Climate vulnerable nations’ frustration at a procedure that is not delivering for all those suffering on the frontline from the climate crisis is turning to anger.
As negotiators gathered in Bonn to lay the floor work with Cop27 in Egypt later this season, a controversial compromise on funding for victims of the climate crisis was back at the fore.
Rewind to last November at the Cop26 in Glasgow. Developing countries demanded a funding facility to assist victims of droughts, floodings, storms and sea-level rise recover. The united states and EU blocked the move and climate vulnerable nations needed to settle for a “dialogue” around the issue.
This week, small island states made their grievances about the dialogue known on its first meeting. As campaigners loudly stated, it hasn’t made the cut around the negotiations’ formal agenda and risks being nothing more than “a talking shop”.
“The Glasgow Dialogue appears to be a one standalone dialogue with no clear destination,” said Michai Robertson with respect to the Alliance of Small Island States (Aosis). They need a mechanism for hard cash to be given to victims of climate disasters and they need it by Cop27. The details can be exercised along the way.
The dialogue isn’t scheduled to end until 2024. Vulnerable nations just can't wait until then.
Humanitarian aid isn't keeping up with rocketing needs. And intensifying climate impacts have held back their economic development in the last two decades. Had it not been of these losses, vulnerable countries would be 20% richer – money that could have been invested in resilient infrastructure, social protection measures and early warning systems to assist societies prepare for future shocks.
In India, where people have been exposed to prolonged deadly heat and devastating pre-monsoon flooding, Skand Agarwal writes the government’s adaptation grants have fallen to some quarter of the 2023-18 levels, hindering local adaptation strategies. While the need for adaptation finance continues to grow, the international community is neglecting to fill the space.
The consequences are very well known. The less action there's to chop emissions and also the less adaptation finance flows to assist communities cope, the higher the humanitarian need is going to be.
Rich countries have repeatedly refused to simply accept liability for his or her historic responsibility in causing the climate crisis. On finance for loss and damage, they have stalled for 3 decades. But how long can this last? The concern is set to dominate this year’s climate talks and vulnerable nations won’t easily be convinced to visit home empty handed once more.
