„If you could act, but you don’t, the whole world will hold you responsible. That’s why I give my best.”    – Kisilu Musya

In November 2017, the climate of our planet Earth was all over in the media: The “Conference of the Parties” (COP23) took place in Bonn, where representatives of 197 discussed how to implement the climate goals set at the Paris Agreement 2015. This time, 38 students of the master’s program “Global Change Ecology” had the chance to take part in the COP23 and present their study program within an exhibition booth. Global Change Ecology holds an official observer status for the UN since 2009, so 8 students could follow the climate negotiations close-up in the “Bula Zone”. The other students could attend side events in the so called “Bonn Zone”, see panel discussions about a variety of topics and have a look at all the exhibitions of different programmes, associations and countries. So, everyone returned with many new experiences and insights and maybe also a different view on the world of climate politics. (See also our articles about our experiences at COP23.)

But how to give somebody an understanding of the atmosphere of such an event – the successes and failures, the merits and danger, the swaying between euphoria and disappointment – beyond blog and newspaper articles and pictures? To bring the spirit of COP23 back to Bayreuth – the discussions, the findings, the failures – the students from GCE chose to organize a movie night at Glashaus with a following panel discussion with students who attended the COP23. The movie “Thank you for the rain” from Julia Dahr tells the story of Kisilu Musya, a Kenyan farmer, whose community is endangered by the impacts of climate change. Kisilu records his everyday life in the village with a handheld camera and shows the audience how his harvest is at risk. Due to climate change the long-awaited rain fails to appear and the plants are withering… When the rain finally comes, it is extreme and causes harm to houses and plants alike. Eventually, climate activists learn about Kisilu and his story and invite him to speak at the 21. climate conference in Paris.The movie fee was funded by the BcG Alumni (Alumni association of Biology and Earth Sciences in Bayreuth).

The Glashaus was well-filled for the movie presentation and around half of the audience stayed for the follow-up panel discussion. Alicia Medina Valdiviezo from Peru and Judith Schepers, Martin Baur, Patrick von Jeetze and Katharina Funk from Germany spoke about their impressions from COP23: They felt – similarly to Kisilu – a certain euphoria to be able to attend the world’s biggest climate conference. But then the negotiations stretched over days and all that was going on was mostly strategical manoeuvres. Thus, it was not easy to believe in a successful outcome of the COP. Did the politicians really want to reach an agreement? Did they really care to limit the warming to 1,5°C? Did they realize the importance of immediate action? Patrick von Jeetze stressed that especially the pre-2020 actions are crucial. Almost nobody is aware that Germany needs to become climate neutral within 20 years to fulfil its requirements according to the Paris agreement. Nevertheless, it recently became clear that Germany will fail its climate goals for 2020, mainly because of an enlargement of the transport sector. Judith Schepers talked about the island nation Kiribati, which will be destroyed in the near future – by hurricanes caused by climate change. Its inhabitants have only one option: humane migration. And Alicia Medina Valdiviezo indicated that especially indigenous people will be affected by climate change. She illustrated how indigenous communities do have their own coping mechanisms which are nevertheless presumed to be “non- scientific” by the science community. This traditional knowledge should come to the fore at climate conferences.

The audience discussed mainly about the (non-) action of the German policy as well as possibilities to motivate people to take more action. And even though climate change is an immense challenge for humanity, the GCE students had the feeling that the visitors went home caring a little bit more about climate change than before. And even though these conferences seem to make very little progress – the Paris Agreement was a major breakthrough in climate politics. Nearly every country has signed the contract, acknowledging the the issue of climate change and the urgent need for action. Now we have to make sure that the Paris Agreement is implemented accordingly. This is why these conferences are immensely important nevertheless.

The post Thank you for the rain appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

1. What is the World Climate Simulation?

Developed by the think tank Climate Interactive, in partnership with the MIT School of Management and the University of Massachusetts Lowell, the World Climate simulation is a simplified UN negotiation. The model uses C-ROADS – a climate policy software – where agreed climate policies are entered and climate patterns get projected until the end of the century. Having had so far an astonishing success, this simulation has been carried out since 2008 over 800 times with over 38000 participants worldwide.

“Education is our strongest weapon to fight Climate Change”

When I first heard about World Climate, I was captured by the convincing arguments – such as the one above – shared during the Education Side Events at COP23 in Bonn. Motivated by the positive impacts this simulation has had and as a Global Change Ecology Master student, I decided to share with young future Latin American leaders this learning experience as well.

2. Game participants: Latin American young graduates

With the support of the KAAD (Catholic Academic Exchange Service) and as part of the Latin American Seminar for scholarship holders held from 2nd-4th February 2018, the World Climate simulation was carried out with 32 participants from 13 different countries.

The weekend-long seminar offered cross-sectorial training for Latin Americans studying in Germany. The seminar focused on the topic “El Buen Vivir” or “good living”, an alternative development concept that gathers South American indigenous wisdom to deliver sustainable answers to current social and environmental challenges.

Within this framework, the World Climate simulation aimed to put participants in the spotlight and give them the responsibility to take political decisions that affect mankind’s and nature’s future with the goal of achieving the good common life.

3. Let the game start

The 32 graduate students from 13 different nationalities were divided for the World Climate Simulation into 6 regional groups to represent China, India, European Union, USA, Other developed countries and Other developing countries. The simulation was carried out in the following way: As a facilitator I welcomed participants, introduced them to the C-ROADS model and World Climate simulation. I also made participants aware of the realistic (scientific facts and emotions) and unrealistic (simulated negotiation) elements of the simulation.

The simulation started when I (as facilitator) adopted the role of Patricia Espinosa (UNFCCC) and participants adopted their respective roles as nation’s delegates.

Photos courtesy of: Yasuo Matsuzaki

Overall, the workshop took about 2.5 hours. Key scientific facts about the Climate Change problematic were introduced first with a slide presentation and handouts to participants (materials available here).

There were two negotiation rounds, each of 20 minutes, after which proposals by delegates were collected on a flipchart and then entered in the C-ROADS software. In the first round the negotiations led to a projected temperature by the year 2100 of about 3.1°C, after the second round, negotiations improved the climate outlook with a 2.9°C temperature increase, thus not meeting the expected Paris agreement goals.

After the negotiations the role-play session concluded. Participants gathered in a circle to give their impressions of the session.

A 2.9°C warmer world, can we do better?

The impressions of the session focused on three key questions: (1) How did you feel during the simulation? Weak or powerful? (2) What were your most important learnings? (3) How do you think we could achieve the ambitious climate action?

