Equity, climate change and sustainable development: Perspectives of Developing Countries – South Centre-Ecuador Side Event at COP 19 Warsaw November 2013

By Mahlet Melkie 

ASouth Centre side event to the Nineteenth Meeting of the UNFCCC’s Conference of the Parties (COP 19) took place in Warsaw on November 21, 2013. The side event which addressed different conceptions and approaches to operationalizing equity in the ongoing climate negotiations was held in conjunction with the Ministry of Environment and Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Government of Ecuador. Side event speakers from delegations of  diverse developing countries addressed questions such as ‘Equity as the gateway to mitigation ambition – Why and how?’, ‘How can equity be operationalised in the negotiations and the 2015 Deal?’ and the role of a rights-based approach to sustainable development.

The moderator, Dr.  Mariama Williams of the South Centre, opened the discussion by remarking that equity is a key issue in the ongoing negotiations. She noted that a high level of frustration and disappointment with the process had led to the walkout from COP 19 of over 800 representatives of NGOs that very day. Williams highlighted that climate change does not affect every one equally – those from countries such as the Philippines, the LDCs, SIDS and African countries are highly vulnerable. Particular groups, such as women, due to existing inequalities between men and women, and Indigenous Peoples, with a long history of marginalization and dispossession, are already suffering from the impacts of climate change as well as from some of the solutions being imposed in response to the climate challenges.  She reviewed that sustainable development as a concept is defined as meeting the needs of the present generation without compromising the needs of the future generation. Hence equity in the context of climate change has multiple dimensions including intergeneration, intrageneration, gender and North and South aspects.

At the international level, Williams said that the UNFCCC recognised that developed countries had contributed to the accumulation of GHG and hence bear historical responsibility. Developing countries who had contributed the least to climate change historically must now bear the disproportionate negative effects. Thus, under the Convention, which is grounded in equity and common but differentiated responsibility, developed countries have the commitment to take the lead in mitigating GHG emissions  and modifying long-term trends so as to protect the climate system and prevent catastrophic climate change. These countries also have the commitment to finance, technology transfer and other means of implementation to support developing countries in adapting to climate change and in transforming their economies to clean and efficient energy pathways.

Mr. Daniel Ortega, Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs, Ecuador, led off the panel discussion by stating that equity is not a mathematical formula, rather it is a political definition in which the implementation of the principle of CBDR should be ensured without affecting the main priority of poverty eradication of developing countries such as Ecuador. When looking at equity in the context of climate change it should not compromise the needs of the people and should not transfer the responsibility to communities in the developing world. There should be a rights-based approach that includes rights to nature which are also included in Ecuador’s Constitution. The Undersecretary further argued that the 2015 climate deal should comprise rights in terms of human rights, poverty eradication and human development, and the rights of mother earth.

Ortega said that the President of Ecuador introduced the concept of net avoided emissions at the 2010 Cancun meeting of the COP as a means of financing the Yasuni Initiative which Ecuador offered as part of its contribution to the global mitigation effort. He said that this was an alternative to the Kyoto Protocol and its market mechanisms which do not reduce emissions that are already in the atmosphere. Hence the essence of the Yasuni Initiative—to leave the oil in the ground. However, while Ecuador would like to do this it needs to be compensated so that it can continue to deal with pressing poverty and other development issues. Ecuador is also supportive of the Daly-Correa Tax (i.e., a small tax on oil exporters to support developing countries). However, in the negotiations there is no opportunity to discuss the sources of finance.

Undersecretary Ortega also flagged the iniquitous situation of the multinational company Chevron which had polluted and created destruction in Ecuador with damages far exceeding that which occurred with Exxon in  Alaska. The communities won the case against Chevron. But then Chevron turned around and sued the government of Ecuador under an international (investment) arbitration tribunal.

Undersecretary Ortega reminded the audience that Ecuador and other Latin American countries champion the right of nature.  He argued that the 2015 deal should have rights and justice at its center.

Ortega added that climate change is not only an environmental issue but also a political problem. But if all (governments, CSOs, academia and others) work together a solution can be found.

Prof. Zou Ji, Deputy Director of the National Center for Climate Change Strategy and International Cooperation in China, in his intervention during the side event, stated that equity as a concept has been there for a long time; it is also mentioned in the IPCC reports. Equity is a normative and a value judgment at the same time; it is very diversified. The basic question for China is how the international climate regime reflects the spirit of equity in terms of equity rights. The other question is: do developing countries have adequate opportunity to move to a low carbon development path?

Prof. Ji said that in history North America and Europe had experienced the high growth curve. Carbon emission levels become lower and lower in developed countries and now others are blaming China while comparing China’s emissions with those of Germany, UK or France. However, China has lower per capita emissions.

Prof. Ji argues that with the urgency of the need to act on climate change, developing countries should not repeat the classic emission trajectory of developed countries to achieve the same development goals. However, this is not easy and is more risky for developing countries. Therefore equity should be elaborated with a focus on an opportunity for low carbon development. There are two pre-conditions here: equity within two groups of people—the most vulnerable and the future generation.

He highlighted that in the negotiations in Warsaw there were three main points that needed to be given emphasis:

1. Historical responsibilities

2. Equity Reference Framework

3. Principles of the Convention

Mr. Rene Orellana, Head of the Delegation of Bolivia, further deepened the discussion on equity in the climate governance by saying that developing countries have concrete demands and needs. He further elaborated that in general when one makes an evaluation of mother earth, the concept and visions of development must be taken into consideration. He also linked it with the ‘Future We Want’ document of the ‘Rio+20’ mentioning that there are interesting elements to discuss with regards to sustainable development and stressed climate change to be included in these discussions.  He said that it was important that we interrogate the tools that  we are using for development in order to better understand in the context of the present and continuing environmental, financial and climate crises. He raised a question about the utilization of concepts and frameworks such as ecosystem services payment and the carbon market. Mr. Orellana called for a broader approach that goes beyond carbon markets. Ultimately, Orellana argues that equity should have the principle of CBDR as its core element. As with Prof. Zou Ji, Mr. Orellana identified four main components of equity:

1. Historical Responsibility

2. Population

3. Poverty

4. National circumstances

Finally, Mr. Orellana concluded that in order to achieve the terms of equity, provision of the means of implementation and adaptation are needed. We also need regeneration and restoration of nature with a new sustainable and also environmental vision.

