Reason for COPtimism?

With COP26 kicking off in Glasgow today it makes sense to focus this week’s newsletter on this pivotal summit and why it represents crunch time in the world’s fight against climate change .

What is COP26?

COP stands for Conference of the Parties. It’s an opportunity for negotiators from nearly 200 countries to come together, review their progress on climate change and identify the best way to move forward. The ultimate goal is to align on a set of commitments that will bring the world closer to achieving its goal of limiting global temperature rise to 1.5°C.

For years scientists have said that the best weapon against rising temperatures is to cut greenhouse gas emissions. Working towards legally binding emissions targets has been a priority of COP since the mid-90s. But current climate pledges aren’t anywhere close to achieving this. In fact, they are moving in the opposite direction, with some countries reporting weaker commitments - or Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) - than at the last summit five years ago.

What have countries committed so far?

To date, a number of G20 countries have strengthened their 2030 emission reduction targets compared to the NDCs they submitted five years ago.

The UK has pledged to reduce emissions by 68% by 2030 compared to 1990 levels, and 78% by 2035. The European Union (EU) is aiming for a reduction of at least 55% by 2030 relative to 1990 levels, and the US target is ‘a reduction of 50-52% compared to 2005 levels. Japan, South Africa, Argentina, Canada and South Korea have also announced plans to strengthen their targets later this year.

Under President Biden, the US has set an economy-wide target of cutting net greenhouse gas emissions by 50-52% below 2005 levels by 2030. However, this will still leave the?US with more emissions per capita?by the time the target is reached than any other of the world’s largest polluters making commitments for the same date.

Meanwhile, China, India, Saudi Arabia and Turkey (responsible for 33% of global greenhouse gases) have yet to submit their updated NDCs and look unlikely to do so at all. Australia and Indonesia submitted NDCs with GHG emissions reduction targets identical to the submissions they put forward in 2015. Worryingly, Brazil and Mexico submitted plans that would allow higher emissions compared to their previous targets, while Russia submitted a target that would allow higher emissions than its current “business-as-usual” trajectory.

The question on everyone’s lips: who pays?

It is undeniable that the majority of climate damaged has been caused by rich industrialised countries like the US, UK and the EU who grew their economies relying heavily on fossil fuels and consumption-based growth. Meanwhile, developing countries - despite contributing far less to rising temperatures - will nevertheless experience the brunt of the impact caused by climate change.

Recognising this, in 2009 rich countries promised to contribute $100bn each year by 2020 to help developing nations cut their emissions and manage the impact of climate related disasters. But according to the latest figures by the OECD, rich nations provided less than $80bn dollars of climate finance in 2019.

Reason for COPtimism?

Former US Secretary of State John Kerry - who led the American negotiating team in Paris and will lead this one also - has called COP26 “the last best chance” to avoid ecological calamity. The building momentum around the summit has certainly made it feel like a ‘now or never’ moment for climate change.

One reason for optimism is that more countries than ever before now have net zero emissions. These commitments cover more than two thirds of the global economy. That said, those targets have to be backed up by policies if they are going to turn into action. That’s why the stakes are so high at COP26 and why all eyes will be on Glasgow this month.

Another aspect that may spark optimism is that the risks are hitting home for many politicians. Wild fires, deadly flooding and some of the hottest temperatures on record are having devastating effects on countries around the world and creating chaos for policymakers responsible for dealing with these unprecedented events. Moreover, the IPCC’s verdict that climate change is ‘unequivocally’ being driven by human behaviour means that politicians can no longer rely on climate denial as a way of avoiding commitments.

The reality is that achieving alignment across more than 200 countries with opposing perspective and vested interests will be an extremely challenging goal to achieve. Nevertheless, one thing this summit has done well to achieve is to create a sense of momentum and urgency like we have never experienced before.

Although many scientists agree that limiting temperatures to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels will be a huge challenge, there are already signs that many world leaders remain committed to this goal. As the conference kicked off on Sunday, the?G20 sent a symbolic message of their commitment, by reinforcing the pledge they made to the Paris Agreement and the 2030 Agenda. However, without the support of countries like China, Russia and Saudi Arabia, the question remains whether this will be enough to prevent us from reaching a world beyond 1.5°C.

Despite the negativity?that surrounds this event and calls that it is already a COP-out, I am trying to remain cautiously COPtimistic that enough countries will rise to the occasion and deliver on the commitments that are desperately needed to save our planet. ??

For more insights on environmental issues, check out my newsletter.

For social and environmental consulting services, you can find us at Shared Planet.