What happened at COP27? – ClientEarth

Follow us

18 November 2022
Back
Share
As the furore of COP27 draws to a close and world leaders, campaigners, NGOs and fossil fuel lobbyists alike make their way out of Egypt’s Sharm El Sheikh, our CEO Laura Clarke, Global Director of Communications Chris Duncan and members of our Next Generation Board have been reflecting on how they feel in the wake of the conference.
Read their accounts below.
“Courts have ruled time and again that Governments have a legal duty to take action on climate change. People shouldn’t have to take legal action to force their leaders to act but are often left with no other option. Governments should expect that if their inaction continues, so will the litigation against them.
A handful of countries and companies have made major progress on their journey to deliver on the ambition of the Paris Agreement to keep temperature rises below 1.5C and they should be praised for their leadership. For the rest, litigation risks will increase, with more claims against not just Governments and fossil fuel companies, but also food and agriculture, transport, plastics and finance. It should now be abundantly clear to all that climate action is not a voluntary activity, nor a matter of PR: it is a legal duty.
When the Secretary General opened COP27 saying we that we are “on a highway to climate hell”, I thought of the proverb about the road to hell being “paved with good intentions”.  Time and again we see Governments and Businesses showcasing their good intentions: they acknowledge the scale of the climate crisis, commit to ambitious action – but then fail to deliver. But good intentions are not enough. We are here to use to the law to hold states and corporates to account for their climate commitments, and ensure that they deliver.”
Laura Clarke, CEO  
Get updates on our cases
“COP27 in Sharm El-Sheikh is due to end today, but talks look set to continue at least until tomorrow before there is agreement on the final text. Lots of people suspected that the issue of loss and damage would be the hardest to get agreement on, and so it has proved. Despite broad agreement that loss and damage needs to be addressed, there is no consensus on what should come next with options ranging from a new finance facility to punting it to COP28. We heard overnight that Frans Timmermans, the EU’s climate chief, is proposing a loss and damage finance facility in exchange for agreements to phase down fossil fuels. Developing countries are understandably hesitant given the track record of such agreements being delivered. Negotiations are set to continue and we’re all hoping for a positive outcome.
The issue of corporate influence has hung over COP27 with reports of a big increase in the number of oil and gas executives and lobbyists in attendance, including BP’s CEO, Bernard Looney, who was attending as part of the Mauritanian delegation. He had, apparently, not come to lobby but to sign a deal with the country. Also in attendance, this time as part of the UAE’s delegation, was Vicki Hollub, the CEO of Occidental, a US oil company. This name stuck out to me in particular as I was listening to Hollub on Bloomberg’s Zero podcast with Akshat Rathi on the first evening that I was in Sharm. Hollub was trying to make the case that her firm was going to sell “net zero oil”. It’s a fairly excruciating listen in some parts and the claims clearly don’t stand up to scrutiny but you can see that they’re compelling to those who believe we can continue with business as usual.
Transitioning away from coal-fired power has been a big focus for ClientEarth for sometime, so news of a new Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) signed at the G20 meeting to move Indonesia off its dependence on coal is promising, with $20bn in funding committed. In theory these are just the kinds of mechanisms we need to see more of but there’s still some scepticism. The JETP for South Africa has yet to deliver significant change and is mired in political wranglings about whether the money should come in the form of private sector loans or funding from governments. As ever, the big question is: where is the money coming from.”
Chris Duncan, Global Director of Communications
“I’m so inspired by all of the work that youth and bipoc groups around the world are doing against the climate crisis after visiting the first-ever Children and Youth Pavilion. Simply having a space to be and rest and laugh and plan and chat is something that was never provided before, and the difference is astounding. From these chance conversations, I better understand now how each of us can enact change through different avenues that account for our positionality and capacity, but that all of these routes are legitimate and complementary.
The US’ lack of leadership on loss and damage negotiations is concerning. As an American, I am especially disappointed. I know we have the money – the fact that we have the largest GDP is because of our historical involvement and profiteering on fossil fuels and other extractive measures. It’s simply a matter of priority – when the military asks for more, it is seen as a national security concern, but when climate action is raised, it is “too costly.” Climate change is a security concern, but beyond that, it is a matter of survival for the global south and frontline communities in the US too. No more sacrifice zones.
Living with a new delegation of youth from around the world who are working on grassroots efforts made me realize how important it is that the climate space is better represented by communities rather than individual influencers. There is an element of accountability to the work that is being done, and I hope that the funders, media, and other influential stakeholders that provide opportunities recognize their role in shaping the youth climate movement.
I think that being at COP27 was the most educational experience of my gap semester and that is largely in part to the vast exposure of different stakeholders that I was constantly rotating contact with. In the future, I would like to learn more about what groups on the ground are doing and how we can better elevate voices of youth from the global south, since the funding, accreditation, visas, training, and English-default are all barriers to accessed for those from the most impacted areas.”
Angela Zhong, ClientEarth Next Generation Board
“The Conference of Parties are remarkable diplomatic events that indeed bring global leaders together to negotiate climate-related issues. Nonetheless, we are far – light-years – from where we should be in terms avoiding irreversible catastrophes and and ensuring justice.
Time is simply running out. We need a miracle. The miracle could be us. At COP, youth inclusion is not only an asset, but a need. We need to empower young people willing to make a change. In order to do so, capacity-building schemes must be put in place (this is something we would look forward to doing).
Seeing action from the inside reminds me that the situation is not under control at all, and we are not treating the climate crisis as urgent as it is. Now, my priority is learning skills to have a significant input at negotiations, but specially to contribute locally back in the Canary Islands and beyond. Think globally, act locally, and have a voice at COP if you can.”
Carlos Shanka, ClientEarth Next Generation Board
Environmental justice
Climate
Pollution
Wildlife & habitats
31 October 2022

Everything you need to know about COP27

Climate accountability
Climate
Environmental justice
UK
16 November 2021

The verdict from the COP26 climate summit

Climate
Rule of law
5 November 2021

COP26: what happened?

©Copyright 2008 – 2022 ClientEarth. All rights reserved.
ClientEarth is an environmental law charity, a company limited by guarantee, registered in England and Wales, company number 02863827, registered charity number 1053988, registered office 10 Queen Street Place, London EC4R 1BE, a registered international non-profit organisation in Belgium, ClientEarth AISBL, enterprise number 0714.925.038, a registered company in Germany, ClientEarth GmbH, HRB 202487 B, a registered foundation in Poland, Fundacja ClientEarth Poland, KRS 0000364218, NIP 701025 4208, a registered 501(c)(3) organisation in the US, ClientEarth US, EIN 81-0722756, a registered subsidiary in China, ClientEarth Beijing Representative Office, Registration No. G1110000MA0095H836. All materials on this website have been prepared for general information purposes only to permit you to learn more about ClientEarth, our work and the expertise of our staff. The information presented is not legal advice, is not to be acted upon as such, may not be current and is subject to change without notice.
©Copyright 2008 – 2022 ClientEarth. All rights reserved.

source

Leave a Comment

Ads Blocker Image Powered by Code Help Pro

Ads Blocker Detected!!!

Welcome to FactsPrime

Sorry, We have detected that you have activated Ad-Blocker. Please Consider supporting us by disabling your Ad Blocker, It helps us in maintaining this website. To View the content, Please disable adblocker and refresh the page.

Thank You !!!