Tag: Doha

How Much Climate Finance Will Developed Countries Provide in 2013 and Beyond?


Based on pledges/statements made in UNFCCC…

Finland, France, Germany, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK were first off the blocks in making financial pledges in Doha.  This was welcome. But the adequacy and the clarity of these pledges vary significantly and need to be pinned down.

And then there’s the rest…

No developed country Party should be coming back to this process empty handed! ALL developed countries need to urgently commit to what climate finance they will provide in 2013 and beyond, in a way that is transparent, comparable and makes clear how finance is new and additional.

Related Newsletter : 

COP 18: a transition

Andrey Zhelieznyi, Ukraine
The National Ecological Centre of Ukraine (NECU)

COP18 in Doha was literally a transition event – defining the track of further climate change fight and if the world is ready to act toward a common goal. Actions on commitments accepted here will determine if we will stay below the 2C warming range in the next five to eight years.

Hospitable Qatar accepted nearly 17 000 people, inspired to see big accomplishments from all over the world. In fact, politicians, governors and civil society were all full of hope, wanting to abolish 'old' legal agreements for emission reduction and agree to a new plan of reaching a fair and legal global deal.

Action on the prevention of anthropogenic emissions in the atmosphere has become vital for the survival of humanity in the way that we know today. But what we saw during two weeks of international negotiations was that both north and south clashed on non-negotiable survival. Basically, environmental topics became big political aspects and were not even economical. Every party in the negotiations resisted taking the lead, despite their available capability in many cases.

Consensus on global agreement is required. I'm asking myself if we really need formal agreements on paper with weak targets or how to urge the world to take on domestic mitigation activities beyond international agreements. I’m still not sure what the right answer is. To mobilize political will and follow the only ambitious plan is the only way.

Large number of civil society representatives joined together to make their voices heard, to voice concerns to decision makers about the world they expect to live in. We bring a lot of environmental and social issues to the climate agreement agenda but this is not enough. We have to continue our work further to ensure that voices are heard.

This year’s UNFCCC negotiations have come to an end with the world at a crossroads. There is only one right way, but the question remains: how much we will need to adapt if we don’t choose the right path now? 

Doha: Week 2


Baimey Ange David Emmanuel
ONG JVE Cote d'Ivoire

For me, the second week at Doha was filled with side events and policy meetings.

To begin, Monday, December 3, the Climate & Development Network (RC & D) coordinates and I had a meeting with the French delegation and the French ambassador for climate change, Serge Lepeltier in the hall of the Delegation European French Pavilion. Present were 12 members of the RC & D from Côte d'Ivoire, DRC, France, Senegal, Mali, Niger, Chad and Togo. On the French side, we noted the presence of seven French delegation representatives.

The discussions focused on key issues in negotiations, including financing issues, the Kyoto Protocol, the NAMAs and development.Exchanges revolved around NAMAs were threefold: ambition is not enough to stay below 2 °C, the funding concerning the Fast start is currently expired and the importance remains of hot air Poland.

The Climate and Development Network then held side events to reflect on who will replace ODD MDGs. Four panelists includingbfrom Togo, Mali and France presented their work on agriculture, energy and the mobilization of civil society. The goal of this side event was for many French to express their views and ideas on the evolution of the UNFCCC process.

I had several working sessions with members of civil society to discuss the French disaster risk management, REDD and the issue of innovative financing.We continue to work on the involvement of NGOs and taking into account aspects of development in the resolution of climate change.

Globally, I think that it is important to keep with multilateralism processes concerning climate change (even if it is dangerous for those most vulnerable because the developing countries will impose their point of views.)

As I said in the JVE International press release, "While Doha was able to streamline the process and policies for international negotiations on climate change, through the adoption of the second commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol, ending the various discussion groups set up in Bali in 2007 and paving the way for discussions on the work plan for the post-2020 could lead to an international climate agreement involving all countries history. But the reality is that the UN still cannot intend to include toxic countries. Doha is a victory for Canada, Russia, Japan, Poland and the USA.



Developed Countries: Show Your Capability to Lead!


Henriette Imelda, Indonesia
Institute for Essential Services Reform (IESR)

Attending COP in Doha probably one of the greatest things I have dreamed of. It’s 2012’s COP 18, where all eyes look to Doha as the negotiations roll on, and I’m there, waiting for the miracles could happen for the world as we combat climate change. The second commitment period of Kyoto Protocol would continue with more Annex 1 Parties on board. The Bali Action Plan will actually live up to its real means of implementation. The world will cheer, people would stand clapping their hands and poking each other’s shoulders. Some would hug colleagues from different countries. We’d share the same vision; to achieve the ultimate objective of the Convention that all Parties agreed upon in 1992. Pledges would flow in, both in emission reduction and climate finance- even more than what we, the CSOs, have been demanding. I was imagining that I’d able to speak before other CSOs and people in Indonesia, upon my return home, to tell them how miracles do happen in the international negotiation on climate change. I would describe a phenomenal negotiation process, despite the many people would had already lost their confidence in its effectiveness and its contributions to the world.

