From Le Bourget to the Streets

While diplomats and negotiators attempted to come to an agreement this morning in the suburb of Le Bourget, thousands gathered across Paris for a series of demonstrations to mark the conclusion of the conference. These demonstrations’ fate has been in flux over the past month following the attacks in Paris, following with the French government imposed a State of Emergency and banned nearly all demonstrations. Coalition Climat 21 (which includes organizations like 350.org and Avazz) was unable to gain authorization for two demonstrations. A planned march on November 29th the weekend before the COP and what organizers said would be the largest ever civil disobedience today (Saturday 12 December) to conclude the conference. Potential demonstrations faced threats of tear case and clashes with police.

A smaller action did take place on November 29th, but the 10,000 participants were a far cry from the hundreds of thousands expected. Actions organized by 350.org and Avaaz included a human chain through the downtown the placement of thousands of pairs of shoes – including ones from UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and Pope Francis – at the Place de la Republique to symbolize the people who would have joined the march. A peaceful march in Paris that day clashed with police in riot gear using tear gas on protesters. Nevertheless, over 800,000 people around the world marched in solidarity as part of the Global Climate March.

Despite the protest ban, Coalition Climat 21 planned a mass civil disobedience action, though the ban deterred many, leading to lower interest than expected. Nevertheless, the coalition trained thousands of activists this week in preparation for the action and for the likely scenario of arrest.


However, early this morning, the government decided to officially authorize the demonstration. A mass text sent from Coalition Climat 21 at 6 am this morning read: “BREAKING: massive mobilisation pushes French Gov. to PERMIT #D12 #redlines action. We didn’t accept demands to change plans & prevailed. See you on the streets.” In the end, an estimated 15,000 people converged within sight of the iconic Arc de Triomphe on Avenue de La Grande Armée at noon wearing red to form red lines to symbolize the ‘red lines’ demanding negotiators and political leaders not cross (one references repeatedly during the COP was the need to keep warming well below 2 degrees Celsius). Banners read, “It’s up to us to keep it in the ground” and “Crime Climatique – Stop!”

Later in the afternoon, thousands chanted, sang, and linked arms to circle Champ de Mars and sit-in in front of the Eiffel Tower. This closed out with a rally with music and speakers, including author and activist Naomi Klein. She shared her reactions to the final draft text (which had been released just hours before and had yet to be approved). She heralded the agreement as a clear sign that the fossil fuel age is ending, but called for greater action, noting how countries’ existing INDCs (see our earlier blog for an explanation) set us on path for over 3 degrees Celsius of warming. She pointed to the fossil fuel industry’s immense power in domestic and international politics as a major inhibitor of an ambitious deal at the COP.

However, she expressed hope for the coming months, highlighting the development of the climate justice movement over the past few years, citing the Keystone XL win, a growing number of fossil fuel divestment commitments, and institutions like museums cutting ties with fossil fuel companies. She highlighted plans for a series of global civil disobedience actions organized by 350.org in May in which she said thousands around the world would “go up against the biggest fossil fuel projects in the world.”

Klein’s response echoed the views expressed by 350.org and many other climate justice organizations over the past few days, and today as the parties finalized the agreement: the agreement is a major step in the right direction and provides a clear example of the effectiveness of civil society engagement. However, it is not enough and civil society and social movements will need to step up the pressure over the next few years to counter the power of the fossil fuel industry and ensure countries go above and beyond their INDCs and, for those in developed countries, pressure governments to provide financial support to less developed countries to support in adaptation and mitigation efforts.

A couple more long nights

Though the COP was planned to end this evening, negotiations are still ongoing in order to finalize an agreement. This is not unusual for COPs, which often extend into the weekend following the planned conclusion. This time is allowing for high level negotiation to work out major sticking points, including loss and damage, ambition, differentiated responsibility, and finance.
COP President Fabius is expected to convene Paris Committee (Comité de Paris) on Saturday morning to present a final draft, following intensive consultations with the Parties during the last two days. As one of the knowledgeable people we talked to said, there will be an agreement, its ambitiousness will be open to debate, but it will pave the way for further action on climate change. Fingers crossed. Au revoir, for now.

Sub-National Level Efforts: Mitigation and a Just Transition

In the official negotiations and media coverage of them, there is substantial focus on national governments, especially the submission of INDCs.  However, sub-national levels, including sub-national states, provinces, cities, regions, are playing an increasingly important role in climate action. Multiple panels this week have focused on their role in taking leadership on mitigation and adaptation. Here, we wish to highlight one of them hosted by the Climate Group and the Network of Regional Governments for Sustainable Development (nrg4SD).