Participants highlighted the powerful impact the simulation has left on them, as they experienced directly the need for more ambitious political and civil society initiatives. Participants also brainstormed on solutions from their own professional backgrounds, starting with sustainable consumption, trade and markets, education for sustainability and legal and fiscal mechanisms so implement political action.

There is space for improvements

Here I list some aspects for further improvements when running the World Climate simulation

1. Briefing statements could contain more concrete economic facts for region delegates to negotiate better. Sending reading material in advance may also help.
2. Having “developing countries” delegates sitting on the floor to metaphorically refer to unbalanced geopolitical relations may not be the best call. Ask in advance, as participants may take this personally. Alternatively find milder ways of representing power relations in the simulation.
3. Adapt examples of climate change impacts to your audience backgrund. I used Latin American cases, to engage Latin American audience with at-home ongoing issues.

Emotions were key, audience became aware, goal was achieved

As an individual aiming to spread the word for climate action outside the scientific circles, the opportunity to run the World Climate simulation with a very diverse audience was deeply motivating, empowering and touching.

It was truly fantastic to see how, regardless of the professional background, participants would engage and discuss the urgent need to limit global warming by the end of the century in our small simulated world that day.

Professionals from different fields such as international business, history, medicine, law and even philosophy would leave their “comfort zones” for two hours and experiment in the roles of politicians and advocates to decide for what is good for one or for all nations.

Personally speaking, it was touching to see how the message of climate action can and must spread outside the barriers of natural science. I closed that day’s World Climate session by reminding the participants that having a more powerful role in society was in fact not needed, as our position as organized and aware citizens in society is in fact powerful enough.

The World Climate simulation is a strong tool that beyond a climate action narrative, sends out a message of strength and empowerment, especially important for youth leaders from the global south.

Within the framework of the good common life or “Buen vivir”, the lesson learnt as professionals, regardless of the role or position we may have, is that we shall never forget that life on this planet is our highest responsibility and main goal. That is what Climate Action stands for.

Special thanks

The World Climate simulation was possible thanks to the KAAD Catholic Exchange Service support and thanks to the facilitator advices provided by Eduardo Fracassi (ITBA Instituto Tecnologico de Buenos Aires, Argentina).

References

• World Climate simulation website
• Facilitator Resources and Materials here
• To play around: C-ROADS online
• KAAD press release here

The post 13 countries, one game – A call for Climate Action appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

Session’s theme: How can SDGs be enforced not only in national, but also in local level as well?
Objective: How cities can be made more open (in terms of access), resilient and livable?

An interesting side event took place on the 13th of November at Bonn Zone (COP23, Bonn, Germany)  with the purpose of “How transport sector (mobility) can be better leveraged with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)?” under the event – Global Climate Action and SDG 11 Round Tables: Creating Green and Inclusive Transport for Liveable and Resilient Cities.

The meeting began with all the panelists sitting on their respective positions around the roundtable with respected Ms. Mary Cross, Head of Institutional Relations and Summit at the International Transport Forum (ITF), Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) serving as the moderator and thus conducting a short introductory round of all the panelists present.

Ms. Mary, after an introductory round of all the speakers, emphasized on the point:

“Transport – is not fully a part of SDGs, but to achieve the salient features and ambitions of the SDG 11 i.e. “Sustainable Cities and Communities” – ‘transport sector’ plays a pivotal role in achieving it.”

She also drew attention of the mass towards the target 11.2 of the SDG 11 which goes as:

“By 2030, there should access to safe, affordable, accessible and sustainable transport systems for all, improving road safety, notably by expanding public transport, with special attention to the needs of those in vulnerable situations, women, children, persons with disabilities and older persons.”

A series of panelists thereafter with the session’s theme and objective presented their talks as follows:

Najib Boulif (Morocco’s Secretary of State in charge of Transport)
Mr. Najib said that Morocco is one of the first countries to ratify Paris Agreement at COP 21. The principal themes for framework in Morocco are as follows:

• Urban Planning (Transport important in that)
• Reduction in the need to travel
• Sustainable Urban Transport (Electrification of vehicles)

Jean-Pierce Loubinoux, Director General, International Union of Railways (UIC)
Mr. Jean stated that in the context of achieving SDG 11 in urban settings, Railways in near future will cut 60% of its greenhouse gases (GHGs) emissions and energy usage. He also pointed out to the stunning fact that railways contribute to only 2% of total GHGs emissions worldwide. According to International Energy Agency (IEA) and the International Union of Railways (UIC), the railway companies in operation globally generate less than 1% of total CO₂ emissions (IEA, 2011a; UIC, 2011b). He said that according to IEA and OECD the energy consumption in Railways is the lowest of all urbanized motorized transport.

He then focused on the “Optimized complementary mode of mobility” i.e. no competition anymore elsewhere and urged on the need to find actions and ways to make this happen. He said that upon achieveing it, the return would be 5 times better than the investment. He further added on how to improve the efficiency in transport sector – is the key!

Lucila Capelli, Senior Advisor, Ministry of Transport, Argentina
Ms. Lucila started with how mobility and transport is important in Argentina. She said that the SDG 11 is focused in cities, and therefore, Argentinean transportation plan is focused in cities as in Buenos Aires (the Argentinean capital) where 15 million people live in suburbs only and thus one could easily assume about the daily commute scenario out there. The Argentinean target is to reduce potent GHGs such as: CO₂, SOx, NOx and effective promotion of the Public transport system as an astounding 22 million people commute everyday in Buenos Aires. She said that in 2018, the pilot programs for Busses and Taxis will be conducted for low emission targets and will be focused on vulnerable population.

Franz R. Drees-Gross, Director for Transport and ICT Global Practice, World Bank
Mr. Franz spoke to the fact that transportation sector accounts for 7-8 Gtns of global emissions. He said that the transport sector is increasing drastically, especially in developing countries. He emphasized on limiting global emissions from transport sector to 9 Gtns by 2050 and thus affirmed that it is only possible through shifting to the public transport and this must be focused strictly in developing nations. At last, he suggested avoiding daily commute in cities by creating dense cities.

Frank Muehlon, Global Head of Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure, ABB
Mr. Frank was the one-and-only panelist present with the ‘Industrial’ background in the session. He came up with the point that there needs to be a good National and Regional interconnection – i.e. a complementarity is required in transport sector.

Ms. Mary raised a question to Mr. Frank: “What type of system and partnership can be created for a sustainable transportation system?”

He humbly replied saying:

“You want to have a development which is not hyped – but is sustainable.”

