This year’s Bonn Climate Change Conference set the agenda for COP28. FriEnt, IDOS, IA and Brot für die WElt invited experts from the global South and North to a side event. Together they gave the negotiators homework: Measures to mitigate climate change must take into account the potential for conflict.
The Bonn Climate Change Conference has come to a close. Indeed, every year, climate specialists, negotiators and CSOs meet for 2 weeks to discuss and prepare the agenda for the following COP, taking place at the end of the year.
Amid tensions around the near failure to agree on an agenda for COP28, the Transitional Committee (TC) co-chaired the Second Glasgow Dialog on loss and damage. The discussions seemed to focus more on the funding arrangements than the fund itself. It remains critical to discuss who will pay into the fund, the scope, who will be the beneficiaries and how communities affected by the double burden of climate change and conflict will be involved.
In view of these discussions, together with FriEnt, International Alert, IDOS and Brot für die Welt we hosted a timely discussion on how to ensure the link between the loss and damage fund and fragile and conflict affected states (FCAS) is made clear.
A wide array of experts joined us on the panel, starting with Jahan Rowshan Moni (ALRD) and Mohamed S. Conteh (Sierra Leone Network on Right to Food) , respectively dealing with cases of loss and damage in Bangladesh and Sierra Leone. Be it climate induced migration or sea levels rising – the call remains the same: the urgent need for transparent, inclusive and conflict sensitive management mechanisms of the fund – ensuring the most at risk are supported and aggravation of societal devides, further marginalisation and structural violence is prevented.
Moving away from top down funding with locally led projects is key
From a policy perspective, Saleemul Huq (International Center for Climate Change and Development) echoed their concerns by emphasising that no one was prepared for the consequences of this new era of climate induced irreversible losses and damages. Deploying funds will not help unless local communities are involved. On the contrary, this leads to the risk of maladaptation, which weakens even further the populations resilience. Moving away from top down funding with locally led projects is key.
Sinead Walsh (Departement of foreign affairs, Ireland) emphasised that Ireland’s (that shares a seat with Germany on the TC) main concern is about who loss and damage finance is reaching and how can we make sure in practice the most vulnerable are reached? Their key priority on the TC is including fragile and conflict affected settings into the final recommendations.
Hanspeter Schwär (BMZ) highlighted that indeed local communities hold the solutions within and that they must be part of the discussions that will improve their livelihoods. Peace and conflict impact assessments ex ante and conflict sensitivity throughout the project cycle are standard procedures for German development cooperation in fragile and conflict affected contexts. Mainstreaming “Do no harm” into the climate finance mechanisms helps to reduce risks of triggering conflict and strengthens connectivity.
We are entering an era of loss and damage
The conclusions from the discussion were clear – more money is needed to compensate for losses and damages that does not trigger conflict and violence. Available money is not yet reaching those that need it the most. We are entering an era of losses and damages where mitigation is the new adaptation and adaptation is all about minimising loss and damage. “Vulnerability” and “exclusion” was on everyone’s lips, but will decision makers take responsibility and find common ground?
Much homework has been given to decision makers. The TC needs to hear the call from those most affected. They have to make sure their recommendations to COP28 are tailored to local structures and needs in a conflict sensitive manner. No country can be left behind if we are to build a sustainable and peaceful world.
