Loss and damage negotiation at COP 18: Key issues are lost
Negotiations at COP 18 to agree on a mechanism to address loss and
damage caused by the impacts of climate change drew immense attention of
the country Parties, CSOs and policy think tanks. The continued lack of
mitigation ambition and inadequate resources to implement adaptation
actions are increasingly causing suffering and significant loss and
damage of assets and properties all over the world, especially in the
poor and vulnerable countries.
Studies confirm that loss and
damage associated with the adverse effects of climate change can no
longer be avoided through mitigation or adaptation. Multiple approaches
should be undertaken, with some approaches having synergies with
adaptation efforts, but with others requiring taking action through new
arrangements and stand-alone approaches, which could be referred to as
"beyond adaptation" measures.
Following a proposal by the
Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) in 2008, loss and damage was
included on the agenda of the UNFCCC negotiations. The COP 16 in Cancun
decided to establish a Work Program to address issues related to loss
and damage in developing countries in a more comprehensive and
actionable manner, with a mandate for the Subsidiary Body of
Implementation (SBI) to do this.
The draft decision adopted by
COP 17 takes into account the following thematic areas to enhance
understanding of and expertise on loss and damage: (1) assessing the
risk of loss and damage associated with the adverse effects of climate
change and current knowledge; (2) a range of approaches to address this,
including impacts related to extreme weather events and slow onset
events; and (c) the role of the Convention in enhancing the
implementation of approaches to address loss and damage.
Meantime,
four regional workshops under the guidance of SBI have been held to
develop an understanding of the issues and challenges to aid the
development of the work programme. Loss and damage is a relatively new
issue in the UNFCCC negotiations but it has progressed, which raised
expectations of achieving some tangible outcome at COP 18. The expected
deliverables of COP 18 on loss and damage are: (a) finalisation of work
programme and comprehensive response to loss and damage; (b)
establishment of a mechanism to assess diverse risks and approaches; (c)
consider the concept of a "Multi-Window Mechanism" put forward by AOSIS
as a basis for future negotiations. Multi-Window Mechanism consists of
three inter-dependent components, namely insurance, rehabilitation/
compensatory payments, and risk management. These play complementary
roles and comprise the necessary components of an integrated approach to
risk reduction, risk transfer and risk management efforts; and (d) the
establishment of a 2nd phase work programme to elaborate the functions
and institutional structure of the international mechanism on loss and
damage.
The negotiations at COP 18 are being sidetracked towards
being limited to knowledge generation and capacity building to collect
and analyse data for assessing the risks -- all to be implemented
through an invitation to the Parties and relevant institutions outside
of the Convention, as the US proposed. However, the key issues of
addressing loss and damage, such as the establishment of a compensatory
mechanism in the context of the notion of "beyond adaptation" and
addressing the "residual losses" caused by both sudden onset and slow
onset events, are missing.
In the context of slow progress and
protracted discussion on loss and damage it is important to focus on at
least three major issues. First, loss and damage resulting from slow
onset events will be different from sudden onset events, and will cause
more indirect losses over a longer time period. However, the current
negotiation text gives little attention to slow onset events.
Second,
the approaches discussed so far could be framed under three broad
categories; (a) risk reduction by comprehensive disaster risk management
and adaptation; (b) risk transfer by introducing insurance mechanisms,
and; (c) rehabilitation/compensatory mechanisms for unavoidable loss and
damages. The ongoing negotiations at COP 18 seek to identify options
and designing and implementing of country-driven risk assessment
strategies and approaches, including mechanisms such as insurance, while
the approaches under rehabilitation/compensatory are grossly
disregarded, especially by the developed country Parties.
Approaches
to reduce and address disaster risks are mostly sudden onset
disaster-centric, with no approaches for addressing slow onset events
like ocean acidification, salinity intrusion, loss of ecosystem services
or loss of economic preferences etc. On the other hand, insurance will
merely create business opportunities for the insurance companies.
Third,
the G77/China pushed "to establish an international mechanism which
complements existing arrangements for adaptation actions by developing
country Parties." However, the US, while agreeing that "all the impacts
of climate change could not be addressed only by adaptation," wants to
put all loss and damage-related issues under the Adaptation Committee
and National Adaptation Programs. The US also urged to make strong cases
of "unavoidable" and residual loss and damage of the impacts of climate
change so that a stand-alone mechanism could be established.
This
means that a different and stand-alone mechanism will be required, one
that will be complementary to the national adaptation actions. But there
is still the potential of unavoidable loss and damage, and we need to
explore "adaptation plus" mechanisms, institutions and opportunities to
address unavoidable loss and damage.
No comments:
Post a Comment