Yet, as I sat in the plenary 1 QNCC in Doha early Saturday morning, only a couple of hours before my departure back home, I was staring at the draft text of LCA, KP, and COP. All of those images I described of a balanced package had suddenly evaporated.

The number that has been agreed upon in Copenhagen for USD 100 billion per year up to 2020 is alright, but there isn’t any clarity from where that chunk of money will come from. We can’t predict whether it would be there annually, and we just don’t know how to track the money. Even for a mid-term period, from 2013 to 2015, we have no clue. Isn’t the Fast Start Finance period enough for us to learn? Developed countries should claim the climate financing from developing countries, yet we received nothing. It came in a development package that already exists. Nothing new, nothing additional, it’s just the same. Climate finance should be new and additional.

To me, the idea of developed countries having to ask developing countries for their NAMAs or Low Carbon Development Strategies is a betrayal. Some developing countries have already put their NAMAs on board; some have even done so voluntarily. Now, instead of providing the finance that supposed to go along with it in accordance to the Bali Action Plan, developing countries were demanded to do more, to be MRVed. Not only that, but we have to do a biannual update report. Can you imagine how much money we’ll need to come up with a two year report to state not only our emissions, but also the support we’ve got?
We need more for capacity building, as well as technology, to fulfill such kind of obligations. According to the Convention, developed countries should show us this leadership by pledging domestic emission reduction without offsetting, as well as financing. All of these should be done transparently through an MRV mechanism.

We’re not little kids that need to be told over and over again. We are grownups who should understand that every action has a consequence. It’s not fair to run away from your responsibilities while developing countries have to deal with all the damage.

What I saw from the Doha package that was offered was an imbalance. Not for me, not my country, not for my community. With 27% of populations not having seen a light in the evening and around 40 million households without proper access to modern energy for cooking, my country still put forth pledges to reduce emissions. We still need to develop, yet we have committed to develop in a lower carbon manner. We need to see something from the developed countries. Our population of more than 240 million people deserve more than what we have on the table now. Funding for adaptation for a country with more than 13, 000 islands, with the possibility for 115 islands to disappear by 2100, is highly needed as a grant, not a loan.

Dear developed countries, we’ve done our part, far beyond our limitations. Yours are truly hanging fruits. Why don’t you show us that you’re still capable to lead? At least, show that responsibilities in the coming legally binding agreements that should be applied from 2020 onwards. 

The environment is harsh, but there is life in the desert


Enrique Maurtua Konstantinidis
Fundación Biosfera, CANLA

COP 18 is now done. A key milestone in our international negotiations for a global agreement on climate action has passed, and very little progress has been made. Global negotiations on climate change will continue next year, loaded with responsibility. Many tasks are overdue, the two most important being mitigation ambition and financial transfer.

But what happened in Doha? Russia, Poland and Ukraine continuously blocked the negotiations under KP for the 2nd commitment period; while NZ and Japan obstucted in another way: saying they would pull out of KP while enjoying the benefits. The US and Canada worked together to play a very unconstructive role in the negotiations as far as climate finance, as well.  

With things like this happening on a daily basis, the good efforts of some countries to create a positive outcome from Doha seem to be overlooked. It is important to make this clear: there are some positive things in the UNFCCC. UK and France some countries expressed their willingness to contribute to financial support in this COP, while others, such as Monaco, pledged emission reductions for 2020. Some developing countries, like the Dominican Republic, even pledged a 25% absolute reduction by 2030 without international support.

The positive actions we have seen in Doha are small compared to the empty Climate Fund and remarkably low ambition from some developed countries to reduce their GHG emissions. This kind of situation puts the world on a difficult scenario to 4ºC.

All of this being said, you cannot blame those who question this process, especially because they hear only of disappointments, lack of ambition and frustration. Many people ask us, the Civil Society Organizations, why we continue to attend COPs if they don’t lead anywhere. I can understand them, but I believe that, even though the last COPs did not deliver a global agreement, many movements and environmental programs around the world were born from this process. Changes have happened- believe it or not.

As a final thought, observers in UN are key witnesses to what governments are doing. The world knows what is happening thanks to people like us, who are not driven by only one interest- the integrity of this world’s environment.



