Senator Dr Bukola Saraki

What are we to take away from the Warsaw Conference? For me, the message appears to be that developed Western nations want to offload reductions in Co2 emissions until they can afford it, or at best, use a market-based approach to finance climate change adaptation in developing countries. But is this the best way forward? Won’t this jeopardize the whole essence of curbing the impact of climate change on the most vulnerable population?

The discussions on “loss and damage” mechanisms won’t even happen until 2015 and clarification on funding for the proposed $100 billion a year post-2020 fund has stalled, for now economics seems to have won over the environment. From an African perspective, is a very narrow-minded equation.

The UNEP report released this week has highlighted how Africa is extremely vulnerable to the rise in global temperatures. It’s estimated that the costs to adapt the farming and infrastructure across the continent will be in excess of $350 billion a year. The post 2020 $100 billion a year fund wouldn’t even get close to this. But it’s not just these unaffordable costs that are the issue. Food shortages and droughts that will follow will cause frictions among already struggling nations, and conflict may follow.

The higher the temperatures rise, the greater the financial and human challenge to adapt, says the report. It argues that present policies point to temperatures rising to 3-4C by 2100, a turn of events it claims would be catastrophic. The African Union (AU) has made a seven-point demand for a framework that recognises the vulnerability of African countries to climate change and their incapacity to adapt. They want all parties to ratify the Doha ammendments in preparation for the 2015 outcome document. This demand, which I fully support, looks to avoid any failure at Paris (COP 21), where the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol (KP2) is expected to come into operation.

The AU demand does not have unachievable objectives. It additionally calls for institutions to administer forest related activities (under the UN REDD+ programme), and for a strategy and reporting mechanisms to control the reduction of emissions in developed countries. The finances of the green climate fund need to be used along with an implementation of the promised $100billion Global Climate Fund by developed countries. Finally, the climate technology centre and network need to be addressed properly in order to remove bottlenecks for Nigeria and other African countries in accessing new technologies for adaptation and mitigation.

Further ideas should also be drawn into the agenda for the Paris talks. The World Bank has recommended a development called the “landscape approach” where both ecosystems and social-economic policies are strategically combined and implemented together like two sides of a coin. With this system ‘the natural capital is used, without using it up’. This forward looking project aims to assist the development of sustainable agriculture across the world, especially for those that will bear the brunt of climate changes. Instead of using the Warsaw Conference to push aside commitments to drive down damage, resources and knowledge should be used to find more intelligent ways of making the most of what we have and what we will have.

The G77+China group of 133 countries were right to make a stand against the non-committal of the developed nations. We are not in the position to allow our economies to drive our environmental policies as we will bear the brunt of rising temperatures. We need firmer commitments on a global scale for not just funding to mitigate the damage but also to pursue alternative methods of agriculture, damage prevention and planning for such acts of nature that we have recently seen.

What the Warsaw Conference has highlighted is the huge difference between what the poorer nations need and what the richer nations are willing to provide. The $100 billion fund needs to be put in place in 2020, with richer nations making the commitments. The framework for the Paris talks must have the needs of the least developed nations in mind and take on board recommendations from outside organisations such as the AU and World Bank. The damage of climate change needs to be seen not just as a short-term economic issue, but as a long-term global social problem as this is how it is seen in Africa.

About:
Dr Bukola Saraki is the Senator for Kwara State in the National Assembly of Nigeria (www.abubakarbukolasaraki.org). He is also the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Ecology, and founding President of GLOBE Nigeria, an affiliate of GLOBE International & World Summit of Legislators which is meant to bring legislators in Nigeria to join their counterparts across the globe, to agree and advance common legislative response to major global environmental and sustainable development challenges facing our time. Dr. Bukola Saraki who was a former two time Executive Governor of Kwara state between 2003-2011, has helped transformed the agricultural landscape of his home state and indeed Nigeria through innovative agricultural strategies. Little wonder, he is a member of the Nigerian Senate Committees on Agriculture, Banking & Capital markets, Finance, and Health where he continues to play an active role through visionary leadership.