COP17 post-mortem

long after its conclusion.
The ministry’s feedback meeting, which was held in Harare, convened youth groups, the civic society, business, environmentalists and other interested parties.
Its main objective was to examine the previous Conference of Parties’ 17th meeting or COP17 long concluded with less-than-expected outcomes three months ago in Durban, South Africa. COP is an initiative under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, which resulted in the signing of an international and only legally binding treaty committing developed nations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions — the Kyoto Protocol. Negotiations have been held under the Protocol since 2005 with little success.
A common position agreed at the meeting was that the COP17 outcome lacked ambition, and fell short of expectations, from both the Zimbabwean and African viewpoint. Contrary to expectations, Durban failed to secure commitments for an extension of Kyoto post-2012, but instead gained promises to commit under a new treaty involving developing nations, which would only become effective in 2020.
A fund without funds, the Climate Change Fund was established, which does not make things better for mitigation and adaptation action for vulnerable countries, at least not in the short to medium term. National climate change co-ordinator in the Ministry of Environment Mr Washington Zhakata gave a history of the Kyoto Protocol saying it aimed to stabilise growth of greenhouse gas emissions, and prevent the world’s climate system from changing in a destructive manner.
Among other issues, he also highlighted the outcomes from Durban against expectations, which include an extension of the Kyoto Protocol beyond 2012. However, Mr Zhakata’s presentation was mostly a narrative of events now a matter of public knowledge, the contentious outcome from Durban, which has been widely covered in both the local and international media.
It failed to provide essential insights into submissions that Zimbabwe made at Durban, if at all, and whether the country was any better than it was before COP17. Nor did the presentation offer a satisfactory roadmap for designing specific future local responses to climate change, as the country waits for another international summit. Apart from the global agreements reached at Durban, the people want to know whether Zimbabwe emerged from the conference richer.
Mr Zhakata was short on this except for illustrating the global perspective to the talks, and assuring more talks were coming. Perhaps the most forward-looking submissions at the feedback meeting came from Mr Shepherd Zvigadza, representative from the local Climate Change Working Group (CCWG), a coalition of several NGOs with keen interest on the environment and climate change. He said the civic society recommended that when Zimbabwe attends such meetings as COP, it should not return empty-handed riding on fragile global commitments. Instead, the country should be able to come back with a concrete plan on local adaptation and mitigation action. Furthermore, as a mitigatory measure, Zimbabwe could consider setting up an innovative local Climate Fund bankrolled by Government and the private sector.
“Now it is essential that civic society and social movements regroup to reconsider strategies to curb global warming,” said Mr Zvigadza.
“It is up to us to shift outcomes from those that preserve the status quo (polluters) to those that are good for the people and the environment. What needs to be done is clear; global emissions need to be reduced, and quickly.”
He said faith and trust between Government and the civic society was lacking, which weakens Zimbabwe’s national position at international climate change talks, and even in co-ordinating local response strategies. Overall, the civic society organisations were not particularly happy with the Durban outcome because it lacked balance, expected ambition, equity and justice. Also, decisions were very high risk, and “based on political choice rather than science”.
The CSOs observed that while an agreement was reached on a second commitment period for Kyoto, it excluded major polluting countries like Japan, Canada and Russia.
There is need for civic society to put more pressure on such countries to fully commit to the Protocol, Mr Zvigadza said. A representative from the Business Council for Sustainable Development Zimbabwe, Mr Dingane Sithole, said business should incorporate climate adaptation in its long-term strategies, as well as partnering Government in similar mitigatory actions. He said local businesses could not operate in failing communities, hence the need to adopt eco-friendly policies that increase energy efficiency and lower the country’s carbon and water footprint.
“Business should always understand that greener production makes business sense and should act as a lever for investment,” Mr Sithole said.
“Climate investments should also have a greater focus on adaptation.”
For business, Durban presented an opportunity for understanding climate finance and learning new ways of doing business the green way.
Mr Sika Ahawo of the Development Reality Institute Africa in Harare, representing the youth, said Zimbabwean youths had increased activity on climate change issues.
During Durban, the Zimbabwe Youth Initiative launched COP@Home, a project aimed at increasing accessibility of the COP negotiations to youths and NGOs unable to be at the conference venue.
“The purpose of the project activities is to raise awareness and knowledge around climate change and the negotiations, and to connect the youth in Zimbabwe with youth from other countries also using a similar platform,” said Ahawo.
However, the youth believed Durban’s outcome was not enough. They said: “Durban was exhausting.”
They questioned the endemic incremental nature of the climate change talks, and that even after lengthy talks, the outcomes were not fulfilling. Ahawo said Durban “left a feeling of too little too late”.
God is faithful.