COP26 concluded this Saturday night (13), in Glasgow (Scotland), the book of rules of the Paris Agreement, after five editions of the UN climate conference with negotiations to regulate the climate agreement.
Since then, the worsening of extreme weather events and the new scientific reports of the IPCC (UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) have increased the relevance of the conference and also the pressure for countries to expand their climate goals (NDCs for nationally determined contributions).
However, the lack of new climate finance commitments by the developed bloc has barred the rest of the world’s willingness to go further with its targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
The so-called G-77 plus China, the bloc of developing countries, blocked the session scheduled for Saturday morning (13) to insist on the demand for an additional mechanism for financing adaptation, which was not accepted. The proposal consisted of a percentage rate applied to carbon market transactions, which would go to the adaptation fund.
COP 26 approved a 5% tax on the transaction of carbon credits traded between private sector projects or NGOs. However, transactions between countries were tax free and, therefore, without contribution to adaptation funds, for a refusal of the developed block.
Through the carbon market regulated at COP26, countries can buy carbon emission ‘allowances’ to help meet their climate goals, remunerating those countries whose actions, in turn, reduce emissions.
The item was one of the main impasses in the last five editions of the climate COPs, but it was unlocked on Thursday (11) with a proposal prepared by Brazil to create a mechanism to define, in an implementation instance, criteria that had no consensus in the regulation.
As Folha revealed, Japan was the spokesperson for the proposal and protected it from the credibility crisis faced by the Brazilian delegation. Despite leaving gaps in the accounting of carbon credits, the solution was widely accepted and was approved at COP26, allowing the completion of the rulebook.
In addition to the carbon market, transparency rules and the definition of common time frames for reviewing climate goals were pending in the Paris regulation. In both cases, the impasses were resolved by relaxing conditions for countries that claimed they could not meet stricter standards of transparency.
They must indicate a deadline for adapting to the rules. The timeframes for reviewing targets must be five years, also with flexibility to review every ten years.
Among the few achievements in terms of funding, the final text of COP 26 maintained the forecast that the fund for adaptation to the effects of climate change should provide, by 2025, twice the resources deposited globally in 2019.
The fund for compensation for damages, proposed by the group of countries most vulnerable to the climate, was left out of the decision and should be discussed in the next multilateral meetings.
The report found that the developed bloc acted to avoid committing to the fund, since the values ​​of climate losses can be incalculable and even priceless. The United States tried to propose a technical assistance fund, but the proposal was turned down.
“We are asked for more contributions in emissions, but they are not solidary [com o financiamento]”, said Ahmadou Touré, negotiator from Guinea, in Africa, to the report.
The country spoke at the final plenary of COP26 on behalf of the G-77 plus China, highlighting “extreme disappointment” with the paragraphs on damages.
The text of the COP decision recognizes the gaps between the climate urgency and the current goals, as well as the occurrence of losses and damages with impacts for developing countries. It also cites, at different times in the text, the US$ 100 billion promised by rich countries in 2009 — and whose collection should only be completed in 2023, with three years of delay. The mentions were interpreted as signs that, for the time being, the developed block should not put more money on the table.
The decision mentions the importance of containing global warming to up to 1.5ºC — the limit, which prevents the disappearance of island countries, had no consensus in the Paris Agreement, which accepted a containment of warming up to 2ºC. The text also calls on countries to present more ambitious climate goals before 2023.
Journalist Ana Carolina Amaral traveled at the invitation of Instituto Clima e Sociedade.
.
