Paying for our climate In Nigeria

The Earth has a natural way of balancing its climate. The various components of the atmosphere have their function in ensuring this planet is not only habitable for living things but also conducive for their productivity. Over time, man has abused this great privilege by altering nature’s ability to maintain the climate due to his display of sophistication (industrialization) resulting to over-exploitation of natural resources. As this continues, the need has arisen for mitigation in order to restore the earth to its near original state of clemency, but this will not be without a cost or a price to pay.

Paying for our climate can be described as financing our climate or climate finance which refers to the funding of activities and projects which aim to achieve progress against climate objectives (mitigation and Adaptation). Climate finance can come from a wide range of both private and public sources and can flow domestically or internationally. Developed countries have made concrete agreements to provide financial resources to assist developing countries in meeting climate objectives, recognizing that some countries have contributed to the causes of climate change more than others and that countries have different capacities to financially contribute towards climate objectives.

Nigeria has always relied heavily on international climate financing and this has been very crucial to her significant progress towards achieving climate objectives, as this often requires large-scale infrastructure and the engagement of large portions of population, both of which can require high levels of investment. As at 2015, Nigeria has leveraged $63 million of multilateral funds for climate change projects. This is broadly equal to that of Rwanda, whose population is roughly 7 per cent of Nigeria’s, and is just over a tenth of the funding approved for South Africa. This figure is less than one might expect for Nigeria considering Nigeria’s level of GHG emissions, its vulnerability to the impacts of climate change and the amount of funding provided to developing countries as a whole. Additional factors, such as the withdrawal of the U.S. contribution to the Green Climate Fund, further curb the implementation of Nigeria’s and other CVF-members’ climate action strategies, leaving them vulnerable to the extreme effects of climate change.

Hence Nigeria need to seek an alternative to financing its climate, all the tiers of government needs to meet, discuss and strategize ways to secure funds domestically from both private and public sources combined with funds provided by the government. Another strategy to secure climate funds locally is to create an awareness to public on the shortage of climate funds from the international climate finance and its implication on the nation, hence sensitizing the public (illiterate and literate) in various local languages about the consequences of their actions on the climate will go a long way in keeping the Sub-Saharan Africa alive. There is the need to effectively quantify the ecological footprints of individuals or organizations in terms of monetary cost and such should be compelled to pay. Also, efforts that contribute to mitigation of climate change should be rewarded as well. The government needs to be transparent on how the donated climate funds are spent with general public fully informed.

This will help Nigeria not to totally depend on international financing but see it as a support to achieving the climate objective. This will be a great contribution to the international financing in combating the threat to our environment due to climate change.

•Andrew is a climate tracker with a platform for young people tracking countries’ roles in #UNFCCC / #CLIMATE negotiations.