He further said that in the transportation sector, the (business) partner from whom one buys the technology – is reliable – matters the most in the market place. He said that railways have been more standardized than before but electric motor vehicles nowadays are getting better standardized as never before. He further focused on the fact that the electrification of electric motor vehicles across the globe right now has regional differentiation – such as – in China, Europe and the USA due to their own differing charging technologies.

Hence, he urged on the necessity and vital significance of having a global partnership on electric motor vehicles electrification technologies in an openly manner.

Paul Simons, Deputy Executive Director, IEA
IEA is tracking decarbonization. He said that by 2030, 30% of all fleets are going to be electric. He emphasized that data, tracking, policy, and analysis is important as well. In the year 2015, only one-fourth of electric vehicles sales were recorded. He said that IEA wants cities to develop database and policy to communicate effectively.

Young Tae Kim, Secretary General, International Transport Forum (ITF)
The question on the floor for Dr. Young was that how electrification is one of the solutions to solve the existing problem of decarbonization in transport sector. He answered saying, ITF tries to go beyond the transportation sector. It should develop society.

He further said:

 “From holistic point of view, cities should have sustainable transport system like human bodies have static (city) organs and moving blood (transport).”

Dr. Young pointed on ITF’s role on modifying indexes such that ITF combines all elements to share and collect information from around the world, thus, striving to improve in the future!

Clayton Lane, CEO, Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP)
The question to Clayton from the moderator, Ms. Mary Cross, was that ‘how cities can get to SDG 11?’

He responded saying that, cities are left with hard work in near future and ITDP’s role is to connect global agenda.

E.g.: In Rio de Janaerio, Brazil, it takes on an average 2-3 hours to commute (no rapid transit) as only 23% of population has access to rapid transit BUT with the ‘government devised policy’, 90% of  population will have access to rapid transit.

In Maharashtra and Jharkhand states of India, ITDP is building and enhancing knowledge and capacity tools at state level in association with different genders. This will help 80% of population to get access to Metro trains as per matching population density with location of Metros.

Mr. Clayton concluded by saying that:

“To know how to measure and articulate is very important.”

The post COP23: Creating green and inclusive transport appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

But among delegates of almost 200 states and more than 16 000 participants in the Bula zone in total, it´s easy to get lost and to lose track. Clearly, you do recognize some faces. Nobody would confuse Schwarzenegger with Al Gore or Merkel with Macron. However, I wanted to get some more profound impressions and decided to get in touch with the people.

“I am here at COP 23, because I think climate change…”

I asked participants to complete this sentence in order to find out about their motivation or ambition, their specific interest in, personal connection to or simply their understanding of climate change itself. The answers I received in these candid interviews were as diverse as you can imagine them to be, if you, more or less randomly, select individuals for a quick chat at a conference where the whole world comes together.

“… is real!”

First of all, it should be noted that climate change “is real”, it “is happening”. These statements might refer to the unbelievable denial of the obvious ongoing environmental variations by the official position of one particular country. Nevertheless, I spoke to a representative from the very nation who described climate change as “an urgent problem we have to deal with”. That´s why we all came together these days in Bonn, because in fact it “is a problem”, it “is a life or death issue for the planet”, but it also can be understood as “the most important justice question of the 21^st century”.

“… is a threat.”

Furthermore, people see a threat in the continuing climatic changes. Especially the interviewees from the Small Island Developing States like Antigua and Barbuda, the Bahamas, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau and the Seychelles, expressed that. They attended the COP because of climate change being “the biggest threat to our planet” and “a crucial factor regarding the survival of Small Island Developing States”. On a very personal level, climate change “is threating everyone and everything I love” or “negatively impacts my community and I want decisions that reduce climate change vulnerabilities”. “We are all affected”, but it is these nations who are currently suffering the most from consequences they didn’t cause.

“… is important.”

Actually, climate change is seen as “the most important thing to deal with in our and in future generations”. “Fighting against it´s devastating nature is crucial for mankind”. Therefore, generally all participants at the COP are busy. The time for every statement is limited, decisions will have to be made and even the most protracted negotiations have to come to an end in order to be able to present a satisfying outcome. Considering this, I understand all people who did not want to answer my question.

“… can draw attention.”

An international conference of the magnitude of the UNFCCC COP 23 provides great chances for every participant. You can connect to people from all around the globe and get into touch to important politicians and famous personalities. That’s what makes the COP an excellent platform to draw people’s attention on aspects related to the core topic. For example, on human rights: “climate change and human rights are related to each other and we need to incorporate the rights into the core of the Paris Rule Book”. Other aspects comprise the importance of the “involvement of indigenous people and their traditional knowledge” or the “integration of young people into the decision-making processes”. Ultimately, climate change can be considered to be “paramount of sustainable development”.

“… can be mitigated.”

Some interviewees pointed out solutions and ways to handle the challenges we are facing: “climate change is a critical issue; the impacts must be collaboratively addressed”. “All nations need to take part in order to make a “good life” for all people possible!”. This emphasis on the significance of international cooperation and joint implementations were complemented by personal advice: “climate change can be mitigated with simple ideas, changes of our daily habits and the way we view things”. We need to act now! It’s about you to make a difference.

I thank all my interview partners for their cooperation:

• Mr. Alden Meyer (Director of Strategy and Policy at the Union of Concerned Scientists, USA)
• Ms. Alice Gaustad (Chief Engineer in the Norwegian Environment Agency, Norway)
• Mr. Arana Pyfrom (Technical Advisor at the Office of the Prime Minister, Bahamas)
• Ms. Barbara Hendricks (Federal Minister at the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety, Germany)
• Ms. Brigitte Beyer (Head of Political Staff at the Federal Ministry for Food and Agriculture, Germany)
• Ms. Clara-Luisa Weichelt (Desk Officer for Adaptation, Policy and Global Challenges at MISEREOR, Germany)
• Ms. Doriane Mollard (UNFCCC COP 23 Volunteer, France)
• Mr. F. Umiich Sengebau (Minister of Natural Resources, Environment and Tourism in Palau)
• Ms. Janinka Lutze (Naturefriends International, Germany)
• Ms. Joy S. Juma (Kenya)
• Ms. Mai Tina Ichihara (Climate Change Consultant at the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Climate Change, Seychelles)
• Ms. Mariana Balau Silveira (PUC Minas, Brazil)
• Ms. Mélissa Dumont (University of Lapland)
• Mr. Muawia Hamid Ibrahim Shaddad (University of Khartoum, Sudan)
• Mr. Nawaf Alshatti (Team Leader Maintenance at Kuwait Oil Tanker Company, Kuwait)
• Ms. Patriciah Roy Akullo (Programme Officer for Advocacy at DanAid, Uganda)
• Mr. Roy Harris (Secretary for National Emergency Service, Government of Nauru)
• Ms. Sarah N. Baashan (International Policies Advisor, APA Chair, Ministry of Energy, Industry and Mineral Resources, Saudi Arabia)
• Ms. Shema Roberts nee Nsabimana (Environment Officer at the Ministry of Environment, Antigua and Barbuda)
• Mr. Tesfaye Gashaw Yeshanew (Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change Ethiopia)
• Ms. Tui Shortland (Director at Pacific Indigenous and Local Knowledge Centre of Distinction, New Zealand)
• Mr. Vegard Tørstad (Researcher at the European University Institute, Norway)
• Mr. William N. Kostka (Director Micronesian Conservation Trust, Federated States of Micronesia)

