We are hearing a lot from wealthy economies about a sense of urgency to operationalize the Santiago Network for Loss and Damage (SNLD). But are these genuine calls for accelerated action or are they the actions of a dodgy salesperson trying to convince a desperate customer to purchase something that isn’t what they need?
The Santiago Network was born at the Chilean COP25 as a ray of hope to finally start delivering on the missing third function of the Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM), enhancing action and support; including finance, technology, and capacity-building to address loss and damage associated with the adverse effects of climate change. Since the establishment of the WIM back in 2013, the people impacted by the climate emergency have been desperately waiting for action in this respect. This gaping hole in the global architecture was exposed in 2019 at the WIM review prior to COP25. The review made it crystal clear that the absence of any action to address loss and damage was a major flaw in the WIM despite this function clearly being the third pillar of their mandate.
So, we are now hearing about urgency to act, and that we need to get the SNLD established as quickly as possible, but what is actually being offered? The scale of the climate emergency was highlighted by the latest IPCC WG2 report with losses and damages documented throughout. The scale of the challenge facing the SN is huge, and therefore we need a network that is fit for purpose. You don’t build a bridge based upon how much material you have. You build a bridge that spans the gap, that is fit for purpose and does the job it is designed to do. Sadly, with the SNLD, we seem to be offered a bridge that fails to span the gap, because of the scant resources on offer.