COP27 has come and gone. And, as 2023 begins, with all the best intentions and resolutions, we ask ourselves: who will support and implement the agreements reached?
One of the main results of the Conference of the Parties (COP27) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was the creation of a specific fund for damages in order to support the countries most vulnerable to climate change. This is a historic demand from countries in the global South, particularly small island nations and least developed countries, which suffer from the effects of extreme weather phenomena and other climate catastrophes. In fact, the creation of the loss and damage fund is essential to complement the mitigation and adaptation effort already under way.
After 30 years of discussions and negotiations on climate change, our political leaders on a global scale have not effectively tackled the problem, nor have they provided global alternatives to climate action or guided change towards a more just, inclusive and sustainable future. Many people around the world – activists, environmentalists, scientists and citizens – are suspicious of the results of world meetings like COP27, which undermines their legitimacy. Simultaneously, however, many new spaces for engaged and broader participation have emerged, seeking to bridge the gap between science, politics and society.
What are the main results that the current leaders achieved at COP27?
The damages fund is one of the main achievements of COP27. However, this is just the beginning of a conversation that will set the agenda for years to come. Which countries should provide funding? How will the funds be distributed? What happens when traditional ways of inhabiting the planet disappear and cultural practices are transformed because of climate change? Can we compensate with cash? How do we measure payments and compensation due to the destruction of the planet?
The conversation continues with other important results for the Americas. The Sharm el-Sheikh Plan of Implementation highlights that a global transformation to a low carbon economy will require at least between 4 and 6 trillion dollars per year. However, the goal of developed countries to move 100 billion dollars a year by 2020 has not been met. By 2023, countries will submit stronger and more ambitious climate plans to the UNFCCC Secretariat. These will be analyzed to see how close we are to maintaining the 1.5°C target. Furthermore, it was decided to establish a work program on just transition.
The magnitude of the climate crisis represents other cascading challenges that need to be faced in the near future, but which, if handled correctly, could be the key to building a more just, democratic and equitable world: improving participation, expanding the voice of young people, build trust between countries, and empower leadership at all levels to address our complex common challenges.
Building hope to face the climate crisis: another meaning of the leadership of the American continent
During the last three decades, national and world leaders have been discussing the repercussions of human activity on the planet and the negative effects that modernity and development have on the climate, nature and biodiversity, which is conventionally called the Anthropocene. This is a time when humans are leading change on a global scale as a geological force. The prominent symptom of the Anthropocene is the climate crisis, due to the increase in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and a human leadership characterized by betting on and defending endless economic growth, which is based on domination, growth and exploitation, and comprises, in turn, centuries of slavery.
Science has been clear for many years about the need to significantly reduce emissions in order to meet international targets and decarbonize human activities. Time is running out and, in this critical context, every action (and inaction) counts. There is still a huge gap in linking science with politics and social action, and there is no magic formula to solve the complex problems we face, including the climate emergency. So how can we (re)build a new scientific-political architecture and (re)activate the imagination to think of alternative paths, in order to actively face our problems? The climate crisis is also a crisis of leadership and imagination to build consensus.
Paradoxically, at the same time as COP27, 30 scientists and professionals at the beginning of their careers from different disciplines, participants in the Science, Technology and Policy (IAI-STeP) program from 14 countries across the American continent, gathered in Uruguay to address one of the most pressing challenges related to the climate crisis: how to effectively link scientific-technical knowledge and social, political and ethical dimensions in order to support an inclusive and action-oriented environmental policy.
Professionals in the IAI-STeP program intend to work towards building a more effective type of leadership that each person can exemplify; a pluralistic, ethical, collective, inclusive and horizontal leadership that is also better suited to face the challenges of the 21st century. This leadership must be capable of facilitating the effective participation of all actors in society in the co-production of knowledge and solutions, and in amplifying the voices of those who are already suffering the impacts of climate change. Bringing a rich diversity of knowledge and experience to the table requires the empathy, vulnerability, and listening skills needed to jointly reimagine development options, build resilience, and perhaps consensus, in seeking solutions to the climate crisis.
COP27, like previous conferences, left many issues and concerns unresolved, such as finance, accountability, power relations and transparency, which are once again outstanding issues. These issues are part of the structural problems that evolved along with colonization, exclusion and exploitation; historical processes led by large power groups. This is why the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR)” was included in the UNFCCC. However, its implementation has yet to move forward with a view to building a good consensus among world leaders at this point in time.
The COP27 results are once again an example of opposing positions on our own American continent, positions that do not start from a shared vision of the climate crisis. Our countries continue to trade from different groups such as developed, developing and least developed countries. We still need to assume and reconcile the problems of injustice, racism, inequality and colonization. Will the day come when our continent will take a common or consensual position on the climate crisis? Let’s return to the question: who will support and implement the agreements reached at COP27? Perhaps it is science, technology and policy (STeP) professionals around the world working with national governments, international organizations, academia and the private sector who will finally bring science, policy and society together for effective action. We are confident that with a growing group of inter-American leaders such as STeP professionals, a large, resilient, and meaningful community working in decision-making positions, this can be achieved.
With a wealth of experience honed over 4+ years in journalism, I bring a seasoned voice to the world of news. Currently, I work as a freelance writer and editor, always seeking new opportunities to tell compelling stories in the field of world news.