The post Faces of COP23 appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

<< Climate Change is not an academic subject, it´s a matter of life and death.>>
– Henry Puna

In the early morning hours of the 18^th November 2017, the climate change COP 23 in Bonn came to an end after two weeks of negotiations, discussions and debates. The conference didn’t result in tremendous progress but met the overall expectations. Progress in implementing the Paris Agreement was achieved and next steps towards the coal phase-out were undertaken. Bonn was a necessary step on the way to Katowice next year where the members of the parties will come together again.

One main outcome of COP 23 consists of the further elaboration of the Paris Agreement’s Rule Book. Clear and consistent standards were needed regarding measuring and reporting CO₂ emissions as well as advances in climate protection on the national level within all participating nations. Aiming for the prevention or at least for slowing down the global heating, a draft of around 200 pages was presented. This document will be finalized and adopted at COP 24.

Despite the disappointing German position concerning the withdrawal from coal use, the initiation of the global “Powering Past Coal Alliance” was a great step towards a coal free future. Under leadership of Canada and the UK, more than two dozen countries, provinces, states and cities agreed on the phasing-out of the climate killer within the next decades. Germany might follow in 2018. Its role as a financial supporter of climate protection is very important but others took over political leadership.

Contrasting Americas official position, positive signals came from other US representatives including civil society members, companies, states and cities: “We are still in!” – a clear message and support to keep the spirit of Paris alive in Bonn.

Further achievements are the adoption of the Gender Action Plan, the development of the Local Communities and Indigenous Peoples Platform and the launch of the Ocean Pathway Partnership. In order to promote and stimulate the process of inclusive, participatory and transparent dialogue, the Talanoa Dialogue was initiated. This facilitative exchange encourages action in climate mitigation by bringing together science, industry and the civil society.

Apart from the negotiation processes in the Bula (Fijian for “hello”) Zone, the organization of the climate conference in Bonn in two zones, also provided room and opportunities for showcasing projects and examples of implementation. Countries, industry and civil society presented a wide spectrum of climate action solutions in hundreds of events in the Bonn Zone.

The COP 23 was characterized by the shared general consensus to get active in climate policy. That is a strong signal but a lot of work remains until more groundbreaking decisions will have to be made in Poland next year. From our perspective as scientists, the statement of His Excellency Mr. Henry Puna, Prime Minister of Cook Islands, should provide motivation and be seen as a mandate: “Climate Change is not an academic subject, it´s a matter of life and death.”

The post COP23: A conference of small steps appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

“I hear no objections, it is so decided.”

As observer in the Bula zone, this sentence was the most heard during the first days of the 23^rd Conference of the Parties . Most meetings in the first days of the COP23 still dealt with organizational matters, such as agreeing on the structure of following meetings. The interventions by parties appeared rather repetitive to me, which is probably caused by the diplomatic character of the sessions. Almost everybody started their comments by thanking Fiji and Germany for hosting this year´s COP and stressing out how much they appreciate the previous work and look forward to fruitful discussions with tangible outcomes.

The negotiations in the Bula zone are carried out in many parallel meetings of the following working groups/ bodies:

• Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA),
• Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI),
• Conference of the Parties (COP),
• Ad Hoc Working Group on the Paris Agreement (APA),
• Conference of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP),
• Conference of the Parties to the Paris Agreement (CMA)

Each group has a long list of agenda items that they work on during the two weeks in Bonn. For more detailed information on what the COP23 is all about, read this GCE post. Due to the vast number of parallel meetings and increasing restrictions for observer presence in sessions, it was impossible for us four observers from the Global Change Ecology programme to get a full overview of what´s going on each day in the negotiations at Bula zone. Luckily, there are many media teams, climate activists and other NGOs who provide very helpful daily briefings, such as the Climate Tracker.

I mainly attended informal consultations of the SBSTA, e.g. on systematic observation and research, and the big COP plenary meetings. In the course of the first week, I could observe how the negotiations went from structural issues to more technical, content-based discussions. Some of the bodies already produced informal notes and draft texts which ultimately will lead to the creation of a rulebook for the
implementation of the Paris Agreement.

According to the big COP stock-taking plenary on Saturday and an overview article by Climate Tracker, the main points being discussed in the different bodies in the first week of COP23 have been:

Pre-2020 actions
The Paris Agreement commitments only begin in 2020. However, as the COP president Frank Bainimarama says: “We must not waste time”. For this reason, especially developing countries, demanded pre-2020 actions to already get started with mitigation activities to combat climate change and have a chance at limiting global warming to below 1.5°C in comparison to pre-industrial levels. This is very crucial for island states, for example in the Caribbean. Unfortunately, so far the pre-2020 ambitions have not been assigned to any working group or official agenda item of this year´s COP.

Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs)
One of the main points being discussed in this context is how and when the reporting and updating of the NDCs should take place. Developing countries and developed countries might face differentiated processes here.

Loss and Damage
As nicely explained by Climate Tracker: “loss and damage is a concept where rich countries, who have historical responsibility for climate change, are asked to be liable to developing countries, who are already facing climate change impacts.” Unfortunately, negotiations on this topic ended in controversial discussions when some developed countries questioned the scientific evidence necessary to correlate extreme weather events/natural disasters with climate change.

Finance
One of the crucial issues for the implementation of the Paris Agreement is the finance of all required measures, e.g. in form of an Adaptation Fund which can help the developing countries to tackle climate change impacts.

Talanoa dialogue
Also known as Facilitative dialogue, the Talanoa dialogue has been introduced by the Fijian COP presidency to have inclusive, participatory and transparent conversations in which people listen to each other and respect the other one´s perspective. It is supposed to be held in 2018.

