Climate justice and social justice are inextricably linked. Climate justice recognizes how climate change has impacts on communities already made vulnerable by social, economic, health and other impacts, and who have contributed the least to climate change. In turn, climate change worsens existing social injustices. The connections between climate justice and social justice are drawn more clearly by those working on gender-based and youth-based climate justice initiatives and through projects that also shed light on the impacts of climate change on low-income countries.
Climate justice advocates call for a “gender transformative approach” when undertaking initiatives that address the impacts of climate change. For example, according to CARE International, climate justice initiatives should put effort into addressing gender and power differences and vulnerabilities that emerge in efforts, including:
- projects aimed at increasing climate resilience.
- efforts that enhance men and women’s engagement in household practices of nutrition and health care.
- conversations with traditional, religious, and elected leaders regarding the impacts of climate change.
Weather shocks, such as floods, droughts and historical fluctuations in temperature, heighten climate injustices when also considering age and gender. A recent study shows “[g]irls and women are particularly vulnerable to the social responses triggered by weather shocks, especially in places where they face restrictive gender norms.” Young boys in agriculture-based economies may be taken out of school to work, and adult males may be forced to choose to leave their households to migrate to places where they can find alternative sources of income due to the impacts of weather shocks.
According to UNICEF, youth define climate justice relationally. That is, youth consider climate actions to be intricately associated with other actions, including human rights, sustainable development, and addressing numerous injustices, such as social injustice, gender injustice, economic injustice, intergenerational injustice and environmental injustice. In order to address climate injustices, youth call for “people-centered” efforts that address climate change, knowing that “not everyone has contributed to climate change in the same way.” To facilitate climate justice, youth call for:
- skills development to enable youth and children to contribute to decision making.
- consistent and reliable financing for youth activists to undertake projects and actions that enable them to implement their collective vision to address climate justice.
- non-monetary forms of support in the form of partnerships to assist with climate justice action initiatives.
According to the World Climate Risk Index 2020, between 1999 to 2018, among the top countries most affected by extreme weather events, “seven were developing countries in the low income or lower-middle income country group, two were classified as upper-middle income countries (Thailand and Dominica) and one was an advanced economy generating high income (Puerto Rico).” Puerto Rico, Myanmar and Haiti ranked highest among the countries most affected by extreme weather events. Poor families are paying the most when it comes to the effects of climate change.
Achieving climate justice requires ensuring the protection of human rights and inclusion in decision making by those made most vulnerable to the effects of climate change.
By Leela Viswanathan
(Image Credit: Chela B., Unsplash)
The post Connecting Climate Justice and Social Justice appeared first on Indigenous Climate Hub.
Continue Reading
In the thick of the COP29 climate summit in Azerbaijan in 2024, the UN climate talks were rattled by what can only be described as a major PR disaster. The BBC, Reuters and The Guardian all carried headlines, attributed to leading climate policy experts, that the COPs were “no longer fit for purpose”.
The articles outlined a series of reforms called for in an open letter signed by 22 eminent scientists and politicians, including a former UN secretary-general and previous UN climate chief, with a further 150 lending their support. The headlines shook confidence in the COP process, just as governments were wrestling over a new climate finance goal.
The Club of Rome – which handled the media relations for the letter – hurried to say that its “constructive, supportive ideas” had been “misinterpreted”. Negotiators kept calm(ish) and carried on, in the end landing the finance goal after some high-stakes drama on the final day.
-
Early speakers’ list suggests few powerful leaders will attend COP31
Just 77 heads of state or government are scheduled to address the COP31 climate summit in Antalya, a third less than the COP28 peak -
Africa wants adaptation finance on COP31 agenda, raising risk of a fight
The African Group wants dedicated space on tripling adaptation finance, the Green Climate Fund and trade, setting up a possible clash
To my surprise, when I went back this week to read the letter again, I could not find the offending line about the COPs not being fit for purpose. The Club of Rome has yet to respond to my query about its disappearance.
Whatever happened to the wording, that sentiment has been widely shared. COPs have ballooned in size while the importance of their outcomes seems to have diminished since the 2015 Paris Agreement (with the exception of the 2023 COP in Dubai where countries agreed to transition away from fossil fuels in energy systems).
The same on the surface
Two years on from those painful headlines in Baku, has anything changed for the better? You might be forgiven for thinking not. Official decisions are still made by consensus rather than the majority voting some have called for to stop blockers.
