EurActiv Logo
EU news & policy debates
- across languages -
Click here for EU news »
EurActiv.com Network

BROWSE ALL SECTIONS

Climate cash debate rages as Doha summit opens

Printer-friendly version
Send by email
Published 26 November 2012, updated 14 December 2012

The EU will not commit to renew climate funding which runs out at the year's end ahead of talks at the Doha climate summit, which opens today (26 November). But new climate aid may be announced in the conference’s second week.  

Development NGOs reacted angrily to an EU statement on 23 November which said only that in Doha, the EU would “discuss with its developing country partners how major flows of EU climate finance can continue in 2013-2014”.  

"If the EU and other developed countries are serious about making climate action a reality for the period 2013-2020, they can't afford to come to Doha empty handed,” Lies Craeynest, Oxfam’s EU policy adviser told EurActiv.

“Vague promises to increase support in developing countries won't help communities who are facing the impacts of climate change now,” she said.

Senior EU officials believe that most member states have factored climate aid into their medium term financial plans and leaders are likely to announce commitments at the conference itself.

“Normally, if it is about money, it is not the senior mandarin who will announce anything but his masters,” the EU’s chief climate negotiator Artur Runge-Metzger told a Brussels roundtable on 16 November.

Such declarations are often synched with the ebb and flow of negotiations.

“It will probably happen in the [conference’s] second week,” Runge-Metzger said, “and I don’t think this will be a pledging exercise, just what is in the drawer at the present point in time and what has been agreed to in the next year and maybe the year after”.

The UK and some other member states reportedly want to launch new initiatives that blend public and private funding sources. “I’m sure a lot of noise will be made about this in Doha,” Runge-Metzger said.

Copenhagen promises

At the Copenhagen climate summit in 2009, developed countries promised to commit $100 billion a year by 2020 for climate mitigation and adaptation, with a $30 billion Fast Start Finance upfront compact for the 2010-2012 period.

The EU coughed up €7.2 billion of this total, but new research published by Oxfam today estimates that just 33% of this money was ‘new’, and only 24% was ‘additional’ to the long-standing promise to provide 0.7% of gross national incomes in overseas aid.

The vast majority of the funds were repackaged from older aid commitments, Oxfam says.

“Obviously, when the whole EU is under austerity protests, this is not exactly the time to be talking about financing,” the UNFCCC secretary general Christiana Figueres told a Green Party-organised meeting at the European Parliament on 15 November.

“However you must admit that it is also completely justified that developing countries are concerned that they don’t have enough information about the commitment of developed countries to ramp up the financial support for the $100 billion promised by 2020,” she said.

New 2015 climate deal

Before financial aid, the EU appears to be prioritising the need to agree a new global climate agreement by 2015 to replace the Kyoto Protocol, which also expires on 1 January 2013.

“Doha must build on the breakthrough we achieved in Durban and make progress in preparation of the 2015 legally binding global climate agreement,” the EU’s Climate Commissioner Connie Hedegaard said.

“Equally important will be agreeing on further measures to reduce emissions so we can stay below a 2°C increase.”

An extension of Kyoto, involving a new round of emissions reductions could be agreed by parties such as the EU, Australia and Ukraine – covering 12-14% of global emissions.

But big developed nations such as the US, Canada, Russia, and Japan will not sign up to a new treaty, partly because they want emerging economies such as China and India to shoulder bigger emissions reduction responsibilities.

Eight more Kyoto years?

There are also divisions within the Kyoto-friendly nations, with the EU proposing an eight-year extension to the protocol and developing world nations favouring a longer deal.    

Figueres called on the EU to resolve the issue, when she addressed the European parliament. “I see a solution there in the making, particularly if the EU comes to Doha with a very concrete proposal for how during their expected eight-year commitment period, they will raise ambitions,” she said.

The UNFCCC was also expecting the EU to make “a very clear statement about the importance of markets” in large-scale and cost-effective climate mitigation, Figueres added.

“We are depending on the EU to come forward,” she said. “The EU holds the answer in its hands.”