Feelings after Doha


Lama Ghaddar

I am writing this from Lebanon, after I returned back from the Qatar National Convention Center in Doha for COP 18.

After 2 exhausting weeks and a very busy schedule consisting of attending sessions, side events and meetings, talking to delegates, doing actions and writing ECO-articles, here I am!! I went from a person who had zero experience or knowledge about climate change negotiations to someone who knows what KP, LCD, ADP and other eco acronyms mean.

One week ago, I was asked to write about my feelings at the COP, and my answer was simply: “I have neutral feelings”. Being asked that same question now, I can effortlessly say that it is the best feeling ever. I must confess that the last two weeks were a great turning point in my life; I’ve changed a lot on a personal level.

As this was my first COP, I didn’t have much background knowledge about it, but I learned a lot during my short journey to Qatar. I got to learn about the decision-making process: now I can say that I have a clear idea of how political games work.  I am sincerely disappointed by the failure of COP18, being that it was hosted in Doha- an Arab country! Why didn’t the Arabs lead? I expected Arab countries to give pledges to reduce GHG emissions since they have the financial power to do so. Why did they miss this opportunity?

There is no question that climate change is happening, but the main question remains: why are countries like Russia, Japan and Canada seemingly unaware of this global problem? We have an agreement on KP, but a weak one… is this the concurrence that we are looking for?

It is not the time to blame civil society, who had a very weak position and a feeble influence this year, nor the government. But we should always keep our positive outlook. Change doesn’t come without persistence and resistance and a lot of work (and struggle) is waiting for us.

We came to save the world, so let us keep this spirit….



Doha and rising above it all!
















Vositha Wijenayake, Srilanka

Back home after another session of “climate talks”, I am left to wonder what I have achieved during this adventure. Some things were accomplished, but there is much more left to be done in the coming year. Am I happy or sad? Well, I’m looking ahead, wondering what’s next.

What was achieved in Doha? A plethora of information from different parts of the world: a new-found respect for women and many new realistic goals focussed on education and legal activism. This COP has finally put me in the area of work that I have been expecting to work in, but have not yet had the chance. COP 18 showed us we need more work on legal issues, and to learn that being able to interpret the pros and cons of words can help our cause.

Memories to be taken away: stories of Sixbert in Tanzania, with the implementation of the “Akashiv foundation for Education and Research” in the coming year, Ben and the Kiribati airport, and Mona on survival in Palestine.  Also, that huge spider and the eerie feeling it gave me every time I passed it. Imagine my surprise upon discovering that the spider was named “maman”, a tribute to motherhood (quite ironic, methinks!)

However, nothing tops the taxi drivers sans any sense of direction, or the two and a half hour bus ride from the convention centre to the Horizon Manor Hotel, less due to traffic and more due to a lost driver and the policemen who had apparently misdirected him. In short, Doha didn’t seem quite prepared to handle the whole event; it was a bit pricey for those without the means to finance ourselves.

Summing up on a personal note, Doha was a learning experience on many levels, especially on diversity and climatic impacts which affects us all in different ways. It has also been an appreciation of others’ experience in facing hardships of the world- be it climate related, poverty related or opinion and judgement infused. Doha was also an experience of discovering a new-found respect for those who have risen above these difficulties and been able to make a difference and crate positive changes in others’ lives. But, it’s a pity that these stories were only heard by a few, many of whom overlooked them due to their own fixed mentalities.

So before I declare “the end” to COP18 and the year 2012, here’s to better climate talks and more appreciation of humanity in the coming year!


Doha has proven to be a doom for the poor


Sixbert Simon Mwanga
Climate Action Network-Tanzania

The 18th session of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC),Conference of Parties (COP) and the 8th session of the Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP) has concluded in Doha, Qatar on the 9th of December, 2012.

Civil Society Organizations and delegates from developing countries have clearly shown their concern with the outcomes of the negotiations. The critical areas of  concern include low ambitions to cut hot air, the length of the second commitment to Kyoto Protocol with so many loopholes and difficult to implement and a lack of commitment to provide  climate finance to operationalize the green climate fund. The conference also failed to deliver on technology issues which developing countries and African countries need to adapt and mitigate the effects of climate change.                                                             

These decisions and commitments have many negative implications to the developing countries:  migration (especially for climate change refugees), increasing poverty, frustrations, dejections, and deaths, all of which spell an infringement of the right to live. Being my first COP, I saw how respected leaders from developed countries failed to show leadership and political will in addressing the structural issues that have caused climate change.

We praise the African and developing countries delegates for standing firm and in union on damage and loss issues. For the first time, loss and damage have been accepted and international mechanisms have been set to address them. If there is one thing that we have achieved, it is work on loss and damage.

