Business

Reactions as fourth meeting to operationalise Loss and Damage Fund ends with no outcome

Despite going into overtime and several rounds of breakout and plenary discussions, the fourth meeting of the Transitional Committee (TC) on Loss and Damage has ended with no outcome. A final attempt to push through consensus will happen at a special fifth meeting of the committee in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates (UAE), in early November.

The meeting of about two dozen countries involved in a committee tasked with designing a “loss and damage” fund was held in Aswan, Egypt from October 17 to 20. The meeting was meant to draft the recommendations for COP28 to operationalise the Loss and Damage Fund.

Loss and Damage refers to the impacts of climate change that are beyond what countries can adapt to, either because the damage is irreversible or because countries lack the means to cope. The Loss and Damage Fund, announced at COP27, was hailed as a victory for those fighting for decades for climate damages.

However, key elements of its functioning: its governance, structure, location, source of funding and beneficiaries of funding were mired in disagreement with rich countries pushing for it be hosted in the World Bank which is a red line for developing countries who have asked for an independent body.

Various members of civil society and climate justice advocates have reacted to the development.

Professor Chukwumerije Okereke, a professor in environment at the Alex Ekwueme Federal University in Ebonyi State, and an expert in climate justice said, “I am sorely sad that rich countries continue to undermine equity and justice in the international climate change regime. The latest attempt to grab the Loss and Damage Fund is nothing short of an affront on climate vulnerable countries.”

Liane Schalatek, Associate Director, Heinrich Böll Foundation Washington, DC said, “The fourth meeting of the Transitional Committee to design a new Loss and Damage Fund tanked because rich countries drew up too many red lines and displayed little political will for compromise. Instead they played hard ball with the lives and livelihoods of vulnerable countries and communities already suffering catastrophic losses and damages. They failed to accept their historical responsibility (suggesting that many of those harmed should pay themselves), tried to pit affected countries and communities against each other (by limiting who could get money) and proposed to set up the new fund under the World Bank with a Board representing shareholders not equity. There is still time to prevent the collapse of the process, but only if rich countries in the fifth impromptu meeting in Abu Dhabi in early November show the solidarity and cooperation they promised at COP27 and that the communities in the Global South need and deserve.”

Lien Vandamme, Senior Campaigner, Centre for International Environmental Law, said: “People whose human rights have been violated because of the climate crisis are entitled to remedy without further delays. The Transitional Committee’s failure to deliver is no surprise given the lack of will wealthy nations have demonstrated from the start of this process. Instead of a commitment to deliver, we have witnessed exclusion and limitations on civil society engagement, and deliberate attempts to narrow down the scope and undermine the fundamentals of the Fund by wealthy nations. After decades of delay, they continue to deny their historic responsibility for causing the climate crisis, and therefore to pay up for the loss and damage this has caused.”

Harjeet Singh, head of global political strategy, Climate Action Network International, in his opinion, stated that: “The failure of the Transitional Committee to draft recommendations for the operationalisation of the Loss and Damage Fund is a clear indication of the deep chasm between rich and poor nations. Developed countries must be held accountable for their shameless attempts to push the World Bank as the host of the fund, their refusal to discuss the necessary scale of finance, and their blatant disregard for their responsibilities under the UN Climate Change Convention and the Paris Agreement. Behind closed doors, developed nations not only attempted to fracture the solidarity of developing countries, but when unsuccessful, brazenly asked even the poorest nations to contribute to the fund.”

READ ALSO FROM NIGERIAN TRIBUNE