bushfires have been raging across the illegally occupied lands of Australia for the past few weeks, wiping out homes, displacing communities and threatening wildlife populations to the point of extinction. Lidia Thorpe, Gunnai, Gunditjmara, Djab Wurrung Woman reflects on the way that disregard for indigenous rights and knowledge has resulted in what is now an uncontrollable situation. She says, “the logging of old growth forest in the name of jobs continues to strip the earth of moisture and throw the ecosystem out of balance.” This has contributed to what has been one of the driest summers to date. 

The traditional practice of burning, a form of fire management that has been used successfully for thousands of years by her people, has been ignored and misused. She says “the way the Department of the Environment go about their business is not in line with our traditional ways of protecting and preserving country.” As residents throughout Australia are subject to the devastation of these fires, environmental groups are finally coming to the realisation that indigenous knowledge and practices are a vital part of ongoing climate solutions.
... Read more ...

Australia gets a big ZERO on climate policy – is it possible to be that bad?

Last week ECO exposed the Australian Government’s role in pushing for use of carryover units from the Kyoto Protocol to meet a large portion of their already very low Paris NDC for 2030 – ECO likened this to a runner wanting to start a race at the half-way point, rather than at the starting line. That’s obviously not fair or responsible (ECO might say it is even cheating), especially when the race is about stopping catastrophic climate damage.

This week ECO can reveal it’s even worse than that! The Australian government has updated their plans on carryover and is now trying to use it for almost 60% of their NDC, to avoid a whopping 411 million tonnes of carbon abatement. This gets right to the heart of ambition and their genuine commitment to meet responsibilities under the Paris Agreement.

Australia’s strategy in Article 6 negotiations to ensure use of Kyoto carryover is basically a ‘nothing to see here’ strategy. After all, Australia is reportedly the only country admitting that it will use carryover credits to meet its Paris target, and seems to be hoping the issue will just slip by.

But early in week two of COP25, their cover was blown, after the Guardian Australia reported that as many as 100 countries, led by Costa Rica and Belize, formally challenged Australia and called for a ban on the tactic, including text to be inserted into the rulebook.
... Read more ...

Multilateral Development Banks Promise Paris Alignment: but won’t say when they’ll stop funding fossils

Multilateral Development Banks Promise Paris Alignment: but won’t say when they’ll stop funding fossils.

The nine multilateral development banks (MDBs) — which include the World Bank, the Asian Investment Bank, and the Inter-American Development Bank among others — have an outsized influence on the private finance landscape and on countries low carbon development pathways. 

As public *development* banks, who are mandated to act in the public good, they should be at the vanguard of the all-important provision of Article 2.1c – “making finance flows consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development.”

It seemed they got off to a good start — they first promised to align their financial flows with the Paris Agreement in 2017! But they’re yet to come up with the goods and a timeline ever since. On Tuesday at COP25, ECO waited with baited-breath for another much-anticipated joint announcement, but instead was greeted with a dizzying array of impressively content-free flowcharts, assurances their framework would show “some projects are Paris-aligned and others are not”, and a promise that full implementation won’t happen until 2023-2024. Another smoke and mirrors powerpoint presentation! It seems politics trumped science on this occasion.

If public banks who are literally mandated to do sustainable development want to wait until 2023 to implement a framework that will eventually get their finance aligned with 1.5°C, we hate to think what the plans of the private arm of the financial sector might look like. 
... Read more ...

ECO 8, COP25, Madrid, 10 December 2019 – THE RIGHT(S) PATH TO CLIMATE ACTION ISSUE Issue

ECO banner

Content:

  1. Mind the GAP
  2. Putting People at the Centre of Article 6
  3. Why Do We Need the Escazu Agreement?
  4. CDM: Reserving the Right to Wreck the Planet
  5. Voices of the Indigenous Caucus
  6. Grab’n Go – Brazil’s Massive Scheme to Legalize Land-
    Grabbing and Raise Emissions
  7. Presidency’s Text Proposals: the Good, the Bad, the Missing
  8. Time for Countries to Step Up and Follow the
    Leadership of the CVF to Protect Rights
  9. The Facts on the Ground for L&D Finance
  10. ECO is CROSS and PUZZLED: Where’s the
    Ambition on Phasing out Fossil Fuels?
  11. Fossil of the Day
 … or read this ECO as a pdf

Mind the GAP

The Gender Action Plan (GAP) has been a critical driver of progress and action on gender responsive climate change, and there is an urgent need to renew GAP now.

Civil society present at COP25 wants to remind governments of their responsibility to deliver a robust GAP to drive just and effective climate solutions. We are not here to let governments trade off between rights and resources, and we expect them to uphold their human rights commitments and gender equality. We, the people, the rights holders, demand our duty bearers to engage in good faith towards getting an ambitious new GAP.

ECO is disappointed to see governments play politics, create obstruction, and act in what seems like a poor procedural manner that is delaying potential action on the GAP. There is a real lack of political will to actually #ActOnTheGAP, to make certain that the new GAP will ensure momentum, and to achieve a decision on the new GAP now at COP25 and not in the future. This is not the leadership we need from governments on gender equality in this process.

ECO reminds Parties that if they leave here with no decision, they will have lost a critical moment to invest and scale up a gender responsive climate solution.
... Read more ...

Putting People at the Center of Article 6

Over the last week, we’ve heard a lot of talk about Article 6, and a lot of it has been very technical, including critical rules for ensuring global emissions are reduced globally, preventing double-counting, and what share of proceeds should go to the Adaptation Fund, amongst others. And ECO has been pleased to see an increasing number of Parties (Tuvalu, Switzerland, Mexico, Costa Rica, followed by Australia, Canada, the EU, New Zealand and Norway) talking about the critical role of human rights in successful and fair climate action. But missing from all of this are the human stories about what these rules mean to people who are being impacted – every day – by projects that fail to integrate human rights, were given a “sustainable development” stamp, and have resulted in destructive outcomes. We cannot ignore these people.  

Never fear, ECO is here to help. This Human Rights Day, we’re sharing the story of the communities impacted by the Alto Maipo hydroelectric project. Since we aren’t in Santiago, you won’t be able to visit the Cajon del Maipo, just 50km from the former COP25 venue, where you could have witnessed the devastating impacts of this so-called “clean” hydro project. So, ECO will help paint a picture.
... Read more ...