Will COP 26 be any different?
Charlotte Agniel
In forty years, the Sahel will be completely uninhabitable. Climate change is an augmenting crisis that was recognized on the international stage in the 1980s, yet very few substantial changes have been made to mitigate its effects. Due to the growing crisis, the Conference of Parties (COP) was established as the UN’s Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) decision making body in efforts to limit climate change through concurrent domestic policy (Met office).
This November, the 26th annual Conference of Parties will convene in Glasgow, Scotland to set new emission targets, create future plans, and review whether previous goals are being met. This conference is also vital in bridging a gap between the UN and climate change movement, as these climate conferences have been criticized for the lack of transparency between the conference and the public as well as commitments regularly going unfilled.
The Paris Climate Accord is the most influential agreement that has come from COP. This international treaty served as a legally binding initiative to slow global warming to pre-industrial temperatures, using carbon emission targets generated from the 1990s. The main goal of this agreement is to limit warming to below 2 degrees Celsius—ideally 1.5 degrees (Briggs, 2021). One regulation in the agreement is a five-year checkpoint to re-evaluate admission targets and warming levels, and because the Paris Climate Accord was passed by COP 21, COP 26 will evaluate its effectiveness. The Paris Accord may appear commendable in committing to specific climate change reductions, but with our current progress, global warming is set to increase from 2 to 2.7 degrees celsius from 2016 to 2030, as nations have failed to hold up their end of the bargain and change energy policies (UNFCCC, 2015). There has been a growing disconnect between the climate change movements, academic sentiment, and the UN representatives, as COP becomes a source of political tensions rather than climate mitigation. It is projected that by 2030, the Earth will have warmed by 2.7 degrees since 2016, nearly double the COP goal of 1.5 degrees Celsius.
Although the Paris Agreement has proved more significant than the Kyoto Protocol of 1997, it lacks accountability as seen with the US withdrawal in 2017 (Briggs, 2021). The US rejoined the agreement in time for COP 26, but it sets a precedent that a major world power is not in firm support of the agreement’s goals. COP 26 needs to open the eyes of the international community that global pacts are not enough to mitigate climate change; new forms of accountability need to be solidified at the conference. In the move to end coal and set new emission targets, countries attending the conference need to commit to setting specific domestic policies to curb global warming.
But while much of the developed world has started to abandon coal, many developing nations are still dependent on coal as a source of both energy and employment. COP 26 should put a primary focus on the move to renewable and clean energy sources, following the lead of more progressive countries such as Sweden and Costa Rica (Climate Council). This would create a concrete plan for the elimination of coal reliance, rather than making commitments to decreasing emissions.
The main hurdle in achieving the many ambitious goals of this conference is climate finance. Political leaders and representatives of wealthy nations promised to fund developing nations’ policies to limit greenhouse gas emissions through the Green Climate Fund with $100 billion by 2020 (CPI, 2020). In 2021, these nations have only pooled about $80 billion, a number dwarfed by the cost of a move to renewable energy, which stands at around $73 trillion in order to be accomplished by 2050 (Marcaci). COP 26 will be an outlet to hold these wealthy powers accountable, as well as a final opportunity for these countries to reach their target or set new standards. These standards need to be re-evaluated in COP 26, with a focus on main domestic emitters, such as strengthening corporate emission caps beyond “cap and trade” policies. Combatting warming through the finance sector cannot depend solely on the Green Climate Fund, but must also work to defund the industries that have put us in this position to begin with—fossil fuel and big oil industries. COP 26 should create incentives or plans for further decarbonizing efforts, funded by wealthy nations.
The US, Canada, Greece, Australia, France, and Japan were the first nations to make a pledge to compile these funds in hope to influence other wealthy nations to follow. But these countries did not make a binding agreement, so COP 26 will examine whether the commitment to reaching the $100 billion target by 2020 will be extended and expanded—both in terms of time to reach it and the monetary goal itself (Timperley, 2021). As of now, France and Japan are the only countries that have met their goal in climate finance, while the US continues to fall behind on its commitment. There is not only a lack of urgency in the US domestic sphere, but also a lack of multilateral power on the international level. The US has been criticized for not providing a fair share to the climate fund, funding less than 20% of the international pool while producing a major percentage of global emissions. Accounting for wealth, population, and past emissions the US contribution should make up about 40% of the climate finance pool, which needs to be addressed at COP 26 to, at least, symbolically push US representatives to make firmer commitments (Timperley, 2021).