Next steps: 
  • November 26-December 7, 2012: COP18 UNFCCC Cimate Summit in Doha
  • 2013-2020: Fund-raising due to begin to capitalise the Green Climate Fund.
  • By Oct. 2014: IPCC to deliver fifth scientific assessment of climate change.
  • 2015: COP17 parties to agree a new legal framework agreement for a second round of emissions reductions under the Kyoto Protocol.
  • 2020: New global climate treaty due to come into force.
Arthur Neslen

COMMENTS

  • Since there is still not one shred of evidence for man made global warming (AGW) and much less to suggest a catastrophic global warming (CAGW), the best message from developed countries to the developing countries would be to say: Foster your development the old fashion way. Trade commodities and services for money on a voluntary basis.
    What the developed countries can and should offer, is a lowering or removing of trade barriers and a sustainable effort to implement stable democracies in the developing countries.

    By :
    Mats Jangdal
    - Posted on :
    26/11/2012
  • Good advice Mat but it won't pay the salaries of that vast army of Climate Challenge consultants and Development Workers spread like ants marching across the land with their message of doom and purporting to improve our carbon footprints through questionnaires. On the ground, so much money has been ill spent in wages and ticking boxes, rather than on real actions.

    By :
    Daye Tucker
    - Posted on :
    26/11/2012
  • I hope we don't spend 100 billion on worthless research. Let's use it do something productive. Like reducing deficits and curing disease.

    By :
    JC
    - Posted on :
    27/11/2012
  • What I miss here is that we are talking about %s and numbers and the environmental effects on the climate change but we often forgot mention its serious public health effects. A reminder before it is too late (= before the conference ends without having any concrete action)

    Which are the main health impacts of climate change?

    1. Increases in heat-related deaths, injury and disability, especially in the elderly, children, pregnant women and those with chronic disease;

    2. Deaths and injuries from flooding, with exacerbated negative consequences in developing countries;

    3. Migration of plants and pollens causing prolonged allergy season and new allergies;

    4. The spread of infectious and vector-borne diseases such as dengue fever, malaria, schistosomiasis, and Lyme disease as a result of warming temperatures at expanding latitudes and elevations;

    5.Increased hazards from sewage and chemical pollution;

    6. Climate-change induced famines and malnutrition;

    7. Exacerbation of water- and food-borne diseases.

    By :
    Zoltán MASSAY-KOSUBEK
    - Posted on :
    02/12/2012
  • Zoltán,
    That will not happen, because all of the climate scare is just that! A climate scare, with the intent to impose taxes and regulations. The claims of an arriving man made climate change with disastrous consequences are flawed and false.

    By :
    Mats Jangdal
    - Posted on :
    02/12/2012
  • If there was no enough scientific evidence about climate change I would refer to the precautionary principle.

    The earth and mankind is too precious to act irresponsibly. We cannot be cautious enough. Even if there is 0,00000001% chance that modern industry is not responsible at all for global warming/climate change - which I can hardly believe - it should not be a cause for inaction. It is better to have fear than be shocked.

    By :
    Zoltán MASSAY-KOSUBEK
    - Posted on :
    03/12/2012
  • We have nothing to fear, but fear itself!

    By :
    Mats Jangdal
    - Posted on :
    03/12/2012
  • I don't think it is about inaction it is about WHAT TYPE of action. It is quite clear that the usual parasites have already captured the bandwagon and already have devalued many so called actions. Biomass and the clash of the three Fs Food, Feed and Fuel demonstrate failure of leadership that can withstand vested interests.

    By :
    Daye Tucker
    - Posted on :
    03/12/2012
UNFCCC COP17 Durban Climate Summit 2011
Background: 

The 'Copenhagen Accord', agreed at in the Danish capital in December 2009, included a pledge by developed countries to raise $100 billion per year by 2020 to help poor countries fight climate change and adapt to its inevitable consequences.

Meeting the following year in Cancún, the 190 nations involved in the UN talks made progress on the establishment of a Green Climate Fund to deliver climate cash to developing countries.

The fund will be governed by a board of 24 members, on which developed and developing countries will be equally represented.

More on this topic

More in this section

Advertising

Videos

Climate & Environment News

Euractiv Sidebar Video Player for use in section aware blocks.

Climate & Environment Promoted

Euractiv Sidebar Video Player for use in section aware blocks.

Advertising

Advertising