Some issues have been postponed, as usual.  By postponing important issues like technology transfer and finance to the next COP, it has proven COP18 to be the doom for the poor.  During this postponement and the slow creation of work programmes, we should know that communities are suffering from climate change. Therefore, it is unacceptable to procrastinate in making these important climate decisions.

For us who are already affected by climate change, an hour-long delay to take action feels like ten years. We find no reason for world leaders to attend the COPs while their aims are to delay actions on the negative impacts they have caused while struggling to develop their regions.

We see this as dividing the world on the efforts to fight our “common” enemy: climate change and its impacts. Scientists with their reports are disregarded; affected people in developing countries are seen as nothing while developed countries are not committed to pursuing sustainable development. They continue to invest in development pathways that are negative to the environment. We call upon leaders from developed countries to remember the role they played in emitting billions of tonnes of greenhouse gases and the necessary political will and leadership needed to emission cut targets. This is required by science to save our one and only home called the Earth.  



From a Pinch of Salt to “Pinches” of Gender


One speaks of gender rights and environmental rights, but combining them on the UNFCCC track is important and can be a challenge.

Women play a key role in day to day life, and are those who are most burdened by climate issues. Nevertheless, a focus on women in COP discussions is lacking. In Decision 36 of COP 7 in 2001, the need to focus on gender and women was already highlighted. From Beijing Declaration of 1995, the Decision goes to lay down the importance of the inclusion of women delegates in the UNFCCC process, and other form of entities that take action on climate change. This is based on the need for effective communication of women’s needs, which can be most clearly stated by those who are affected due to their absence.

Furthermore articles 3,4,5, 15 and 16 of the Beijing Declaration all stress on the need for inclusion and equal treatment of women in development. In addition, article 27 of the same states the inclusion of the women in the development process of developing countries is needed, as well as highlighting the need for participatory development where women are not side-lined by their male counterparts.

The relevance of this in UNFCCC discussions is clear: women are key victims of the impacts of climate change. They are the most vulnerable and most affected by climate disasters. Furthermore, in agricultural communities affected by climate change, women walk for many kilometres in search of water. In African and South Asian regions hit by droughts, women not only struggle to find water, but to feed their children, given the scarcity of food. Maternity makes women more vulnerable to climate change, health-wise as well as financial wise. In many coastal communities, agricultural communities are suffer from loss of crops due to sudden changes in the climate. The mother of families in these regions bears all of it, while struggling to adapt to changes in circumstance, while at a loss of livelihood through harsh changes in the climate.

The lack of awareness and education among women regarding the impacts of climate change affects their ability to react to these changes. The seasons may change, the crops may be damaged, and the rains may fall harsher, but the lack of knowledge on what impacts their life makes women unable to adapt to the situation  appropriately. There needs to be more focus on Article 6 and education. Girls in societies where they are deprived of access to education render them vulnerable, depriving knowledge to future generations.  As clich­é as it may sound, the education of a woman is the educating of a generation.

So what is needed? More inclusion of the female gender! While I do see many women in the UNFCCC processes, there lacks a focus on highlighting women's rights  in combating climate change. This could be the next step for those who walk the corridors of UNFCCC – including me.

So time to suit up, buckle up, and call for climate justice, several “pinches” of gender  included.

Will Doha be an oasis of hope or doom for the poor?

This generation has witnessed unforgettable catastrophes of climate change. The most affected are the rural and poorer people of developing countries, Africa in particular. The African continent has contributed the least to the problem and is the one least able to cope with the impacts, because we depend heavily on climate sensitive activities for our survival. Most of the NAPAs from Africa prioritized agriculture, water, health, energy, forestry and wetlands, wildlife and tourism as the most vulnerable sectors.

The whistle for negotiations in Doha has been blown and negotiators are running from one room to another to ensure as much ground is covered as possible within one week. However, most of the outcomes of these discussions are not in favour of the interests of the developing countries, including Africa, leaving most of the negotiators dejected and frustrated.

However, there is still hope to be salvaged  Doha-Qatar negotiations and asking negotiators from Annex 1 countries must be friends in need so that we become friends indeed by focusing on the scientific imperative. They must reflect on the dangers that climate change already felt by vulnerable regions of Africa and other developing countries. This will be easily seen by finalizing and adopting a meaningful and effective second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol, addressing the outstanding issues under the convention track in accordance with the 2007 Bali mandate and setting the negotiations under the Durban Platform for enhanced action on firm footing to adopting a legally binding agreement by 2015.

Africa is looking for an agreement that will assure to undertake mitigation and adaptation through effective finance mechanism and technology transfer.



Subscribe to Tag: Doha