No cop out: why COP27 wasn’t a complete failure
There may have been big hopes for COP27, and it may not have delivered on everything, but the sustainability summit wasn't a complete write-off. In fact, there were many small victories over those two weeks of climate chat. Find out what happened and our thoughts in our COP27 roundup post.
Yes, there were big hopes. And no, COP27 exactly didn’t deliver on everything. However, the narrative that last month’s key climate summit in Sharm el-Sheik was a total failure actually ignores the many small victories won between 6-20 November.
Although the conference didn’t live up to COP26, which we thought was rather promising, we shouldn’t forget that this year’s summit was never going to be the game-changing event that everyone wanted. That’s because world leaders are currently focused on the political and economic turmoil exacerbated by the war in Ukraine. Thanks again for that, Vlad.
With soaring energy prices and now the threat of winter blackouts, many countries have been understandably (albeit frustratingly) prioritising energy security above sustainability at the current time. Many European nations have been hunting for new oil and gas resources in Africa. And some have even turned back to dirty coal as a temporary measure to keep homes warm.
Consequently, this year’s COP needs to be judged within this broader context. Whilst we’re all incredibly frustrated that targets set at Paris in 2015 will probably be missed, we can’t ignore the fact that Joe and Jo public are currently struggling to pay their energy bills.
So, with that in mind, let’s focus on what was actually achieved at COP27 rather than dwelling on the doomsters decrying the summit’s denouement.
The positives
The gargantuan good news from COP27 was the surprising agreement to create a loss and damage fund, which will compensate developing counties harmed by climate change. This was decided at the fifty-ninth minute of the eleventh hour after delegates extended their stay.
This unexpected development will bring smiles to faces in Somalia, where more than seven million people are suffering due to drought, and in Pakistan, where floods on a biblical scale caused billions of dollars worth of damage and claimed well over a thousand lives earlier this year.
The amazing thing about this landmark agreement is that the US climate envoy, John Kerry, actually opposed such a fund at the beginning of the conference. The Americans were worried that it would lead to a whole host of legal claims against the West for emissions in years gone by. The European Union was therefore sceptical, too.
However, momentum shifted when Scotland - God bless the bonnie Scots - agreed to make a voluntary contribution to such a fund, which supported similar commitments already made by the Danes, Australians and Kiwis. An impressive $244 million had been raised by the time COP27 closed. Pats on the back all round.
There were other signs of progress at the summit, too. China and the United States, whose relationship has long been frostier than a reindeer’s coldest bits, finally reopened their conversation on beating climate change. Top of the agenda was how to help four billion people living in the most vulnerable communities to adapt to climate challenges by the end of the decade.
Delegates at COP27 also agreed to develop a framework for a ‘Global Goal on Adaption’. After all, if we can’t mitigate the worst of rising global temperatures then we’ll all have to adapt to our new reality, instead.
Finally, after being dubbed the ‘implementation COP’, Sharm el-Sheik did step closer to fulfilling agreements made in Glasgow. For example, there was work towards an agreement on carbon markets. We also saw ‘coalitions of the willing’ (countries that want to move faster on specific issues) in action for the first time: a group that included Australia, Egypt and China committed to control methane as a priority.
The negatives
The big problem with COP27, however, was that it failed to deliver new commitments to reduce emissions. And with the window of opportunity to limit temperature rises to 1.5C closing faster than a mousetrap, this was indeed a massive disappointment. Delegates didn’t even ramp up their language over the use of fossil fuels. Sigh.
At COP26, big polluters like India and China seemed more prepared to cut back their oil and coal consumption. However, getting them to make firm commitments is tricky because they believe that Western countries, who experienced their industrial revolutions first, should do more instead of lecturing others. After all, the West are responsible for the lion’s share of past emissions.
However, looking to the past doesn’t really help humanity in the present, or indeed the future. This leaves experts like Jorge Gastelumendi, the Director of Global Policy at the Atlantic Council, wondering whether the fact that China and India won’t have to pay into the aforementioned loss and damage fund - they are, after all, developing nations - could be used as leverage to secure firmer commitments on emissions.
How Cop27 will be remembered
Despite the successes mentioned above, COP27 will probably be remembered as a time when the world put on size 11 boots and kicked the can firmly down the road. Even the final 10-page document admitted that keeping “1.5 alive” now hangs in the balance and that Paris aspirations are on “life support”. We can now expect a catastrophic rise of about 2.5C by the end of the century unless there are “rapid, deep and sustained reductions in greenhouse gas emissions”.
However, the prospect of a loss and damage fund, and some small but significant progress on adaptation, means that COP27 was far from a write off. What’s more, analysts often forget that official agreements between countries aren’t the summit’s only purpose. Several important measures to fight climate change are actually agreed by non-state actors on the fringes. And this is where COP27 was actually quite encouraging…
For starters, the Sharm el-Sheik Adaption Agenda (SAA) rallied both state and non-state actors to mobilise $300 billion to promote sustainable agriculture, reduce emissions, and improve farmers’ livelihoods in vulnerable regions. They’re also bringing together 2,000 of the world’s largest companies to develop adaptation plans and preserve millions of hectares of mangrove forests.
Meanwhile, more than 100 CEOs and senior executives of large multinational corporations signed an open letter to work side-by-side with governments to accelerate the transition to net zero by setting science-based targets, disclosing emissions, and building decarbonisation partnerships. The Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ), which includes over 500 of the world’s biggest financial institutions, also committed to reducing their emissions in Sharm el-Sheik.
The real significance of COP27
Consequently, COP27 witnessed the private sector continuing to take a major role in fighting climate change. Indeed, the business world and NGOs could turn out to be our greatest hope because they often outpace the politically-constrained official process. The impact of this progress is obviously hard to measure, and it doesn’t always receive the media attention it deserves, but the emergence of new eco-friendly technologies and businesses’ increasing commitment to sustainability offer genuine reason for optimism.
So next time you read that COP27 was a failure, just remember that what we see on TV is only part of the story. Yes, there are challenges ahead - not least the fact that the US House of Representatives now has a Republican majority - but there are good news stories floating around, too. For example, the return of Lula da Silva as President in Brazil should help to end deforestation.
Our advice, therefore, is to hang on in there and hope that next year’s conference in the United Arab Emirates finally shines a light on emissions. After all, fossil fuels are what the UAE’s economy is oil about.