TWN Dubai Climate News Update No. 25
27 December 2023
Published by Third World Network

---

Global Goal on Adaptation- Framework for Global Climate Resilience adopted

Kuala Lumpur, 27 Dec. (Eqram Mustaqeem) – After 14 days of intense negotiations in the metropolis of Dubai, COP28 concluded its final bow on Dec. 13, finishing one day later than scheduled. While the decision on the global stocktake (GST) took most of the limelight especially in relation to mitigation, less attention was paid to the decision on the global goal on adaptation (GGA), where Parties struggled to find consensus on the GGA framework, which saw the final text from the COP 28 Presidency coming only hours before the closing plenary, where the decision was finally adopted.

Parties agreed to adopt “…the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience” (see paragraph 6) and in paragraph 7, Parties decided that “…the purpose of the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience is to guide the achievement of the GGA and the review of overall progress in achieving it with a view to reducing the increasing adverse impacts, risks and vulnerabilities associated with climate change, as well as to enhance adaptation action and support.”

It was also decided that “…the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience should guide and strengthen efforts, including long-term transformational and incremental adaptation, towards reducing vulnerability and enhancing adaptive capacity and resilience, as well as the collective well-being of all people, the protection of livelihoods and economies, and the preservation and regeneration of nature, for current and future generations, in the context of the temperature goal referred to in Article 2 of the PA, should be inclusive in terms of adaptation approaches, and should take into account the best available science and the worldviews and values of Indigenous Peoples, to support the achievement of the GGA.” (See paragraph 8).

Paragraph 9 of the decision “Urges Parties and invites non-Party stakeholders to pursue the objectives outlined …above and to increase ambition and enhance adaptation action and support, in order to accelerate swift action at scale and at all levels, from local to global, in alignment with other global frameworks, towards the achievement of, inter alia, the following targets by 2030, and progressively beyond:

(a) Significantly reducing climate-induced water scarcity and enhancing climate resilience to water-related hazards towards a climate-resilient water supply, climate-resilient sanitation and towards access to safe and affordable potable water for all;

(b) Attaining climate-resilient food and agricultural production and supply and distribution of food, as well as increasing sustainable and regenerative production and equitable access to adequate food and nutrition for all;

(c) Attaining resilience against climate change related health impacts, promoting climate-resilient health services, and significantly reducing climate-related morbidity and mortality, particularly in the most vulnerable communities;

(d) Reducing climate impacts on ecosystems and biodiversity, and accelerating the use of ecosystem-based adaptation and nature-based solutions, including through their management, enhancement, restoration and conservation and the protection of terrestrial, inland water, mountain, marine and coastal ecosystems;

(e) Increasing the resilience of infrastructure and human settlements to climate change impacts to ensure basic and continuous essential services for all, and minimizing climate-related impacts on infrastructure and human settlements;

(f) Substantially reducing the adverse effects of climate change on poverty eradication and livelihoods, in particular by promoting the use of adaptive social protection measures for all.

(g) Protecting cultural heritage from the impacts of climate-related risks by developing adaptive strategies for preserving cultural practices and heritage sites and by designing climate-resilient infrastructure, guided by traditional knowledge, Indigenous Peoples’ knowledge and local knowledge systems.”

In paragraph 10, Parties decided “…that the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience includes the following targets in relation to the dimensions of the iterative adaptation cycle, recognizing the need to enhance adaptation action and support:

(a) Impact, vulnerability and risk assessment: by 2030 all Parties have conducted up-to-date assessments of climate hazards, climate change impacts and exposure to risks and vulnerabilities and have used the outcomes of these assessments to inform their formulation of national adaptation plans, policy instruments, and planning processes and/or strategies, and by 2027 all Parties have established multi-hazard early warning systems, climate information services for risk reduction and systematic observation to support improved climate-related data, information and services;

(b) Planning: by 2030 all Parties have in place country-driven, gender-responsive, participatory and fully transparent national adaptation plans, policy instruments, and planning processes and/or strategies, covering, as appropriate, ecosystems, sectors, people and vulnerable communities, and have mainstreamed adaptation in all relevant strategies and plans;

(c) Implementation: by 2030 all Parties have progressed in implementing their national adaptation plans, policies and strategies and, as a result, have reduced the social and economic impacts of the key climate hazards identified in the assessments referred to in paragraph 10(a) above;

(d) Monitoring, evaluation and learning: by 2030 all Parties have designed, established and operationalized a system for monitoring, evaluation and learning for their national adaptation efforts and have built the required institutional capacity to fully implement the system;

The decision also affirms in paragraph 11 “…that efforts in relation to the targets referred to in paragraphs 9–10 above shall be made in a manner that is country-driven, voluntary and in accordance with national circumstances; take into account sustainable development and poverty eradication; and not constitute a basis for comparison between Parties.”

