Climate summit starts, war rages
The states of Africa face the next disappointment
A guest contribution by Anja Berretta, Nairobi
11/06/2022, 08:45 am
No continent has contributed so little to climate change and is feeling it as badly as Africa. The African governments therefore want to finally see action from the industrialized countries at the climate summit in Egypt. But because of the war in Europe, they are likely to be disappointed again.
This year’s UN climate conference (COP27) in Egypt begins on Sunday under the most difficult of circumstances: Rising food and energy prices worldwide as a result of the Russian war in Ukraine, food insecurity in many countries and the aftermath of the devastating pandemic seem to leave little room for ambitious climate protection to let.
Nevertheless, African countries have high expectations of the COP27, which is also known as the African climate conference because of the venue. The Egyptian hosts speak of an implementation summit to make it clear that climate change can only be stopped with deeds and not with words.
From the point of view of the African states, there is a need for action, particularly in the area of climate finance. Since 2020, developing and emerging countries should be supported annually with 100 billion US dollars in order to be able to achieve the goals of the Paris climate agreement. The OEECD estimates that only 80 percent have been mobilized so far. The financing gap is now a symbol of the lack of solidarity in the industrialized countries, which are largely responsible for the climate crisis.
Devastating climate costs for a poor continent
It is difficult to put a figure on how much money is actually needed on the African continent to achieve the climate protection goals. The UN Economic Commission for Africa estimates the figure at more than a trillion dollars. But it is not only about increasing financial commitments, but also about realigning the financial architecture towards more transparency and improved incentive mechanisms for private investments. Of course, the African countries also have the latter in their own hands by creating better framework conditions for the private sector.
African countries are disproportionately affected by the consequences of climate change and are therefore demanding that adaptation to climate change receive more attention and support in the future. The damage caused by climate change is already costing these countries an average of five percent of their gross domestic product. Adaptation measures could minimize economic damage.
The most important adaptation measures include, for example, early warning systems for extreme weather events, reforestation of mangrove forests near the coast to prevent flooding or, and this is particularly relevant for Africa, climate-resistant agriculture. From the point of view of the continent’s climate diplomats, the financing of adaptation mechanisms should therefore be improved and the topic should be given just as much priority as the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in international climate negotiations.
But what is to be done when the consequences of climate change have progressed so far that people can no longer adapt to the changed living conditions, or the necessary technical and financial resources are not available? In Article 8 of the Paris Climate Agreement, all contracting parties undertake to provide support in the event of this type of loss and damage.
So far, however, it is unclear how Article 8 can be applied in practice. For a long time, African countries have been demanding that things finally become more specific, for example by setting up a separate fund or a more specific set of rules for defining permanent climate damage. The industrialized countries, on the other hand, prefer to remain vague. The European Union, for example, declared non-bindingly that it was trying to find effective solutions to the issue.
Why should Africa of all places cut emissions?
On the other hand, the commitments made by many industrialized countries at the last COP26 to become climate-neutral in the coming decades were more binding. The African continent, on the other hand, is only responsible for four percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, which is why the obligation to reduce greenhouse gases is primarily seen as being in the hands of industrialized countries. Some African heads of state react with increasing incomprehension when they are asked for ever more ambitious climate targets, while 600 million people, half the population, still have no access to electricity.
The importance of natural gas for the industrialization of the continent has gained prominence in the public debate – countries like Senegal, Nigeria, Angola or Mozambique have untapped reserves – and in June this year the African Union spoke out in favor of using gas as necessary bridge technology.
This position is not uncontroversial in Africa, but the credibility of the energy transition has suffered as a result of the current energy crisis and the associated return to fossil fuels in many industrialized countries, which is unlikely to be particularly helpful for international climate diplomacy. In addition, the debate about the importance of natural gas in Africa’s future energy mix threatens to overshadow negotiations on more effective climate protection measures.
Against this background, it seems unlikely that the high expectations of African countries will be met. Due to rising global inflation and the associated price increases and high lending rates, the prospects for additional climate finance are limited. However, if we succeed in conducting the debate about the common but differentiated responsibility for mitigating climate change in a pragmatic manner and if the industrialized countries reward Africa’s efforts to adapt to climate change more than in the past, progress could be made selectively.
Anja Berretta has headed the regional program on energy security and climate change in Sub-Saharan Africa in Kenya for the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung (KAS) since January 2019.