This is one of the key challenges of COP27, the annual meeting of the international community fighting global warming. Will developing countries make progress on the sensitive issue of loss and damage? In Glasgow last year, the developed countries managed to block any significant progress on this sensitive matter.
At the start of the COP in Sharm el-Sheikh (Egypt), franceinfo explains what this term means.
What does this expression mean?
This topic, also known as “loss and damage”, is as old as the climate negotiations, it was first mentioned at the Rio de Janeiro summit in 1991. It is becoming increasingly important as the effects of global warming become noticeable. This term describes “the consequences that we cannot avoid, even if we do everything we can to reduce global warming and adapt to it,” explains Fanny Petitbon, advocacy manager of the Care France association, to franceinfo.
More concretely, it is the damage already caused by extreme events such as the recent terrible floods in Pakistan or the heat wave that hit Europe this summer, and by more progressive phenomena such as sea level rise, which threatens certain vanishing island states. This damage can be material, human, cultural and psychological.
“These are irreplaceable things,” continues franceinfo Azeez Abubakar, an activist with the Loss and Damage Youth Coalition. You can’t replace someone who has died as a result of climate change, you can’t replace lost health or a vanished culture.” The young Nigerian explains that in the poorest countries, for lack of resources, not even the material infrastructure can be replaced.
In a report published on October 24, 23 NGOs, including Care France, estimate that since 1991, 97% of people affected by “extreme climate events have stayed in developing countries”, ie 189 million people a year. . A recent study by the V20* group, which brings together 58 “vulnerable” countries, puts the cost of the climate crisis for their economies at 525 billion dollars (around 525 billion euros) over 20 years.
Why is this a sensitive topic?
Because behind this expression hides a central question: Who is responsible for global warming and who should pay? Least developed countries are the hardest hit by these “losses and damages,” while being the least prepared to face them and least responsible for global warming. “These damages are caused by the increase in greenhouse gas emissions, for which the countries of the North are mainly responsible,” reminds franceinfo Sidra Adil, a researcher at the Collective for Social Science Research in Karachi (Pakistan), who, however, does not want to. does not exonerate his government for the lack of measures to deal with the risk of flooding. Since the start of the Industrial Revolution, North America, Europe and Australia are responsible for 63% of CO2 emissions, the main greenhouse gas, compared to 3% for the African continent or 0.28% for Pakistan, according to data from Our World in Data* -Platform.
Based on this observation, the most vulnerable countries, especially the small island states, are calling for the establishment of a compensation mechanism. In their view, this should be separated from the means already available for adaptation or reduction of emissions. “The UN system today has money to put in solar panels to upgrade your home (not enough of course) but it has no money for people who are losing their homes. To someone who is drowning, we say, ‘We can’t help you now, but if you survive, we’ll help you prepare for the next disaster,'” explains the specialist website Carbon Brief * Harjeet Singh, expert at the Climate Action Network .
This demand is currently encountering reticence in the countries of the north. “The question of financing has always been a big taboo. The big polluting countries do not want to be taken to court if they admit responsibility,” puts Inès Bakhtaoui, Associate Researcher at the Stockholm Environment Institute, in context. In 2015, the term “loss and damage” finds a place in the Paris Convention, in Article 8. But the text accompanying the Convention immediately specifies, in paragraph 51, that this famous Article 8 “does not imply liability or give rise to compensation”.
Aside from this desire not to be blamed for the problem, developed countries have had another argument so far. “They didn’t want to hear about it because they said we could still avoid getting there, that we could limit global warming and adapt to it,” Inès Bakhtaoui continues. We now know that we are lagging behind on these goals, so the issue of claims management is coming up more and more.” Of all the COPs since 2015, Care France’s Fanny Petitbon “has never seen so much media and political interest in this issue”.
What advanced solutions are there?
Several solutions have been proposed from COP to COP to finance these “losses and damages”. “Northern countries say these are colossal sums that they cannot ‘sell’ to their fellow citizens. In September, for example, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called for taxing “the extraordinary profits of companies that produce fossil fuels” — coal, oil and gas, the burning of which is the main cause of global warming — in order to redirect them “particularly” to countries suffering losses and damage from the climate crisis”. Fanny Petitbon also mentions the possibility of taxing emissions from air and sea transport, introducing a levy on financial transactions or even imposing a debt moratorium for countries affected by a climate catastrophe.
What is France’s position?
“France has an open position on this issue, but we must agree on what is most effective,” the Elysée said ahead of Emmanuel Macron’s visit to Sharm el-Sheikh. Apparently, Paris wants to move forward on this issue, but without going so far as to approve a new financing mechanism, arguing that money available in other funds is not being fully used. France prefers to rely on early warning devices or “insurance solutions”, a file examined with Germany. Finally, the advisors to the President of the Republic consider the question of whether to “automatically blame the developed countries for climate catastrophes” as “complex”.
Emmanuel Macron on Monday’s podium considered it “a fair debate” and saluted his counterparts who raised the issue. However, he did not advocate a new financial mechanism, referring to “a group of senior wise men” formed with Barbados Prime Minister Mia Mottley to find “innovative financing”.
What can we expect from COP27 on this dossier?
Concrete progress has been made in recent months, despite the failure of Glasgow, where rich countries blocked the proposal to create a financing mechanism. Scotland, soon followed by Wallonia and Denmark, was the first entity to pledge financial aid for loss and damage. In Sharm el-Sheikh, the countries of the South won their first victory on Sunday November 6th. An item was added to the official conference agenda to “discuss matters related to funding arrangements in response to loss and damage associated with the adverse effects of climate change, including a focus on loss and damage management”.
However, our interlocutors are not optimistic about the opening of the negotiations. “The developed countries will try to save hot meals, humanitarian aid, the early warning system and insurance mechanisms,” predicts Fanny Petitbon. In Karachi, Sidra Adil, unable to travel to Egypt due to lack of a visa, is not expecting much from an event where decisions are “non-binding” and the most affected communities are weakly represented. The researcher believes that developed countries are unjustly ignoring the issue: “If Pakistan or Bangladesh are hit, refugees will literally pour into the countries of the North.” For Azeez Abubakar of the Loss and Damage Youth Coalition, developed countries “need to get out of their bubble and take care of people in other countries.” At the invitation of franceinfo on Monday November 7, Senegal President Macky Sall warned: “If nothing is done, we will leave Sharm el-Sheikh with a taste of unfinished business.”
* Links with an asterisk are in English.