Other important topics covered in the meetings were the reporting guidelines/ implementation for adaptation and mitigation, the global stock-take, a gender action plan and features, such as transparency, equity, capacity building and technology transfer.

The parties still have a lot of work ahead and with ministers arriving in the second week of COP23, one can hope that negotiations progress faster and that the delegates agree on how to implement the different components of the Paris Agreement.

I feel honored to be given the unique opportunity to observe the negotiations at the UN Climate Change Conference 2017. I felt overwhelmed by the number of events taking place at the same time and also by the engagement and interest that NGOs demonstrated at Bonn zone and within negotiations.

The post COP23: Wrap-up first week appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

Parallel to informal consultations of the meetings and protocol bodies of the convention where we had limited access, the workshop for the facilitative sharing of views (FSV) under the international consultation and analysis (ICA) process for developing country Parties was organized under the Subsidiary Body of Implementation (SBI) at this 47th session in room Genf of the Bula zone.

The objective of this FSV was to invite non-Annex I Parties that have submitted their Biennial Update Report (BUR) and have a final summary report by 8 September 2017 to share their experiences, lessons learned, success and challenges during the preparation and the submission of their BURs in order to strengthen the process and encourage more and more non-annex I parties to improve and submit their report. Till that date, five countries namely Armenia, Ecuador, Georgia, Jamaica and Serbia had already submitted their BURs. These 5 non-annex I parties had already finalized the first step of the ICA process, the technical analysis of their first biennial update report (BUR) conducted by a team of technical experts.

After a short clip showing the benefits of participating in the ICA process by developing countries, each representative of those 5 countries were invited to present their national circumstances, the GHG inventories and mitigation actions developed, the projections of scenarios to assess the forecasted impacts of mitigation actions till 2030, to exchange in a very positive manner their experiences in the implementation of the Measuring Reporting and Verification (MRV) framework, to showcase their efforts done at the national level to put such framework in place, and to present the challenges, their needs on how to improve domestic MRV, opportunities and support received for mitigation of climate change.

Amongst the obstacles presented by those countries, the lack of detailed information, the lack of capacities, financial resources and technologies were the main factors encountered during the preparation of their BURs. They expressed their needs in term of capacity building in order to strengthen the BUR preparation and mitigation actions and to increase the accuracy and quality of their domestic MRV framework.

At the end, several questions were posed by other parties in order to improve the preparation of their own BUR. Those questions are summarized below.

The post COP23: Biennial Update Report appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

“Negotiations are important, but action is more important” – Salaheddine Mezouar, COP22 President

The first week of the conference was marked by the presence of several African countries which share together the urgent need of implementing the Paris Agreement. Besides participating individually to main plenary meetings and informal consultations during meetings of the convention and protocol bodies on specific agenda item of the Paris agreement, the African Group organized several closed meetings at least twice a day in order to discuss, prepare and clarify the position, visions and expectations of African countries during COP 23. Unfortunately, we didn’t have access to those closed meetings. As a result, the point of view expressed here is based on what we have heard and seen during plenaries as well as informal discussion with countries’ representatives.

Africa is highly vulnerable to climate change
I think we heard this sentence or something similar at every single speech of African negotiators during plenary meetings, and it’s not false. From coastal locations in the West, tropical ecosystems in the center, small islands in the Indian Ocean to arid and semi-arid regions in the North and South, every single country feels the adverse effects of climate change. Agriculture is the main sector impacted by climate change, due to the high reliance on precipitation for rain-fed agriculture which accounts for nearly 95% of farmed land in Africa. This high vulnerability is also linked to poverty which induces low adaptive capacities and mitigation actions across the continent.

A lot of progress is made at the national level
In response of the adverse effects of climate change, a lot of efforts is put in place across the continent to cope with climate change both at the national and international level. During plenaries and side-events, several African countries shared their efforts made. Amongst the 169 Parties who already ratified the Paris Agreement, 52 are from Africa. This denotes their commitment and their need to implement the Paris Agreement which entered into force in November 2016. In addition to that, of the 8000 climate and sustainable development projects registered under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), more than 45% are from African countries said Frank Volke, Chair of the CDM executive board during the 2nd meeting of the ad hoc group responsible for the implementation of the Paris agreement (APA) when presenting the annual report of their activities on Tuesday 7 November.

More than 45% of the 8000 climate and sustainable development profects are from African countries.

However, out the 52 Africans countries who ratified the Paris Agreement, only 5 already submitted their first Biennial Update Report (BUR), 2 countries submitted the second one and the rest are actively working on their own. This shows the difficulties and the challenges for African countries even if they share the same enthusiasm in the fight against climate change. At the national level, efforts are being made to improve GHG inventories and to bring together several actors, like the Climate Change Forum presented by the representative of Uganda during the first Presidency’s Open Dialogue on Wednesday, and which brings together government,  NGOs, members of the civil society, youths, local communities to discuss and find common solutions. In addition to that, several countries have already identified keys sectors focusing on adaptation and mitigation actions.

Need for collective efforts – a strong signal sent by the German Government

“Limiting greenhouse gas emissions is a central challenge for the future. Adaptation measures will be required in many countries…adaptation to climate change is an equally important second pillar of the Paris Agreement. Germany has been very committed in this area in the past and will remain so in future… we will once again support the Adaptation Fund this year with an additional 50 million euros” – Dr. Barbara Hendricks, German Minister for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety

This was perceived as a strong and powerful signal sent by the German government to other developed countries to come together and assist developing countries in the fight against climate change. Across the continent, challenges are diverse and during plenaries, African representatives have expressed their difficulties and needs in term of capacity building, technology transfer, the adaptation fund, additional funds for losses and damages as well as funds for medication. This contribution from Germany will help to move forward and reach the annual amount of $100 billion promised for 2020 by developed countries towards developing ones. Since we are all in the same canoe, several collective efforts need to be implemented to meet this goal before 2020.This means:

 “We must act in solidarity because the story will not hold back who was stronger or weaker. Negotiations are important, but action is more important” – Salaheddine Mezouar, COP22 President

The post COP23: Summary of the first week from an African perspective appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

Bula! from the UN-Climate Conference in Bonn. Bula is Fijian for “life” and is most commonly used as a greeting, wishing one good health. In this article we want to present an overview of what the COP23 is about.