This event focused on a growing network of subnational governments collaborating on climate leadership. The Climate Leadership members collectively account for 331 million people, 11% of global GDP and 2.6 Gigatons CO2 emissions.

Climate Leadership members list

The heads of these subnational governments cited the importance of ensuring constituent support for renewable energy and decarbonization in order to create durable and ambitious climate action policy under sometimes hostile national governments. They also emphasized that one of the ways in which constituency support can be generated is to highlight the important role transition to green energy can play in job creation. Across multiple panels, subnational leaders described as critical to gaining support policies to create a ‘just transition.’ A ‘just transition’ refers to the a transition away from fossil fuels that ensures a) working class people who are part of the fossil fuel economy as well as those most impacted by climate change and the fossil fuel industry receive economic assistance and b) that new renewable energy development takes place in a manner that increases democratic participation and promotes racial, economic, and gender justice.

While climate change will affect every part of the planet, for many, particularly in working class communities, economic concerns are also very important. Often, especially in the United States (as Governors Shumlin and Inslee of Vermont and Washington,respectively, have noted this week), economic prosperity is framed as in opposition to action on climate, which dampens support for climate action. By ensuring that renewable energy development benefits workers and local communities, the just transition framework provides an opportunity for politicians and activists to counter this framing.

IMG_20151207_121847_033

First Minister of Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon talking about the Scotland’s transition to renewable energy

Nicola Sturgeon, the First Minister of Scotland, described how direct public benefits were critical to building public support for renewables in a country where many work in the coal industry and there was intense skepticism about renewables from an economic and, to a lesser extent, aesthetic perspective. Today, Scotland generates more electricity from renewable energy than coal and gas combined and aims to produce 100% of their electricity from renewables by 2020 (though this target is looking increasingly unlikely). The Minister emphasized the 10 million pounds per year, Scottish communities receive due to the Community Benefit and Ownership program. She notes: “local energy now helps to fund energy efficiency schemes, fuel poverty alleviation programmes and befriending projects which reduce isolation for elderly people. They meet local priorities because they are run by local communities.” (Despite this program’s benefits, not all companies participate in the program because it is not mandatory.)

Sturgeon and Vermont Governor Shumlin both talked about the importance of community input and governance in increasing support for renewables among the public. In particular, Shumlin noted the local town-based Energy Committees, which allows community members to contribute to decision-making, push for lower energy costs, and pressure reluctant politicians to take action. Similarly, Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne expressed her regret that Ontario did not focus enough on public participation and attributed lack of public support (and some active opposition) to lack of community engagement and benefits.\

Moreover, cities, states/provinces, and regions provide an opportunity to connect the localized impacts of climate change to climate action and renewable energy. Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne and Durban Mayor James Nxumalo both emphasized the importance of educating the public to connect local severe weather incidents with climate change to increase support for renewables and action on climate.

However, subnational governments do not operate on an island. National action can support, but often threatens this local progress. Wynne and Sturgeon noted how Canadian President Stephen Harper (who just lost office this fall) and UK Premier David Cameron have hurt attempts to shift to renewable energy through actions such as cuts in renewable subsidies. And, as is well-known, the US Congress contains many skeptics on climate change, which prevent substantial subsidies for renewable energy in the first place.

-Anita Desai, Stephen O’Hanlon, Ayse Kaya

Follow us throughout the week on Twitter (@SwarthmoreCOP21) and Snapchat (SwarthmoreCOP21) to get real-time updates.

Why You Should Care about INDCs?

INDC is one of the most frequently mentioned words at the COP ground. INDC stands for Intended Nationally Determined Contribution, which constitutes the Parties’ (i.e. countries who have ratified the UNFCCC) plans to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. INDCs provide an alternative to a top-down approach to emissions targets, which have failed due to gridlock and disagreement about countries’ individual commitments.

As the name indicates, the concept of INDCs creates significant flexibility for governments to formulate and commit to their own pace and magnitude for emission reductions. But with this flexibility comes some tough questions – who would enforce these INDCs? How can they be monitored?  Monitoring and verification, so far, continues to be an unresolved issue. The updating of the INDCs is also a pertinent question, as they are meant to set realistic goals with what is known today with a view to becoming more ambitious over time, as new knowledge – such as new technology or new pricing on existing low carbon technology – become available.