Mr. Martin Khor, Executive Director of the South Centre, began his intervention by expressing his appreciation to the government of Ecuador for co-organizing the event. He also mentioned that Ecuador is the latest member of the South Centre and this shows another manifestation of the collaboration. Mr. Khor then moved on to discuss a number of issues that were relevant to equity and sustainable development such as the role of technology and technology transfer, the growth of bilateral investment arbitration, controversy over developing countries’ energy and other subsidies designed to outreach modern energy services and to help to transform their economies to a low carbon pathway.

Khor said that criteria for technology assessment under the CTCN should include assessing if the technology is suitable or not before transferring them. However, the CTCN feels that their mandate is only to transfer the technology and countries are responsible for the assessment. He stressed the fact that we have to be careful about transferring the right and suitable technologies and also see if nuclear energy, GMOs and biofuels are also transferred as climate friendly technologies. They need to be climate friendly and at the same time environmentally sound, good and safe for the population and livelihood and also cost effective. Renewable energy is cheaper but is not as cheap as coal – that is the trade-off.

Khor noted that there is a trade-off between economy and the environment. Therefore we need international financing to move to low carbon development.  If a country’s population is 2% of the world but emits 10% of the total CO2 in the atmosphere there will be debtors and creditors.

In order to implement the Convention, we have the Annex I and non-Annex I countries divided. This is due to the reason that the responsibility of reducing emissions by Annex I countries is much higher. In addition they have the obligation of supporting developing countries (non-Annex I) with finance. Moreover, we need to distinguish that loss and damage is not part of adaptation. Governments will have to pay to rehabilitate and rebuild the houses that were lost and damaged. The finance needed for loss and damage was estimated to be $200 billion a year ten years ago and is expected to be much higher now.

With regards to financing, several estimates conclude that at least $600 billion per year is needed for mitigation and $400 billion per year for adaptation, totaling about $1 trillion per year. This is a huge difference from the $100 billion per year by 2020 promised by developed countries for both mitigation and adaptation in Cancun. Even then, as Khor noted, there is still no clarity about the roadmap towards reaching the $100 billion goal.

Khor also informed the audience that even though climate finance is argued to have achieved its goal with the fast start finance initiative, hence signaling an increase in climate finance, ODA has fallen by 6%. This indicates that the money allocated for FSF is not new and additional.

Mr. Khor ended his intervention by pointing to a growing international governance problem which is a threat to both equity and sustainable development. He said MNCs are bent on suing governments who enact climate and health-related reforms. These companies identify a change in regulation as an attack on their rights and as ‘stealing’ their property (expropriation) for which governments in question must compensate these firms. A case in point is that of the Swedish Company Vattenfall now suing the German government because of that government’s decision to withdraw from nuclear power. Khor said that as governments seek to tighten up climate and environmental regulations they will be facing more such suits.

Khor also flagged the issue of unilateral trade measures by developed countries. He pointed out that both China and India are being sued by developed countries for having subsidies for renewable energy.

Ms. Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, Executive Director of the Tebtebba Foundation, and a member of the Philippine Delegation, in charge of the reducing deforestation and degradation (REDD +) negotiations, presented the perspectives of Indigenous Peoples of the Philippines on the equity issue. She stated that we need to address inequality between races and generations. Many of these are exacerbated as well by some of the climate change solutions that are negotiated in the UNFCCC. Tauli-Corpuz said that we need to look into these kinds of inequities under investment agreements, climate negotiations, etc. All of us are aware of the science and how we need to act urgently to tackle the challenges of climate change. However, Annex I countries (developed countries) make lots of excuses such as recession and financial breakdowns. In the meantime indigenous peoples are one of the most vulnerable and are some of the poorest people in the world. In actual reality that is where the richest ecosystem and biodiversity is found and additionally 4,000 languages are spoken by indigenous peoples. Huge hydropower plants that are sometimes done in the name of renewable energies are displacing many of them. We really have to push for the promotion of rights of indigenous peoples. With regards to equity, Tauli-Corpuz also, as with Prof. Zou Ji and Mr. Orellana, flagged four main approaches:

-Ecosystem-based approach

-Human rights-based approach

-Intergenerational  approach

-Intercultural approach

The final intervention was by Ms. Ling Xiao from the youth group, SustainUS. Ms. Xiao reminded the audience of the increasing numbers of natural disasters in the past few years. She argued that the developing world needs technology transfer and developed countries must be willing to transfer sustainable technologies, provide capacity building and share experiences. Ms. Xiao said that climate change has become a serious problem and that there is no time to wait. She gave support to Ecuador’s proposed Net Avoided Emissions to prevent the climate crisis which will help developing countries without contributing to the furtherance of climate change. She pointed out that this can be done through leaving fossil fuels unmined, limiting or stopping deforestation, as well as using renewable energy technologies to pursue development. However, in order to pursue this, the developing countries  need the participation of the developed countries in transferring sustainable technology and to support developing countries in capacity building. Ms. Ling Xiao ended her intervention by pointing out that South-South cooperation in the sharing of best practices is a good way to also help bolster suitable solutions to respond to the threats posed by climate change.

Mahlet Melkie was a Researcher at the South Centre.