The UN-Climate Conference takes place from 6 – 17 November 2017 in Bonn under the Presidency of Fiji. It is the 23rd meeting of the Parties of the UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) as well as the 13th meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP) and the second meeting of the Parties to the Paris Agreement (CMA). This year’s primary task is to discuss the implementation of the Paris Agreement of 2015, which should ultimately result in a so-called “Book of Rules” that is to be approved during the next COP24 in Katowice, Poland.

Alongside the official negotiations of the parties, there are also many side events and exhibitions taking place in the framework of the conference. Though these are only to be attended with an official registration, there are also possibilities for citizens to visit various event throughout the city.

[bg_collapse view=”link” color=”#117BB8″ icon=”arrow”  expand_text=”Fiji in Germany?” collapse_text=”Fiji in Germany?”]

First questions first. Why is the Conference taking place in Bonn when it is under Fijian Presidency?

Formerly, the hosting procedure was such that the holder of the COP presidency was also hosting the conference. Last year, however, no country from the UN Group Asia that was slated to host the meeting of the parties was willing to take over presidency. To fill the vacancy, the Republic of Fiji was prepared to take on the chair of the Conference but could not host the conference for organisational reasons. Under these circumstances, the regulations of the UNFCCC require that the conference be hosted in Bonn, where the UN climate secretariat is located.

The Republic of Fiji is a small island state in the South Pacific and is already strongly affected by climate change. Sea level rise, the salination of soils, and hurricanes threaten the 890,000 inhabitants of Fiji, as well as residents of other small island states in the Pacific. Over the last several years, Fiji took over the leadership of climate action in this region and was the first nation to sign the Paris Agreement. As Fiji now holds Presidency of COP23, this current conference has a strong emphasis on the fate of small island states when facing climate change impacts.

[/bg_collapse]

[bg_collapse view=”link” color=”#117BB8″ icon=”arrow”  expand_text=”Bula Zone and Bonn Zone” collapse_text=”Bula Zone and Bonn Zone”]

Why are there two zones and what is the difference?

The Climate Conference is divided into two zones: the Bula Zone and the Bonn Zone.

The negotiations and official meetings of the parties take place within the Bula Zone. This is likewise where the main plenary located. Allowed entrance in this zone is limited to delegates and official observers. This year, Global Change Ecology four observer spots; eight students and alumni (four per week) have the possibility to follow the negotiations in person. However, for some topics the meetings are only open to participants (observers are not allowed).

The Bonn Zone is another conference building some distance away from the Bula Zone. This is where the Side Events take place. A huge exhibition area for NGOs and other organisations is located within this zone, and there are additional pavilions representing many countries where information about the local culture and climate action can be found. For COP23, GCE has 15 additional spots for the Bonn Zone, meaning another 30 students are able to attend Side Events and have a look at the exhibitions and actions. In the Bonn Zone you can also find the GCE exhibition booth.

[/bg_collapse]

[bg_collapse view=”link” color=”#117BB8″ icon=”arrow”  expand_text=”What to expect from COP23?” collapse_text=”What to expect from COP23?”]

Some of the most pressing issues that will be discussed during the negotiations

After the successful drawing up of the Paris Agreement, it is now time to decide how this agreement can be implemented. There are some topics that have to be decided, amongst others the rules for the implementation, the NDCs, the Talanoa Dialogue, and loss and damage financing.

Rules for Implementation
One of the most important agenda items is the setting of the rules for the implementation of the PA. This should result in a so-called “Book of Rules” that is to be approved during the next COP24 in Poland.

“A major issue will be on how to produce a negotiating text that is Party-driven and inclusive, balanced on all the elements, and reflects the positions of all Parties.”^[1] The question of how to differentiate between developed and developing countries will also be heavily discussed.

NDCs
The purpose and interpretation of the NDCs will be another controversial item. Most of the parties focus mainly on the mitigation component of the NDCs, whereas the LMDC (Like Minded Group of Developing Countries), the African and the Arab Group believe the scope of the NDCs covers besides mitigation also adoption and means of implementation.

Another key point will be what kind of information parties should report back regarding their contributions. Many parties stress that mitigation efforts should be reported in CO2-eq (Carbon dioxide equivalents), so as to be fully quantifiable; others, such as the LMDC, believe that comparison is not the purpose for this kind of information.

Facilitative Dialogue 2018
In the Paris Agreement, parties have decided to “convene a facilitative dialogue among Parties in 2018 to take stock of the collective efforts of Parties”. This dialogue was organised by the Presidencies of COP22 and COP23. They provide an informal note in which they refer to the Facilitative Dialogue as “Talanoa Dialogue” and ensure that “the dialogue will be conducted in the spirit of the Pacific tradition of Talanoa” which is “a traditional approach used in Fiji and the Pacific to engage in an inclusive, participatory and transparent dialogue” with the purpose of sharing “stories, [to] build empathy and trust.”

This dialogue “will be structured around three general topics: where are we, where do we want to go, and how do we get there.”

Loss and damage
As the COP23 is the first COP to be hosted by a Small Island State, there is hope that this year will feature a greater focus on Small Island Developing States (SIDS) alongside other developing countries. As these states are already hit hard by climate change impacts, it is crucial to find ways to generate and provide finance for loss and damage. There are, however, prominent voices that fear that developed countries seek to delay a result-oriented debate about the providence of finance for developing countries.

^[1] https://www.twnetwork.org/climate-change/what-expect-fiji-cop

[/bg_collapse]

[bg_collapse view=”link” color=”#117BB8″ icon=”arrow”  expand_text=”NDCs and Fair Shares” collapse_text=”NDCs and Fair Shares”]

Nationally determined contributions (NDCs) are the pledged efforts of the participating nations to reduce national emissions and adapt to the impacts of climate change. In contrast to other climate protection standards that are legally determined at a conference of the parties, every country can decide for itself how high its NDCs should be.
Countries are obligated to update and communicate their NDCs in 2020. Countries cannot, however, be punished if they fail to fulfil their commitments. Germany, for example, is likely failing to meet its climate targets for 2020, which is to reduce emissions by 40%. Experts estimate that – without any additional action – emissions can be reduced at most by 30%.
However, even if all countries would be able to meet their goal, there would be still a massive emissions gap (see also: “Critical Voices”), as the actual NDCs are not alone sufficient to meet the goal of staying well below 2°C. The NDCs are expected to be implemented from 2021 onwards; however, there is also a call for a bigger focus on pre-2020 actions, especially from the developing countries. These countries are concerned that developing areas won’t be able to meet even their existing obligations under the Kyoto protocol while shifting their focus to the time following 2020.

