Climate crisis in Africa:
The environmental activist looks back on the results of the COP26 which was held in Glasgow, Scotland, from October 31 to November 12, 2021. Aïssatou Diouf is responsible for international policies and advocacy within the NGO Enda Energie based in Dakar , in Senegal. Coordinator of the Climate Action Network in West and Central Africa, she has been walking the corridors of climate negotiations for almost a decade. Back to COP26. Franceinfo Africa: what were the main challenges of this COP26 for African states? Aïssatou Diouf: first, reduce global warming on a trajectory of 2 to 1.5°C as stipulated in the Paris Agreement. Which is already problematic for the continent since we are already seeing droughts and the consequences on agriculture... Then, concerning adaptation in developing countries and losses and damage, the question of financing is a priority issue. This is my third point, but it was at the heart of the negotiations: the carbon market mechanisms. This is Article 6 of the Paris Agreement and we have not yet found an agreement on the rules of implementation and operationalization. All these issues concern States. As for civil society organizations, the challenge was to put people at the center of discussions because communities are increasingly vulnerable and lives are at stake. In the end, for Africans, there is has therefore made very little progress in Glasgow if we stick to the trajectory and the question of financing. The 100 billion for adaptation have still not been met... A few days before the Glasgow COP, the published roadmap indicated that the 100 billion dollars, promised in Copenhagen, would be reached in 2023. This was already problematic for the developing countries to go to Glasgow on the basis of a broken promise, since this sum should have been raised in 2020. There is therefore already a gap of three years. Which is huge when we’re fighting the effects of climate change. All this shows that there is no determination. There is always an excuse when it comes to finding a solution to this climate crisis affecting developing countries while the richest nations know how to find the money when they want it. Latest example with the health crisis linked to Covid-19. However, there is some progress. For example, on adaptation which is currently underfunded. The objective of the Paris agreement was to balance climate financing: 50% for mitigation and the other half for adaptation. In Glasgow, there is a commitment to double funding for adaptation by 2025, or $40 billion. Which is 10 billion less when the calculation base corresponds to the famous 100 billion dollars. This is far from meeting the needs of developing countries, but it remains a notable step forward. No agreement on loss and damage either... African countries and small island states managed to impose the issue of loss and damage as a political subject at COP26. For me, this is the fruit of the battle of civil society organizations and developing countries. On the other hand, not putting in place a financial mechanism as proposed by the G77 and China with regard to losses and damage is regrettable. Result: climate action is being delayed and the lives of millions of people are further put at risk. However, political recognition of loss and damage constitutes progress. Scotland and Wallonia have put in the money, it’s an incentive. Note that on loss and damage, a two-year dialogue will take place from 2022, but there is no guarantee that a mechanism will be put in place at the end of these negotiations although developing countries intend to push in this direction. In total, more funding is needed for adaptation and loss and damage to finally initiate this ecological transition that our States are incapable of making today. We cannot continue to tour the world to raise so little funding. Wouldn't it be time for African countries, instead of waiting for promised money, to find a way to finance climate action themselves? Our States are already mobilizing. A considerable part of their GDP is used to deal with the consequences of climate change. Climate justice is at the center of this whole discussion we are having today. Therefore, the first question one should ask is: who pays? The answer is quite simple: those responsible must pay. Especially since in terms of commitments, African countries have been playing the game from the start. Aligning on a climate-compatible development trajectory is an additional cost to development and our States cannot assume this additional burden. The richest countries must keep their commitments and strengthen the mobilization of financing. Everyone talks about 100 billion as if this sum was going to solve the climate issue in Africa. This is not true! To this, it must be added that only 30-35% of the financing mobilized to fight climate change reaches the African continent. We felt a lot of disappointment about this COP among all those who have been mobilizing for years to ensure that States take the right decisions. What do you think ? People are starting to get tired of the status quo. The United Kingdom did everything to organize this COP in person despite the pandemic. Therefore, we expected real leadership to push States towards greater ambition. We didn't see anything. In terms of inclusiveness, the account was not there either. It was very difficult for civil society organizations to attend the negotiations and be present when the heads of state and government were. In this regard, people are also tired of hearing political leaders declare that they are aware of climate change and that this is not reflected in the negotiating rooms. We see the negotiators from these same countries making no effort. On the other hand, COP26 is one of the most followed COPs. NGOs call this “people power”. All the citizens who were on the streets in Glasgow and around the world no longer want to allow this status quo to flourish. Can we conclude that if climate action does not take off, it is due to developed countries which, by not making the necessary financing available, are denying their historical responsibility? They refuse to take their responsibilities and dilute the entire discourse on “common but differentiated responsibility” by pointing to emerging countries like India for example. We agree that these countries must make efforts and gradually move away from fossil fuels, particularly coal. But what have developed countries done since then? The States historically responsible for this global warming are not taking their responsibilities. What would be the solution for African countries to have more influence in climate negotiations? We certainly need better coordination between the groups where many developing countries are present, namely the Least Developed Countries (LDCs), the G77+China and the Africa group. Next, the Conference of African Ministers of the Environment should provide more support to negotiators on complex issues. If the negotiators cannot resolve them, they must go back to the ministerial level, especially in view of the next COP which will be held on African soil, in Cairo, in Egypt. We hope that the expectations of the most vulnerable will finally be taken into account and that there will be strong leadership from African countries so that the negotiations deliver results commensurate with the climate emergency. We may criticize the COP, but it is the only process we have which allows the Gambia, the United States, France and Senegal to be gathered around the same table.