Whilst there were clear points of convergences among Parties on various aspects of the GGA framework from the outset of negotiations, there were also fundamental disagreements between the developed and developing countries, especially pertaining the inclusion of the principles of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities (CBDR-RC), Articles 9, 10 and 11 of the Paris Agreement (PA), which hindered overall progress on the framework. The developed countries made it explicit that the inclusion of these principles and the specific Articles of the PA was their red line while the developing countries made them their top priority. (Article 9 deals with the provision of finance, Article 10 on technology transfer and Article 11 on capacity building.)(See https://www.twn.my/title2/climate/news/Dubai01/TWN%20update%2015.pdf

Furthermore, developing countries also called for stronger language on adaptation finance and means of implementation (MOI), that required developed countries to scale up their contributions to developing countries in order to enable the latter to undertake adaptation efforts in response to the worsening impacts of climate change, and that even the doubling of adaptation finance from 2019 levels by 2025 would still not be remotely near to the amount of finance needed for developing countries to cover adaptation costs. Such calls, especially those which imposed further public financing obligations on developed countries were also not agreeable to the latter.

These calls by the developing countries and the opposition against them by the developed countries were amongst the reasons why a text could not be sent by the Chairs of the Subsidiary Bodies (SBs) after the first week of technical discussions.

The mandate to produce the text was then given to the COP Presidency which produced the GGA draft decision text on the basis of inputs arising from ministerial consultations undertaken by Minister Maisa Rojas, Minister for the Environment of Chile and Jennifer McAllister Assistant Minister, for Climate Change and Energy of Australia, as well as from consultations done by the Chairs of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA), Harry Vreuls (Netherlands) and the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI) Nabeel Munir (Pakistan).

It was clear that the constant pushback from the developed countries on the inclusion of the principles of equity, CBDR-RC and on the MOI had significantly influenced the outcome of the GGA. The evolution of text as a result of this pushback can be traced from the original 1st iteration of the draft text in paragraphs 1 and 2 of the preamble which read:

“Recalling Articles 7, [9, 10, 11] and 14 of the PA…;

“[Also recalling relevant provisions and principles of the Convention and the PA, including the principle of equity and CBDR-RC, in the light of different national circumstances.]”

In this instance, Articles 9,10,11 of the PA relating to the MOI together with the entire paragraph that followed which talks about equity and CBDR-RC were bracketed from the get go, indicating a lack of consensus.

Further, in the final decision text that was adopted, all the bracketed texts were removed altogether and replaced with the following text: “Recalling relevant provisions and principles of the Convention and the PA.”.

Additionally, the weakening of the language on MOI is also apparent in paragraph 10 of the GGA decision text adopted which reads: “Decides that the framework for the GGA includes the following targets in relation to the dimensions of the iterative adaptation cycle, recognizing the need to enhance adaptation action and support”. (Emphasis added).

The same paragraph in the earlier 1st and 2nd draft iteration originally read as;

“Decides that the framework includes the following targets in relation to the dimensions of the iterative adaptation cycle, recognizing the importance of and need for enhanced access to and mobilization of support for developing countries, particularly the least developed countries and small island developing States, in this regard.” (Emphasis added).

While the two earlier iterations highlight the importance of the provision of support to developing countries to achieve the targets outlined in the framework, the final text discards this phrase and replaces it with a very passing and general phrase on enhancing adaptation and support.

Despite these setbacks, the strong show of unity in the G77 and China bloc on calling for MOI and adaptation finance in particular, bulwarked further compromise of their  interests and priorities, and whilst it did not capture all the recommendations made by developing countries especially to provide long term, scaled-up, predictable, new and additional MOI to achieve the GGA, it still saw strong language emphasising the obligations of developed countries to provide means of implementation  to the developing countries being registered in the GGA decision text.

The most notable amongst them was paragraph 32 of the GGA decision text which reads:

“Recognizes that the extent to which the framework for the GGA is implemented by developing country Parties depends on, inter alia, engagement and action at all levels, and the effective implementation by developed country Parties of means of implementation and support commitments”. (Emphasis added).

This paragraph was a key fight between the developed and developing countries as the former drew a hard line against such MOI language in the GGA, which saw it being bracketed in the 1st iteration of the draft text, and only being an option in the following 2nd iteration but was successfully included in the final GGA decision text.

The G77 and China, the Independent Alliance of Latin America and the Caribbean (AILAC), the Like-minded Developing Countries (LMDC), Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay (ABU), and the African Group had called for the establishment of a permanent stand-alone agenda item on the GGA to be carried out jointly by the SBs for further work, to capture the urgency and complexity associated with adaptation impacts and to enable a formal setting to further develop adaptation indicators based on best available science. This was not favoured by the European Union (EU).

The final GGA decision text through paragraphs 39 and 40 concluded the matter as follows:

“Decides to launch a two-year work programme on indicators for measuring progress achieved towards the targets referred to in paragraphs 9–10 above with a view to identifying and, as needed, developing indicators and potential quantified elements for those targets;”

“Also decides that the work programme referred to in paragraph 39 above will be carried out jointly by the SBSTA and the SBI, starting after…(CMA 5).”

These paragraphs essentially specify that further work will be conducted to assess progress towards the outlined goals in the GGA framework and to identify potential indicators and quantified elements of those targets which comprehensively captures the views of developing countries with regards to further work on the GGA.