Fair Shares are the amount of contributions countries should pledge because of their global responsibility. These share depend upon historical responsibility (e.g. how much these countries have already emitted) and their capacity to act. Different countries must consequently act differently.
The issue remains that some countries, such as America and the EU, have a higher amount of Fair Shares than their total domestic decarbonisation. How can these nations fulfil their Fair Shares?
The solution could be to help other countries whose Fair Shares are still lower than their total decarbonisation. China, for example,still has a very low contribution to make, as it has not emitted a high quantity during past centuries. Because it is presently emitting massive amounts of CO2, it must be the duty of the other countries to fulfil their Fair Shares while assisting China with its decarbonisation.^[1]

^[1] For more information see: http://www.cidse.org/publications/climate-justice/equity-and-the-ambition-ratchet.html

[/bg_collapse]

[bg_collapse view=”link” color=”#117BB8″ icon=”arrow”  expand_text=”America’s Withdrawal From the Paris Agreement” collapse_text=”America’s Withdrawal From the Paris Agreement”]

“The bottom line is that the Paris accord is very unfair at the highest level to the United States.” – President Donald Trump [1]

On June 1st 2017 US President Trump announced the United States’ intentions to withdraw from the Paris Agreement. Being the last state which has had not yet signed the Agreement, Syria affirmed its commitment for the Paris climate change accord on the second day of the Climate Conference in Bonn, leaving the US quite isolated in international climate change policy. However, according to the guidelines of the Paris Agreement, the US cannot exit the contract until November 2020. Until then, the US will continue to be party.

In a media note from August 4th 2017 the US State Department announced that it will continue to participate in the meetings in order to “to protect U.S. interests and ensure all future policy options remain open to the administration. Such participation will include ongoing negotiations related to guidance for implementing the PA.”

“This is”, says Meena Raman from the Third World Network, “like a marriage in which you have already announced that you’ll divorce in four years, but you still want to have a saying on how many children you want to have.”

There is, however, a countermovement. With the slogan “We are still in” many US citizens and representatives of US Cities and States have expressed their commitment to climate action and their disagreement with the official American policy direction. Prominent examples are the former mayor of New York, Michael Bloomberg, California Governor Jerry Brown, and his predecessor Arnold Schwarzenegger. As the official American Delegation was unwilling to set up a pavilion within the Bonn Zone, the U.S. Climate Action Center built an “unofficial” American pavilion between the Bula and the Bonn Zone. From this pavilion they inform about climate initiatives and actions in the US and assure the international community: We are still in.

[1] http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/335955-trump-pulls-us-out-of-paris-climate-deal

[/bg_collapse]

[bg_collapse view=”link” color=”#117BB8″ icon=”arrow”  expand_text=”Sustainability of such an event?” collapse_text=”Sustainability of such an event?”]

Should climate scientists come together and cause large emissions to discuss about emission reduction?

As a huge event like a climate conference has a huge carbon footprint, it is necessary to take measures to ensure that COP23 is as sustainable as possible. As a voluntary commitment, COP23 aims to be EMAS (Eco Management and Audit System) certified. EMAS is an environmental management scheme based on EU regulations, requiring the use of renewable energies, waste management, and a general sustainable use of resources.

Waste:
In order to prevent the production of waste, the UNFCCC Secretariat and the German government utilize an electronic data transmission system and all exhibitors are urged not to distribute printed materials. Even though the sustainability guidelines are very clear, many exhibition booths still provide lots of flyers and printed material. There is, however, a strong effort made to enhance the distribution of electronic data. Waste bins encourage the separation of waste and every participant is given a drinking bottle that could be refilled at water dispensers located widely across the conference area. In addition, all temporary structures can be used again for future conferences.

Food:
UNFCCC claims that the food provided would be “mostly vegetarian”, with the aim to make at least 50% of the products regional and organic. Served meat are also always organic and fish is consistently certified. During lunch hours, there were usually three meals: one with fish, one with meat, one vegetarian. Even though this menu plan might be less meat than at former COPs, it certainly cannot be declared as “mostly vegetarian”.

Nature Conservation:
According to the COP23 webpage, no trees were felled in order to build the secondary structures; and, following COP23, the Bonn Zone “Rheinaue” area will be regreened using turf.

Mobility:
All participants were encouraged to offset their travelling CO2 emission (see also: “CO2 Offsetting”). Free bicycles were provided throughout the conference and electro shuttles could be used to commute between the Bula and Bonn Zones. Additionally, free local transport was provided for conference participants.

CO2 Offsetting:
Unavoidable CO2 emissions will be offset by supporting projects in Small Island Developing States. Institutions, organisations, and conference participants also have the possibility to offset their own carbon footprint with UNFCCC’s Climate Neutral Now initiative. [/bg_collapse]

[bg_collapse view=”link” color=”#117BB8″ icon=”arrow”  expand_text=”Critical Voices” collapse_text=”Critical Voices”]

Perhaps the Paris Agreement is not as good as they want us to believe…

Though the Paris Agreement was broadly celebrated as a groundbreaking milestone in international climate negotiations, there are still many elements worthy of serious criticism. Many critical voices could be heard during this COP, inside the Bula Zone, in the Bonn Zone side events, and outside during the many demonstrations.

Emission Gap
One of the biggest issues is featured centrally in the latest “Emissions Gap Report” by the United Nations Environment Programme. It shows that the currently stated NDC’s cover approximately only one third of the emission reduction needed to reach the goal of staying well below 2°C. That means that even if every country fulfils its pledge, we will head into a world with 3°C of heating or more. If this emission gap is not closed before 2030, it is extremely unlikely that we can stay well below 2°C.

Private Business and Lobbyism
Another criticism often raised is that of lobbyism. NGOs claim that many politicians are connected with oil, gas, and/or coal concerns. The Netherlands’ Minister for Finance has worked for Shell in Berlin, Hamburg, and Rotterdam. Norway plays a significant role in the negotiations but continues its offshore drilling. Germany promotes itself as a forerunner in climate politics but still uses coal for energy production and will most certainly not meet its emission targets by 2020. Many claim that the “big polluters” need to be kicked out before there can be efficient, climate-friendly negotiations.

Slow Process
The negotiations around the Paris Agreement are very slowly progressing. This can be very frustrating, especially as the time to effectively tackle climate change is extremely limited. However,it is consistently challenging to have meaningful discussions with so many stakeholders and differing interests. As there is traditionally a decision at the beginning of the COP that every decision must be taken by consensus, there must be many compromises made, much goodwill shown. To return to the marriage analogy: The Paris Agreement was like the marriage itself. Everyone was euphoric. Now we find ourselves two years into this marriage and the enthusiasm has faded away. Sometimes it is necessary to let go of a bit of the “you” to be able to work on the “we”.