And, then, there is the question of whether the INDCs will add up to the goal of keeping global warming to a maximum of 2 degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial levels?  A new report by the UNEP on the emissions gap indicates that:  “Full implementation of unconditional INDCs results in emission level estimates in 2030 that are most consistent with scenarios that limit global average temperature increase to below 3.5 °C (range: 3 – 4 °C) by 2100 with a greater than 66 % chance.” In other words, the current INDC commitments put the world on track for 3.5 °C by 2050, nearly twice the limit agreed upon at COP15 in Copenhagen. While this is not good news, the event we attended this morning discussing the report emphasized that the flexibility built in to the INDCs can permit the ratcheting up of the ambitions.  Some countries here, particularly developing countries with high levels of vulnerability, have pushed to include the 1.5 degrees target as opposed to the 2 degrees. The current draft language includes in brackets – i.e. as possible but yet undecided – “below 1.5 °C” or “well below 2 °C”.

Despite potential shortcomings, INDCs also offer advantages: they have helped to bring almost all countries on board with plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and they aid in the creation of differentiated targets that allow each nation to address its most pressing issues.

We will be attending more events on INDCs and will post relevant updates. You might want to visit the following website for updates and graphs on INDCs:  http://cait.wri.org/indc/\

– Anita Desai, Stephen O’Hanlon, Ayse Kaya

Follow us throughout the week on Twitter (@SwarthmoreCOP21) and Snapchat (SwarthmoreCOP21) to get real-time updates.

Kicking off the second week

We kicked off the second week of negotiations by attending the Joint High-Level Segment of the COP21/CMP11, which included both pledges and statements of views by governmental ministers and other high-level officials, including UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and Swarthmore alumna, UNFCCC Secretary General Christiana Figueres.

Ban Ki-moon urged delegates to heed growing calls from civil society for ambitious action on climate, citing the 800,000-strong global Global Climate March during the COPs opening weekend and the $3.4 trillion in funds divested from fossil fuels. He went on to say: “Outside these negotiating halls, there is a rising global tide of support for a strong, universal agreement. All of us have a […] duty to heed those voices.”

Figueres echoed this sentiment, emphasizing the presence of “unprecedented mobilization” for climate action. She went on to say: “The challenge we face now is to crystalize that call into a cohesive legal framework that brings the world together in action and implementation.”

IMG_20151207_110007_943

Christiana Figueres addressing the High-Level Segment

In addition to the remarkable support coming from civil society, there is also an unprecedented mandate for action amongst heads of state this year. Last week, the leaders of 150 different countries gathered at the COP for the first high-level segment. This format – with the heads of state initiating the conference but leaving before the negotiations reached full swing – reverses the set-up from earlier years. (In)famously, the 2009 talks in Copenhagen resulted in failure and embarrassment for many of the world’s leaders, who came at the conclusion of the conference but were unable to salvage the stalled deal.

This year’s change in format served the dual goal of avoiding further embarrassment while also galvanizing momentum for a legally binding agreement early on in the process. This tactic appears to have worked in generating will for the process before the “sausage making” by the political negotiators begins in earnest this week. Today, at the high-level segment, we repeatedly heard the ministers referencing the first high-level segment and the strong showing from heads of state.

During his remarks this morning, COP President Larent Fabius highlighted the newly formed Paris Committee, another recent addition to traditional COP protocol. This committee is an open-ended, informal grouping of all Parties that will aim to overcome differences in the production of a first draft of the Paris agreement by December 9. While observers cannot attend the Paris Committee discussions, in the interest of transparency, the Committee’s deliberations will be teleconferenced to other meeting rooms, so that observers can, well, observe. The emphasis on inclusiveness and transparency seems to be an attempt to correct past mistakes.  In the past, negotiators have relied on the formation of exclusive, small groups that deliberate behind closed doors.

But even this year’s modified format is not immune from questions of fairness and inclusivity. Specifically, delegation size becomes a particular issue for informal negotiations, which pervade different aspects of the COP meetings.  Since delegation sizes from the Parties tend to differ across richer versus poorer nations, the larger delegations have higher capacity at these negotiations (as well as in others).  Despite the COP’s consensus based structure, there is by no means equality in representation and voice amongst the nations represented here. The next couple of days will make clear whether this inequity within the delegations will impede the emergence of a fair and just agreement.

– Anita Desai, Stephen O’Hanlon, and Ayse Kaya

Follow us throughout the week on Twitter (@SwarthmoreCOP21) and Snapchat (SwarthmoreCOP21) to get real-time updates.