NGOs barred at Bonn climate talks

June 18, 2011

Developed and developing countries blame each other for not allowing civil society participation in negotiation process

By Aditya Ghosh

Politics of climate negotiations have taken a transparency twist, with developed countries surreptitiously accusing developing ones of not allowing the meetings to be ‘open’. The developing countries, however, claimed that they had little choice as the observers, mostly comprising international NGOs, would only help in quietly pushing the agenda of the developed countries into the negotiations acting as stooges.

It was the European Union which reportedly launched this clandestine attack on the BASIC and a few other groups of countries blaming them for not allowing observers in most of the meetings leaving little option for them but to be closed-door affairs.

Under United Nations Framework Convention of Climate Change (UNFCCC), countries (or ‘parties’ as they are described) meet over four different forums – Ad-Hoc Working Group-Kyoto Protocol (AWG-KP), AWG-Long term cooperation for action (AWG-LCA), Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice and Subsidiary body of implementation (SBI). Parties have made various subgroups under each of these forums and these groups meet to resolve various issues regarding the negotiations. These meetings can either be open to observers – who are generally participants from NGOs, Inter Governmental Oranisations (IGOs) and the civil society – or closed if any party or parties object to their presence in a meeting.

This year’s mid-term negotiation meeting in the German city of Bonn has been accused of being mostly ‘closed’ with very few exceptions. While NGOs have been equating the lack of access in the actual negotiation processes as lack of transparency, parties have not shifted in their positions of not allowing access to observers in majority of the meetings across all the four forums.

“Some of the BASIC (Brazil, South Africa, China and India) group members, along with countries such as Saudi Arabia have been consistent in objecting to the presence of observers,” said a negotiator from a developing country party.

An all-day meeting on transparency was held on Wednesday at which some governments sympathised with the NGOs. While the EU, Bolivia, Mexico, Australia came out in favour of more transparency and involvement by civil society, Saudi Arabia, India, the US and bizarrely Antigua and Barbuda voted to keep the meetings closed.

One of the developing country negotiators claimed that developed countries often use international NGOs to push their own agenda. “This makes it difficult for us to engage in meaningful discussions on what we consider to be in our national interest,” he said.

Civil society participation from the developing countries was limited which tilted the balance of the NGO campaigns towards developed regions, he said. “NGOs from our countries are not as many here and they don’t find place in various committees and forums. Most of these international NGOs don’t have any obligation to serve our national causes which our NGOs could have done,” he added.

 

Hard evidence
 
World Banks’ double-handedness
imageA report released by Friends of the Earth shows how the World Bank hit a new record in 2010 for annual fossil fuel lending at $4.7 billion, increasing its coal-related spending alone by 256 percent. The World Bank has now been made a trustee of the Green Climate Fund which will administer the flow of funds from developed to developing countries to cope with climate change, which includes deploying 'clean energy' solutions.

See full report »

 


Highest ever recorded GHG emissions were reached in 2010
imageThe world CO2 emissions have hit a record high in 2010 at 30.6 gigatonnes, according to a recent study by the IEA. This is a 5% increase from previous record of 29.3 Gt in 2008. An IEA scenario sets the emissions limit at 32 Gigatonnes for 2020 in order to stay within the “safe” 2 degrees Celsius rise. This means that the rise in emissions for the next 10 years needs to be lesser than that between 2009 and 2010.

See full report >>

 


A Financial Transaction Tax could effectively address climate finance woes
imageA new report from CIDSE throws light on how the climate financing challenge can be met by taxing global financial transactions. A financial transaction tax, such as this, introduced at a mere .05% could raise up to US$ 6661.1 billion.

See full report »

 


Climate change will mean lesser water availability for food production new FAO report warns
imageA comprehensive survey of existing literature points to the impacts that climate change will have on water used in agriculture. Those dependent on glacial melt water for irrigation will be heavily impacted; this covers 40% of the world’s population. The report, although issues a risk warning for both rural livelihoods and food security of city populations, states the rural poor will be the most vulnerable.

See full report »

 


South Asia and parts of Africa are amongst climate hotspots where food supplies will be worst hit
imageThe study which maps out regions based on sensitivity to and capacity to adapt to the impacts of shifts in temperature and precipitation highlights the South Asian region where millions of already-impoverished people will be further impacted due to loss in agricultural productivity.

See full report »