COP27 – Credibility issues around Global Shield – World

The 27th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP27) in Sharm-el-Sheikh, Egypt, is expected to conclude this weekend. Michael Kühn from Welthungerhilfe is present and reports on the developments.

Climate-related risks have pushed both risk provision expenditures and debt to high levels in many countries particularly affected by the effects of climate change. Increasing and securing funding in advance so that it is disbursed quickly and reliably before or immediately after disasters can reduce the impact of those disasters. This ensures increased resilience of people living in countries exposed to climate risks, promotes sustainable development and thus protects the lives and livelihoods of poor and vulnerable people.

Global Shield: The possibility of fair compensation for climate loss and damage?

Partly initiated by Germany, the G7 and more recently the Vulnerable Twenty (V20) group have now agreed to establish a Global Shield funding mechanism to help address loss and damage. The Global Shield is not the only measure needed to address loss and damage – but it should aim to make meaningful and effective progress in providing and facilitating greater and better pre-established protection against climate-related risks and to disasters, for example by making money available for protection measures at an early stage.

Mobilizing new funding is crucial to the success of the initiative, as evidenced by the V20’s interest in the Global Shield. But it is also the target of criticism from civil society.

The credibility of the Global North is seriously damaged by empty promises

While the previous promise of industrialized countries to provide 100 billion dollars a year in climate finance from 2020 has not yet been fulfilled, representatives of the South are struggling to rally behind the idea of ​​a new financial facility whose funds must be provided. The credibility of the Global North has been lost. In addition, some fear that the Global Shield will replace a loss and damage financing facility, which industrialized countries have been reluctant to act on. The criticism is that the new mechanism is limited in scope and reach and therefore risks delaying the establishment of a real facility. In other words, it reduces the chances of obtaining binding commitments from governments or international organizations to provide financial aid or loans in specific cases.

30 years later: recognition of climate damage in Vanuatu

Discussions on a financial mechanism to deal with loss and damage date back to a 1991 request by Vanuatu on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States, which proposed an insurance pool funded by industrialized countries to cover the financial burden and provide compensation. For the first time in 30 years, industrialized nations have now recognized that such loss and damage exists and therefore can no longer be ignored. It is a welcome step forward for the negotiations that the issue is on the agenda of COP27.

Time is running out: a decision at COP27 could restore credibility

The discussion on how to set up a loss and damage financing facility is expected to take place within the next two years. But the countries on the front lines of climate change cannot and will not wait that long; they are already dealing with the damage today. Now would be a good time to decide that here in Sharm el Sheikh. This would allow rich countries to regain lost credibility beyond the Global Shield initiative.

Comments are closed.