Written by Idil Boran and Joanna Patouris
Toronto
The inner workings of government
Keep track of who’s doing what to get federal policy made. In The Functionary.
The Functionary
Our newsletter about the public service.
Nominated for a Digital Publishing Award.
The 21st Conference of the Parties (COP21) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change to be held in Paris is opening on November 30. This meeting presents a momentous opportunity for a turning point in the global effort on climate change. As nations will be working intensively throughout the two-week conference to reach a global climate agreement, a range of issues requiring special attention are on the table.
In addition to curbing greenhouse gas emissions and creating the conditions for low-carbon economies, the climate negotiations will be concerned with catalyzing global efforts to respond to the impacts of climate change.
In recent years, the issue of loss and damage has received much attention at the negotiations. As Gwynne Taraska explains in her report, loss and damage refers to “repairable damage and permanent loss due to the impacts of climate change”. Loss and damage can result from extreme whether events, where the likelihood of occurrence is heightened by anthropogenic climate change. Or it can ensue through what is known as ‘slow onset’ events associated with climate change.
At the Minister’s meeting of the newly formed Canadian Liberal government, which took place on November 23, Yukon Premier Darrell Pasloski noted in his speech that the impacts of climate change are starting to be directly experienced in Canada. The thawing of permafrost – an example of a slow onset event – recently forced a school to be relocated in the Yukon.
As these impacts are starting to be noticed in the Canadian north, some of the most vulnerable communities throughout the world have long been familiar with the threats of a changing climate. Among the most vulnerable are Small Island Developing States (SIDs) where concerns are rising over the threat that climate change poses to their well-being, future prospects, and human rights. A short clip on Kiribati may be viewed here.
In fact, a Paris outcome putting the world on track to meet the 2 degree Celsius target will still leave many communities vulnerable to loss and damage, posing a tangible threat to lives and livelihoods. It is therefore not surprising that loss and damage has been an important component of the climate talks leading up to Paris.
The debate over a mechanism on ‘loss and damage’
Conversations on climate impacts can be traced back to the earliest phases of the international discussions on climate change. Loss and damage was introduced in 1991 by Vanuatu, on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), who proposed to the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC), that an international fund and an insurance pool should be established and made accessible to those who will face the brunt of the damages of climate change. This proposal called on developed countries to supply funds to establish a form of insurance and indemnification mechanism. Despite this call for action, conversations around loss and damage were left out of the COP negotiations, as a focus on mitigation and adaptation prevailed until COP7 in Marrakesh (2001).
At COP7 decision 5/CP.7 was made, outlining party intentions to elaborate on the concept of insurance as highlighted in 1991. However, no decision on insurance or compensation was met through the proceeding COPs. The term ‘loss and damage’ only emerged in the negotiating text of COP13 in Bali (2007), which coincided with the release of the IPCC fourth assessment report found here, which raised concerns over anthropogenic climate change. A work program on loss and damage was then agreed to at COP16 in Cancun (2010), under the Cancun Adaptation Framework. The mandate of the work program is to take into account potential approaches to deal with loss and damage in vulnerable communities.
Continued conversations around loss and damage proved to be complex and controversial, however parties at COP18 in Doha (2012), acknowledged that a comprehensive and inclusive approach would be necessary to address loss and damage. The pursuit for an effective decision to be made on loss and damage through the COP is predominately spearheaded by the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), with the support of the Least Developed Countries Group (LDC) and the Group of 77 (G-77).
The Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage was established at COP19 in Warsaw (2013). This coincided with the release of the IPCC fifth assessment report as well as the devastation of Typhoon Haiyan, which struck on the eve of the negotiations. The destruction made the dangers of climate impacts vivid and raised a sense of urgency.
The inner workings of government
Keep track of who’s doing what to get federal policy made. In The Functionary.
The Functionary
Our newsletter about the public service.
Nominated for a Digital Publishing Award.
After a lengthy negotiation process, a two-year work plan of the Warsaw International Mechanism for loss and damage was approved at COP20 in Lima (2014), to be reviewed at COP22. In the meantime, the Executive Committee of the Warsaw Mechanism on Loss and Damage reports its progress to the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI) and Subsidiary Body on Scientific and Technological Advice (SABSTA) under the Framework Convention on Climate Change.
Options for a loss and damage clause at the Paris climate talks
Heading into COP21, there are two options up for negotiation under Article 5: Loss and Damage found here.
Option 1, as advocated for by members of AOSIS, LDC and G77 and China, elaborates on the purpose of the mechanism and specific mandates which would guide the decision with the intention that The Warsaw Mechanism on Loss and Damage will be anchored in the Paris agreement.
Option 2, generally reflects the position of Annex 1 countries, which proposes “no reference to loss and damage”. The second option implies that a mechanism on loss and damage will be worked out after Paris, in 2016 and beyond.
This is but one aspect of the lengthy text of the agreement that has to be settled at COP21. And it is one of the issues that we will be following in Paris.
Stay tuned for updates on this and other key issues from COP21.
This piece is co-authored with Joanna Patouris.
Joanna Patouris is currently pursuing a Masters of Environmental Studies at York University. Her research focuses on climate resilience and development justice in Sub Saharan Africa. She has long standing interests in climate change policy, gender equity and human rights in the context of the UNFCCC. She has served as an observer and civil society representative to the UNFCCC since COP 19 in Warsaw (2013).
Photo: Suwan Wanawattanawong / Shutterstock.com
