COP26 refers to the 26th UN climate change Conference of the Parties that was held in Glasgow in November this year. The Conference of the Parties happens once a year and is a summit that brings together governments, organisations, companies and individuals to help decide on actions to tackle the climate crisis that work towards the aims set by the 2015 Paris Agreement [1] and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) [2].
This year, COP was particularly important as many were excited by the opportunity to instigate real action, following the important recent IPCC report [3], strong scientific understanding, and increased public and political engagement in the climate crisis. It was a chance for countries to make a strong stance in the fight against the climate crisis and lay down some important pledges to initiate a new level of climate action that needs to be implemented to reduce global warming and the negative impacts of climate change. And, among all the negatives of the COVID19 global pandemic, there was an opportunity for countries and communities to build back economies and living in a sustainable way. Yet, to many, COP26 was a huge disappointment involving weak decisions with much left to be done.
Here are the top positive takeaways from COP26, as well as the key points that left many viewing COP26 as a failure:
POSITIVE TAKEAWAY 1: The ‘Glasgow Climate Pact’
The ‘Glasgow Climate Pact’ was adopted by 197 parties at COP26 and is an international climate treaty that aims to build on the 2015 Paris Agreement. The pact sets out new ambitions to reduce greenhouse emissions, such as establishing a new global carbon market and phasing down coal as an energy source. This is the first ever global agreement that unequivocally states for countries to cut emissions from fossil fuels. The new global carbon market includes standardised rules which will increase transparency in carbon trading and ultimately encourage investments in low-carbon technology. Furthermore, phasing down coal is important to reduce emissions, but notice ‘phasing down’ rather than ‘phasing out’. This phrasing was suggested from China and India who still feel they need coal to build back their economies following COVID-19 and lift people out of poverty. This comes as a disappointment to many as it suggests national leaders are still not ready to fully prioritise the climate crisis in the way it needs to be, with counter arguments making the reasonable point that developed countries had the chance to utilise coal and so why shouldn’t countries that need to now be able to have the same opportunities.
POSITIVE TAKEAWAY 2: The ‘Glasgow Leaders’ Declaration on Forests and Land Use’
The ‘Declaration on Forests and Land Use’ was made by over 100 endorsers to commit to stopping deforestation by 2030. These leaders come from governments, financial institutes and global companies, and in total cover over 90% of the world’s forests. This sets an important precedent moving forward to tackle one of the most important problems for both the climate and biodiversity crises, and shows that leaders understand the importance of forests, especially as a nature-based solution. As part of the declaration, the role of indigenous communities in helping protect forests was recognised, which is a key development from previous global agreements.
Pacts and declarations are more than just words, which is a good place to start. But it is quite a way off from what we need and what many of us were hoping for.
FAILURE 1: The US and EU blocked the set-up of disaster funding for low-income and developing countries
Rich countries have benefitted hugely off the back of fossil fuels over the past decades and are also the major producers of emissions. Therefore, an important part of tackling the climate crisis is for these rich countries to take responsibility for the impacts they have made. Many of the severe impacts of climate change are felt most strongly in low-income countries that are more vulnerable. One-way COP26 sought to help tackle this was for rich countries to provide funding for these poorer countries to cope with the ‘loss and damage’ caused by climate change. However, the US and EU blocked the establishment of this funding as they did not want to become liable for the huge potential cost of climate-related damages.
FAILURE 2: Lack of real representation
On the surface it seemed as if this COP provided a platform for increased representation where groups where able to speak up, for example indigenous peoples and youth organisations, and offer their opinions, concerns, priorities and solutions. But in reality, there is still much more to be done. The real actions that come out of COP summits are the pledges, and these were still only made by the people who created this crisis in the first place. Transformational change will not happen while these people are the drivers of decision-making. When we get to a point where the people who need to, and have been fighting most to, tackle this climate crisis are at the table contributing and shaping decisions, then maybe we will be at a point where summits such as COP26 end with strong and significant actions.
FAILURE 3: Lots of words but very few actions
COP26 was full of excitement and anticipation and was left pretty much as just that: words and speculation. Before and throughout the summit there was lots of talking, but actually very little of it was put into action. There was talk of banning fossil fuels, but in the end, coal is only being ‘phased down’. There was eagerness and discussion regarding ‘loss and damage’ funding, but that ended up being blocked. Ultimately, there was actually very little action – in the form of written pledges and pacts – at all. Thus, there is a lot more that needs to be done following from COP26 in order to meet the targets set out in Paris, and importantly the targets that are vital for the future of this planet.
So, there we have it, a summary of all the important outcomes of COP26 you need to know about. Ultimately, conferences such as these are improving in their outcomes, but they are not improving enough or quickly enough, especially not if we want to limit global warming to 1.5 or even 2 °C.
As 2021 draws to a close, maybe it is time to think more intently about what it is we have to do to fight this crisis and how to bring about systematic change. COP26 has demonstrated that if left purely up to national governments, we won’t stand much of a chance. They show very little urgency and cannot seem to fully, if at all, prioritise the climate crisis over economic agendas. Instead, it looks like it will be down to young people, indigenous groups, vulnerable populations – people with things to lose – to make meaningful changes. Let’s hope that 2022 can be the pivotal moment; the year that makes the difference and sets us on a new and improved path.
[1] https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/paris-agreement
Picture: https://ukcop26.org
Abi Jones 