Category: COP22

On our first day, we went to the Forum for informal consultation with indigenous peoples on a proposed Platform for Indigenous Peoples, pursuant to paragraph 135 (non-party stakeholders) in the Paris Accord. Very few “parties” (state actors) attended–Bolivia and Ecuador seem to have spearheaded this effort; Australia, the EU, Sweden, Canada, Panama and a few others participated. There were many indigenous people observing, and several at the table speaking.

The purpose of the meeting was to “gather views and share information” from indigenous people, a demographic with a legacy of oppression. It is extremely unfortunate that while these countries contribute the least to CO2 emissions, they are also the ones who feel the full effects of climate change and are most heavily impacted. In moving forward, it is critical that they have the opportunity and voice to contribute to the design and implementation of actions. The First Nations spokespersons insisted that this must be a fully participatory process and that they must be active drivers of change, not passive agents.

I admired and respected how the representatives of indigenous peoples highlighted a common theme in their discussions: the importance of understanding the spiritual, traditional, and cultural dimension of knowledge. Walter Schuldt from the Permanent Mission of Ecuador to the United Nations pressed, “We must see Mother Earth as an integral part of nature, as human.” He stated that our collective responsibility to defend nature means that there must be legal implications to any violations against nature.

Kevin Hart, the Manitoba Regional Chief for the Assembly of First Nations, spoke on behalf of the Canadian delegation. He was joined by an elder from British Columbia who said, “Mother Earth can live without us; we cannot survive without Mother Earth,” and who spoke in opposition to a new hydroelectric dam at Fort St. John. Both Hart and the elder expressed their dissatisfaction with the lack of engagement and action. They emphasized that the first step in addressing climate change is to possess full awareness of the holistic issue at hand. The chief elder said, “We are stewards of the land. Our connection to the land is first and foremost based on the teachings that have been passed down in the memorial…Protecting the land and water is not an indigenous issue; it is a human issue.” Hart pressed for full respect of the constitutional treaty and for inherent human rights, supported by all levels of the government. He stated, “I’ve been to a lot of these meetings now, and we really need to move ahead.”

Ecuador and Bolivia, who seem to have pressed for this meeting, had several proposals for moving forward with the Platform. Bolivia suggested that there be indigenous peoples’ sessions at each COP and that the UN work to set up more meetings among indigenous peoples. Victoria Tauli-Corpus, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous People added that there should also be more virtual exchange of ideas and information on extending technologies of indigenous peoples, perhaps by means of a common website. She also said the Platform should be adopted at the next session of COP, and there should be a high level meeting of indigenous peoples’ technology at COP23.The representative from Ecuador suggested as well that there be an “Action agenda” for a full day on indigenous peoples at COP 23.  

There was a state delegation from the EU at this meeting, and while they emphasized their support for human rights, including those of indigenous peoples, and with sharing technological best practices of indigenous peoples, they expressed a need for clarification about the platform and how and where it will fit into the framework and architecture of Paris. They seemed to be less ready to move forward with speed than did others in the room. We asked several parties (state representatives) and they suggested that the EU was somewhat wary because someone would have to pay for whatever was enacted, and/or that the EU was interested in maintaining control over the Paris process.

Day 2 in Marrakech and day 1 (of week 2) of the 22^nd Conference of Parties complete for the second Swarthmore Delegation. Things have been going smoothly thus far and our experience has been a satisfying mix of ad hoc and deliberate scheduling to get the most out of both the busy Conference and the inviting sites in the city. Already in our last 32 hours here, since arriving on Sunday afternoon (Marrakech time), we have managed to explore the labyrinth of outdoor vendors in the Souk and twice dined on delicious dinners ranging from pastille platters and tangine dishes on rooftop restaurants within the Medina (the old city within Marrakech). Thanks to the advice from the first Swarthmore delegation as well as the kind Moroccan city dwellers, we have gotten familiar with transit costs, navigating the COP space, and of course, learning the tricks to optimize the hotel wi-fi.

We’ll be sure to share plenty of details of specific workshops and negotiations as the week progresses, but first, a brief overview of the COP itself may be helpful for understanding the importance of this meeting, and for demonstrating that we are here for more than just delicious mint tea, beautiful weather, and a head start on Christmas shopping.

