Adaptation!? But We Need Money!!

This is an incomplete post salvaged from the internet archive.

-by John

The past few days I have followed the discussions of the Subsidiary Body on Implementation (SBI). Their discussions have been concerned with several issues, capacity building under the protocol, an amendment relating to compliance, the international transaction log (ITL), and several others. Perhaps the most contentious currently is the Adaptation Fund, what today’s ECO publication called a “vital instrument that can significantly assist developing countries reduce their vulnerabilities.”

The Adaptation Fund is a mechanism under the Kyoto Protocol that will receive resources generated by a 2% levy on CDM projects. Currently, the fund does not exist, and developing countries are mainly only receiving funding from volunteer donations to the Least Developed Countries Fund (LDCF), which is aimed primarily at mitigation projects. The adaptation fund is a must-have and a must-have-soon, and parties are only now starting to move the dialogue forward.

Youth Demonstrations Broken Up

-by Michael

This sunny Thursday morning, as COP attendees arrived for the session of the COP/MOP, there were nine youth standing in a rough V shape to meet them. In their hands they held large cardboard signs, making the following statement in six languages: Remember your son (or daughter, depending on the sign).

After yesterday’s youth meeting, some of the young activists of this world planned out this action. They wrote a proposal delineating exactly what would be done this morning, from 9AM-10AM, which was submitted for approval. That approval was granted. Despite this, after 40 minutes of exchanging smiles with delegates and receiving regards and kudos from many, security decided that it was time to exercise some of their power. Security guards, much like the Tyrannasaurus Rex of legend, have brains roughly the size of one of those “squeeze-me stress balls” you can buy on various counters in American stores. Something had squeezed their stress balls the wrong way, and so they decided to come up to us, look big, and deny that the permission we had received was valid. They claimed that the authorization we had received was inadequate, though it is, as far as we are aware, the definitive authorization available at the UNFCCC. Regardless, they proceeded to take every last one of our signs. Both groups were amiable the whole time, as the security guards believed we were just cute fools with bad communication skills, and we decided that this wasn’t a battle worth fighting. The guards even ordered Matt, our eagle-eyed photographer, to delete pictures of them dispersing us. JuanPa, Matt, and the young woman among us, Nathalie, who was our spokesperson when we were dispersed, are currently meeting with security and the woman in charge of authorizing demonstrations. Whatever the outcome, it appears this morning’s demonstration was both thoughtful and effective. Some delegates told us about their children, while a couple Kenyan delegates told us that this was all very impressive and asked our permission to have their picture taken with us. It was, of course, granted. More later.

Deforestation in Developing Countries Discussed at SBSTA

-by Matthew

The second meeting of SBSTA started off with a bang yesterday. Agenda item 5, the first agenda item discussed at the meeting, dealt with deforestation in developing countries. Much praise was given to the work accomplished at the deforestation workshop in Rome. There seemed to be universal agreement amongst those parties initiating in the dialogue that a second workshop should be created.

Tuvalu kicked off the discussion with a call to consider the consultation of any party, or community, affected by deforestation decisions. Tuvalu also mentioned the need to include indigenous populations in the dialogue and decision-making process. A Maasai woman representing the IITP further elaborated on this.

The G77 and China, with the support of the Democratic Republic of Congo called for financial support in mitigating GHG emissions from deforestation specifically calling for a capacity building fund.

Indonesia made a valid point reminding delegates of how global market trends support deforestation in developing countries and until the demand for such resources diminishes, deforestation should be considered an issue the global society is responsible for.
Nepal supported giving local control over forests stating that it has promoted reforestation and protection. It called itself an example country.

Switzerland, on behalf of the EU, called for the need to quantify value of forests and attribute market based mechanisms to forest protection.

I feel that the answer to deforestation lies in indigenous knowledge. The recent ECO had an article addressing the need to have indigenous people better represented at these meetings.
At the end of the meeting The Global Environmental Center made a great statement about peat lands. They are the largest source of GHG emissions due to deforestation and are cheap to conserve.

I look forward to hearing more talk about deforestation in developing countries in the next few days.

Observing the climate, making decisions

This is an incomplete post salvaged from the internet archive.

-by Sarah

This afternoon I attended a side event about climate observations, predictions, and resulting implementation into development decisions. William Westermeyer of the Global Climate Observation System (GCOS) began by zipping through a powerpoint which had much more information in its slides than was possible to read before he moved on. He introduced the concept of GCOS and its initiative in Africa (ClimDev Africa, short for- as you can probably guess- Climate Development Africa). The goal of GCOS and its subsequent regional programs is to mainstream climate information into development decisions, and in the case of Clim Dev Africa he stressed the ownership of the program be primarily within Africa, in collaboration with outsode actors (presumably UN branches, developed countries, and so on). GCOS is one way the UN is trying to carry out the 5-year work program under Decision 2/COP 11, which calls for action on impacts, vulnerability, and adaptation to climate change through better data and observation collection.