Missing Topics
There is also criticism by various parties that some important issues are not featured in the Paris Agreement. Likewise, certain topics are included but are not discussed and/or implicated. Amongst others, specific climate actions, slowing ongoing disasters, intergenerational equity, mentally disabled people, and the option of a radical reorganisation of our capitalism dominated system are left largely unaddressed. [/bg_collapse]

[bg_collapse view=”link” color=”#117BB8″ icon=”arrow”  expand_text=”Outlook” collapse_text=”Outlook”]

What comes next…

Admittedly, COP has a lot of standing issues that must be solved–and solved soon. And yet, it is the best option we have at present, and there is little to indicate that there will be a better option within the next few years (if it is even possible to create something better in that dimension). We have to hope, therefore, that the parties are ready to deal with the climate impacts in an efficient and committed way.

We will see during the next week how much the Parties can accomplish, how many concrete actions for the implementation can be defined. Until then, it is our duty to express our own commitment–and our unwillingness to live in a 2°C warmer world. [/bg_collapse]

[bg_collapse view=”link” color=”#117BB8″ icon=”arrow”  expand_text=”Further reading” collapse_text=”Further reading”]

Official COP23 website:
https://www.cop23.de/

Excellent overview on what to expect at COP23:
https://www.twnetwork.org/climate-change/what-expect-fiji-cop

Analyses the NDCs of countries and much more:
http://climateactiontracker.org/

Our personal wrap-ups of week 1:

[/bg_collapse]

The post Everything you need to know about COP23 appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

“Forests play a huge role in our efforts to tackle climate change” – Manuel Pulgar-Vidal

On Sunday, a series of events under an initiative called Forests Global Climate Action were given in COP23 Bonn zone. Here, many countries and corporations have shown that by establishing sustainable forestry management, it is possible to cut emissions. During the opening event, Inger Andersen, Director General of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) said that

“nature-based solutions such as protecting and restoring forests can contribute over one-third of the total climate change mitigation required by 2030 to keep the temperature rise below 2 degrees Celsius”.

Indeed, forest ecosystems represent a key role not only because its potential in the Climate Change mitigation but also for being a mean of community and ecosystems adaptation and resilience building as Manuel Pulgar-Vidal, Head of WWF’s Global Climate and Energy Programme, held:

“Forests play a huge role in our efforts to tackle climate change – the science behind their contributions is clear. Protecting forests will ensure they continue to absorb emissions from the atmosphere, protect biodiversity, and provide livelihoods for forest-dependent peoples”.

However, it was also recognized by different speakers along the events that more decisive and collective action is still needed to seize the opportunity that forests represent, since destructive [often illegal] logging and deforestation continues:

“After 10 years of REDD programme, we need a broader approach that include more action, leadership and partnership” – Charlotte Streck, Co-founder and Director of Climate Focus

“Funding for forests should also combat illegal activities and forest degradation by incorporating prevention and detection activities” – Davyth Stewart, Head of Project Leaf of Interpol

Under this context, as the enabling conditions to advance implementation and enhance Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) through forests were detailed.

Commitment by Private Sector

Jeff Seabright, Chief  Sustainability Officer at Unilever and moderator of one of these events, concluded that strong collaboration and urgent and ambitious action between State and non-State actors is definitely required in the elimination of deforestation from commodities supply chain. Here, four were detailed as the key commodity areas: palm oil, soybean, feed for livestock (basically associated with beef consumption) and paper (of cellulose pulp derived from wood).

Fernando Sampaio, Executive Director of PCI Strategy at the State of Mato Grosso in Brazil, the largest exporter of commodities, assured that they are experiencing a transition to a more sustainable and inclusive state. Based on partnerships and commitments between the sub national government, industries and smallholders, they are looking to be known as a region that provides without forest degradation goods and services.

On the side of the companies, Kevin Rabinovitch, Global Vice President of Sustainability at Mars Inc., presented a new policy to reduce their carbon footprint 27% by 2025 and 67% by 2050 by addressing deforestation throughout their corporate value chain. In the same way, Laura Phillips in behalf of Walmart’s Senior Vice President of Sustainability, informed about their commitment to deforestation-free commodities and emphasized its importance due to Walmart as the end of the supply chain, being in direct contact with customers.

Contribution of indigenous peoples

On the other hand, Roberto Espinoza, Technical Adviser of Asociación Interétnica de Desarrollo de la Selva Peruana (AIDESEP) explained that contribution of indigenous peoples is vital to achieve climatic commitment and even go further, since Paris Agreement has asked for more ambitious pledges.

Additionally, he said that INDCs will not be accomplished with isolated actors. For this reason, he presented some measures that Coordinadora de las Organizaciones Indígenas de la Cuenca Amazónica (COICA) suggests, particularly to the Amazon region:

• Land rights and titles for more than 20 million ha, which would work as deforestation frontiers
• Autonomy over their territories, which allows them to rule under their holistic vision of the indigenous peoples that gives the actual value to the standing forest
• Indigenous monitoring, verification and revision, supporting the already established national strategies
• Indigenous REDD and a NDC “minga” (that in native language means with collective approach), which can add ambition to the NDCs already given by the nine countries that comprise the Amazon basin

Incubator for Nature Conservation

At the afternoon, IUCN launched a new programme called Incubator for Nature Conservation which seeks to help nurture and shape innovative ideas for making and channeling revenue to finance protected areas, answering to the question can a protected area be a good business?

In this context, it was presented one of the partner sites: Cordillera Azul National Park (CIMA) a 13 500 – km cloud forest in the Peruvian Amazonian jungle, which holds habitats with many endemic and protected species. It has been faced threats from land-trafficking, logging, migratory and industrial agriculture and illegal crops. There are no human settlements within the park itself, but more than 520 villages in its buffer zone including 32 indigenous communities and evidence of an isolated indigenous population from the Kakatiabo ethnic group in the southeast of the park. The national park is financed through the Althelia Climate Fund and the loan received by them is repayable through the sale of carbon credits… what, unfortunately, has not worked as expected. A second financing phase now needs to be designed, under a new regulatory national framework and working with IUCN experts directly to develop and implement solutions, ranging from other approaches for carbon financing to ecotourism to sale of products from the area.

Successful experiences will serve as model for setting up workable financing systems in protected areas around the world.

The post COP23: Forest day appeared first on Global Change Ecology.