The COP is the actual international meeting that has been held annually since 1995, to actualize the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). UNFCCC was first established in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, where the international community decided to begin negotiations in which nations would voluntary work to reduce carbon emissions. The Kyoto Protocol established in 1997 was one of the first COPs that yielded somewhat substantive results for nations to commit to cut carbon emissions, yet lack of participation from large emitters (including the U.S.) combined with weak targets resulted in little global progress towards carbon emission reductions. The Kyoto Protocol differentiated between Annex I (developed) and non-Annex I (less developed) nations, with developed nations bearing responsibilities for reducing CO₂ emissions.  (Harris et. al., 2015, 9) Since China and India were among the non-Annex I nations and had no formal responsibility to curb carbon emissions, the U.S. Congress would not ratify Kyoto. Carbon emissions trading under Kyoto failed to be effective to bring down CO₂ levels.

By many measures, the next substantive meeting that showed any hopeful progress was 18 years later in COP 21 in Paris. With China and the U.S., the world’s two greatest carbon emitters, finally cooperating in the 2015 conference broadly considered “the last chance”, the world finally made three especially important strides towards carbon emissions reductions. The Paris Agreement ended the formal, differentiated responsibility of Annex I and non-Annex I nations, it provided flexibility of states’ contributions in a way that encourages participation, and it establishes 5 year reviews of states’ progress. (Kaya, Desai, 2016, 5, 6) The Paris Agreement also bolstered recognition of the need to pursue more ambitious emissions reductions, marking a global temperature increase of 1.5ºC increase from pre-industrial levels as the goal, rather than the previous goal of no more than a 2.0ºC increase (Obergassel et. al. 2016, 14, 15) The Paris Agreement was officially ratified on November 4, 2016- way sooner than most expected- after a enough countries (the required 55% threshold) signed on to the agreement in October of this year. (Reuters, 2016)

While the progress made in COP 21 rejuvenated hope in the ability of productive international diplomacy on climate change, challenges remain. Calculations of the world’s current emissions reduction plans still project that the global temperature increase will range from 2.7ºC to 3.5ºC, far exceeding the 1.5 to stay alive as was chanted by many small island nation representatives at the Paris conference. Additionally, the Paris Agreement is not legally binding, but only provides a system of “naming and shaming” through its 5 year reviews in which nations share progress. (Obergassel et. al., 3) And, of course the election of a president and a congressional majority that tends to disregard the scientific projections from the international science community, in addition to its own EPA, DOD, and CBO, is not helpful.

The rest of the global community however is continuing to work towards its moral and technical responsibilities to address the global climate crisis. We’ll keep you updated on how these efforts are playing out.

We woke up to great shock and surprise as we realized that Trump had won the election. The irony of being in Morocco at a UN global climate change conference right now hit us hard, especially while we were away from friends and family.  However, we took solace by watching and joining in on youth-led election-response demonstrations. Hearing stories from young climate activist groups such as SustainUS (which includes recent Swarthmore grad Ben Goloff) reminded us that there are many others who will continue to fight for a sustainable and just future, despite present and future challenges to that vision.

Our Moroccan hosts and the general public that we have met have been extremely supportive of us and were also surprised that Trump won.

It is difficult to gague the effect of the election on COP events, as we do not have access to observe the official negotiations between parties. On the surface, COP looked to continue as usual. The only visible signs of grief came from youth delegates, largely activists, who cried and hugged as we made our way through the day.

We’re sending a few pictures after a busy Day 1 at the COP22.  The speeches at the opening ceremonies promised that ACTION would be the operative word at the conference.  Salaheddine Mezouar, the president of COP22, argued that we must commit our work during these negotiations to ensure climate justice for the most vulnerable nations.  He quoted a proverb from the Dogon people of Mali: “The sun does not forget a village just because it is small”.  Let’s see what happens.

Here are some pictures from Day 1:

 

The COP compound is filled with meeting rooms, displays for countries and NGOs, and large halls for panel discussions. These are located in the Blue Zone, which requires special UN accreditation to access and is where we spent all of today.

We look forward to checking out the Green Zone tomorrow, which is where NGOs and other civil societies gather to hold events and displays. We only passed this space briefly on the way out, but look forward to spending more time there.

On the way out we also helped a group of event organizers transport the “Medina Bikes” on display…by riding them! (These are the city bikes available for public use in Marrakech, for a yearly fee of approximately $50.) While chatting with one of the other bike riders on the way out, it turned out we were riding bikes with the Moroccan Minister of the Environment. (Adina was asked if she was a minister too.) Afterwards, Giovanna reminded us that we probably should have asked about environmental justice in Morocco, but it was still a nice way to end the day.

More posts to come soon!

Adina, David, and Giovanna