Alongside the US, China must also be held accountable on the international stage at COP 26. China has the biggest domestic dependence on coal out of any country in the world and is currently the largest emitter of greenhouse gases. Xi Jinping has begun to make energy changes in light of climate change, but similar to the commitments from COP, these changes are not happening fast enough or with a degree of severity to match the crisis (Ni, 2021). With a common sentiment in China that coal extraction must be reduced, COP 26 should provide systems of accountability within China, rather than include China as a recipient of Climate Finance as they have enough institutional funding on the domestic level (Ni, 2021). China along with many developing countries are in the process of increasing their manufacturing and infrastructure which will require energy sources which make it vital for COP 26 to change the energy standards immediately before they follow down the path of developed countries that caused the amount of warming we are suffering from today. COP 26 needs to solidify domestic action in targeting energy sources to wean countries off of coal dependence so that we are able to reach carbon neutrality by 2050—rather than continue on as another empty climate promise.
COP 26 is also expected to include major public opinion and involve the growing Youth Climate Movement. Since the beginning of the Conference of Parties in 1992, the effects of social movements and lobbying in pushing environmental policies on the international level has increased alongside the growing climate crisis. COP 26 is expected to ignite much of the youth voice as well as spur other climate activists who had less social power during the COVID-19 pandemic into action (Derler, 2020). The Youth Climate movement is leading the charge in support for renewables, lobbying policy leaders and gaining civic traction on a global level. Most notably, Mitzi Jonelle Tan in the Philippines is leading a movement for systemic change, especially with a focus on the energy grid in industrializing nations which needs to be examined at COP 26 (Fonbuena, 2021). This puts pressure on the economic skew of these policies, as they often target major corporations that fuel most countries’ economies; but this financial relationship needs to be sacrificed for the stability of the climate.
The UN has often been criticized for lacking enforcement power, and though this may not be a genocide or famine, the climate crisis is quickly becoming a humanitarian issue. It is clear that commitments are not doing enough in the race against global warming. COP 26 needs to challenge major emitters, coming to terms with the fact that most emissions are from fuel and infrastructure (Taylor, 2019). The energy consumption in these industries needs to be completely converted towards sustainability, and these sectors need to hold the primary focus at COP 26. The main driver of global warming is Carbon Dioxide, and currently “big oil” is accounting for about a third of these emissions (Talyor, 2019). COP 26 needs to ensure that major companies such as Chevron, Exxon, BP, and Shell, hold less power on the international stage. Previous COPs have put most of the responsibility on the individual or domestic level, leaving countries with too much leeway in changing energy policies. COP 26 needs to hold countries—that still rely heavily on these companies—accountable. That will be the difference between an uninhabitable and a habitable planet.
Works cited:
“11 Countries Leading the Charge on Renewable Energy.” Climate Council, 13 Jan. 2019, https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/11-countries-leading-the-charge-on-renewable-energy/.
Briggs, Helen. “Why Is the Paris Climate Agreement Important for COP26?” BBC News, BBC, 25 Oct. 2021, https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-35073297.
“COP 26 and Investor Initiatives: Climate Change.” PRI, 2021, https://www.unpri.org/sustainability-issues/climate-change/cop-26-and-investor-initiatives.
Derler , Zak. “The Youth at the Heart of COP25.” Climate Home News, Climate Home, 17 Jan. 2020, https://www.climatechangenews.com/2020/01/17/youth-heart-cop25/.
Fonbuena, Carmela. “Philippines' Youth Call for Systemic Change at Climate Protest.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 24 Sept. 2021, https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2021/sep/24/philippines-youth-call-for-systemic-change-at-climate-protest.
“History of the UN Seventieth Anniversary.” United Nations, United Nations, 2015, https://www.un.org/un70/en/content/history/index.html.
Marcacci, Silvio. “Renewable Energy Prices Hit Record Lows: How Can Utilities Benefit from Unstoppable Solar and Wind?” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 20 Jan. 2020, https://www.forbes.com/sites/energyinnovation/2020/01/21/renewable-energy-prices-hit-record-lows-how-can-utilities-benefit-from-unstoppable-solar-and-wind/?sh=40badded2c84.
“More about Climate Finance at CPI.” Climate Policy Initiative, 1 Aug. 2020, https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/the-programs/climate-finance/more-about-climate-finance-at-cpi/.
Ni, Vincent. “China, Coal and COP26: Can the World's Biggest Emitter Give up Its Dirty Habit?” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 16 Oct. 2021, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/16/china-coal-and-cop26-can-the-worlds-biggest-emitter-give-up-its-dirty-habit.
“The Paris Agreement.” Unfccc.int, United Nations, Dec. 2015, https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement.
Taylor , Matthew, and Jonathan Watts . “Revealed: The 20 Firms behind a Third of All Carbon Emissions.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 9 Oct. 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/09/revealed-20-firms-third-carbon-emissions.
Timperley, Jocelyn. “The Broken $100-Billion Promise of Climate Finance - and How to Fix It.” Nature News, Nature Publishing Group, 20 Oct. 2021, https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02846-3.
“What Is Cop?” Met Office, 2016, https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/weather/climate/cop/what-is-cop.