The COP Summit last year had to tackle the severe conditions that had faced the world in 2023. This was a year characterized by record-breaking temperatures combined with El Niño, producing a climatic carnage in Africa—deaths from fatal floods in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Kenya, and Libya, where floods wiped out a quarter of a city. Terrible cyclones also took place in Malawi, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mozambique, and Zimbabwe. On the other hand, there were also severe droughts in Kenya, Niger, Somalia, Ethiopia, Mauritania, and Djibouti. This situation became the focal point of interest and discussion and there many reiterated that COP28 needs to deliver the way out of misery. A total of 2,456 fossil fuel industry lobbyists participated at COP28, up from 636 last year, according to the Big Polluters Out coalition.
It was such a critical scenario that eventually led to consensus that the world needed to move away from the use of fossil fuels. The United Nations Secretary General, António Guterres, welcomed the deal with the remark- “To those who opposed a clear reference to a phase-out of fossil fuels in the COP28 text, I want to say that a fossil fuel phase-out is inevitable, whether they like it or not. Let’s hope it doesn’t come too late.”
COP28 president Sultan Ahmed Al Jaber however also used the opportunity to point out that “Let me sound a word of caution. Any agreement is only as good as its implementation. We are what we do, not what we say. We must turn this agreement into tangible action. If we unite, we can have a profound effect on all of our futures. Inclusivity kept us going in the difficult days. Everyone has been heard, from Indigenous peoples or youth to global south. “
After a contentious debate more than 100 countries eventually pledged to phase out fossil fuels that contribute to global warming.
It may be pointed out that fossil fuels—coal, oil, and gas—account for over 75 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions and nearly 90 percent of all carbon dioxide emissions, pushing Africa’s poor and vulnerable to the brink of survival. The Paris Agreement’s global goal of keeping global warming to no more than 1.5°C assisted in serving as the COP28’s compass. It was decided that to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to as close to zero as possible by 2050, emissions needed to decrease by 45 percent by 2030 and reach net zero.
However, though there might have been consensus from a majority, Amos Kaggwa, a Ugandan-based climate activist indicated that - “while this is the first time in the history of COPs that a goal to reduce fossil fuels formed part of the final deal, it was not ambitious enough and will not get us to net zero. We will need a bigger global adaptation fund and a larger Loss and Damage Fund”. Kaggwa also underlined that the planet could reach global average temperatures of up to 3°C, “and there will be even more severe losses and damages from climate-related disasters in Africa where climate-adaptive capacities will also be seriously compromised as today, high-polluting rich countries are reluctant to pay for loss and damage and to provide sufficient funds for the least polluting poor countries to adapt to climate change.”
Africa emits an estimated 3.8 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, but only two percent of the proportion of renewable energy investment went to the continent in 2023.
Nevertheless, it needs to be mentioned that till now, 130 countries have agreed to triple renewable energy capacity and double energy efficiency by 2030.
A total of 2,456 fossil fuel industry
lobbyists
participated at COP28,
up from 636 last year
Mary Robinson, former President of Ireland, has commented in this regard- “the Cop28 agreement, while signaling the need to bring about the end of the fossil fuel era, falls short by failing to commit to a full fossil fuel phase out. If 1.5C is our ‘North Star’, and science is our compass, we must swiftly phase out all fossil fuels to chart a course towards a livable future. World leaders must continue to urgently pull together and find ways forward to tackle this existential threat. Every day of delay condemns millions to an uninhabitable world.”
Experts such as Kaggwa have underlined that the COP28 Global Goal on Adaptation did not build on the previous goal, stressing that it is weak and unlikely to deliver adaptive capacities and resilience and to reduce vulnerability to climate change in developing countries battered by climate-induced disasters. He has also emphasized that -“the Global Goal on Adaptations weakness is the glaring lack of mention of existing finance gaps. Current financing for adaptation does not match the needs on the ground. Even if we double the adaptation financing outlined in COP26, the needs on the ground will still be five to 10 times greater than the COP28 adaptation fund package. That is how wide the adaptation financing gap is”.
As expected, the discussion during COP 28 that particularly dominated climate talks among developing nations was climate financing and debt. Analysts have since pointed out that an estimated 85 percent of countries in the global South are in debt distress and are unlikely to spend funds on climate solutions due to competing needs. In this context they have highlighted that to repay the debts, they are likely to invest in extracting fossil fuels, further exacerbating the climate crisis.
It has also been underlined that such an equation requires that Africa be given grants, not loans. It has also been reiterated that there should be less of a bureaucratic tangle as is often the case with multilateral financial institutions. This might then permit funds for climate damages to flow to affected countries smoothly without unnecessary delay.
One also needs to refer to the significant observation made by Fadhel Kaboub, a Tunisian economist -“climate finance requires a minimum of USD 2.4 trillion of transformative grant-based investment and transfer of technology for climate adaptation and mitigation by 2030. We are nowhere near that target at the end of COP28. The historical polluters of the Global North owe a climate debt to the nations of the Global South, who are most affected by climate change. The Global North is in default and is refusing to pay its debt.” Kaboub, also an Associate Professor of Economics at Denison University, commented that “if you owe me US Dollar 100, you are supposed to pay me. Instead, you give me a US Dollar 10 loan with conditionalities to control how I use my money. You give me another US Dollar 10 in exchange for having control over my forests and carbon markets. You invest another US Dollar 10 in green electricity that I must export to you on favorable terms. You outsource another US Dollar 10 worth of low-value-added manufacturing to produce cheap consumer goods for you. None of this should count as climate finance. It is a climate debt default greenwashed with neocolonial debt traps.” There is quite a bit of truth in this opinion.
Analyst Joyce Chimbi has also drawn attention to another significant development that is bound to have a nuance effect in the coming future. It has been pointed out that Azerbaijan, “a nation that receives 60 percent of its government budget from oil and gas and 90 percent of its export revenue, will host the following COP Summit.
Oil and gas also supply 98 percent of Azerbaijan’s primary energy and at least 90 percent of the country’s electricity and are largely responsible for improved living standards over the last three decades”. In this context Chimbi has drawn attention that it will be the third time in a row that an oil and gas producer will be hosting a COP Summit.
(Muhammad Zamir, a former Ambassador, is an analyst
specialized in foreign affairs, right to information and good
governance, can be reached at <muhammadzamir0@gmail.com>)