Tens of thousands of officials, activists and business execs still scurry around the halls to an ever-growing list of side events, roundtables and dialogues, while deals still come down to rows, all-nighters and jargon-filled texts adopted to rounds of applause.
But it would not be true to say that COPs have completely failed to respond to the very real need to translate the words of the Paris Agreement into action in the outside world.
Global warming is projected to be around 1.3C lower this century than it would have been if the world had not committed to tackle the climate crisis under that accord. Developing countries have a valued space at COPs in which their voices have equal weight in decision-making, unlike in many other international fora. And most importantly, perhaps, there has been a subtle shift, tipping the balance away from negotiating towards doing.
Brazil branded last year’s summit in Belém as the “COP of Implementation”, corralling the sprawling Action Agenda into six axes. This was a bid to impose some structure on the mushrooming efforts between governments, UN agencies, cities, businesses and civil society to set targets and spur faster results on their pet issues, from methane emissions to health and adaptation in conflict zones. COP30 alone saw the launch of 120 “plans to accelerate solutions”.
COP30 roadmaps off the cuff
Meanwhile, as the formal negotiations drew to a close, it was clear that consensus decision-making was evolving into something a little more improvised.
With only around half of all countries on board with the idea of a roadmap to transition away from fossil fuels, COP30 President André Corrêa do Lago announced his team would put one together over the coming year, along with another on how to meet a global goal to halt deforestation by 2030. Those roadmaps will be launched next week, presented and discussed at COP31, though it’s still unclear whether or how they’ll be incorporated into the formal negotiating agenda.
Some leading policy-makers don’t think that matters too much. Speaking to journalists before the Antalya summit, COP30 CEO Ana Toni and Dutch climate minister Stientje van Veldhoven said “coalitions of the willing” can move ahead without needing consensus from the COPs. This, they said, was evident this year at the first global conference on TAFF, co-chaired by van Veldhoven and attended by 60 countries.
“Consensus or no-consensus in the general COP doesn’t make a difference for the choices I have to make in my country to get my country to phase out fossil fuels,” said the Dutch minister. The Netherlands recently became one of the first to publish a national TAFF plan.
COP31 banks on flagship voluntary initiatives
This thinking has permeated the management and expected outcomes of this year’s COP too. Earlier this year, Türkiye, supported by international energy agencies, floated the idea of a voluntary goal to boost electrification to 35% of the world’s final energy consumption by 2035 – and this is now being touted as one of the main results to be expected from Antalya.
Türkiye is also championing a pledge on AI and climate, while co-host Australia is pushing to ease access to climate finance for least developed countries and small island states.
COP31 presidency announces AI pledge as UN climate chief says Big Tech ‘on thin ice’
None of these needs consensus. But with a political cover decision already in the works, as trailed by the COP presidents, they – and perhaps the fossil fuel roadmap – may find a home in the official text if language acceptable to most can be found, giving them them additional weight.
UNFCCC reform process in the shadows
Formal reform is underway too, if quietly. UN climate chief Simon Stiell is leading a review informed by ongoing consultations with a group of 15 well-respected climate policy experts, three of whom signed the open letter in 2024.
Among them is leading Swedish climate and sustainability scientist Johan Rockström who has strong ideas about how to make COPs function better, including a switch to majority voting. He told the same press briefing nothing stands in the way of this, because the rules of procedure for making decisions at COPs have never been formally agreed.
Still, to get away from the default setting of consensus would require agreement on a new system that may be impossible to achieve given the rise in bullying tactics by fossil fuel heavyweights.
Comment: The UN climate process was built for negotiation – now it must support implementation
The deliberations with the high-level policy gurus, as reflected in a summary of June’s session in Bonn, largely echo what’s already happening organically, calling for stronger partnerships and accountability both in and between the Action Agenda and negotiations. It doesn’t mention voting.
A general overview of the reform exercise says that “improving and optimizing the [UN climate] process over the medium to long term… will be critical to fostering trust, enhancing collaboration, and catalyzing increased ambition”.
In the short term, don’t hold your breath for anything concrete on reform at COP31 but watch for signs in what ends up dominating the headlines from Türkiye.
The post Editor’s Desk: COP reform is happening quietly, behind the headlines appeared first on Climate Home News.
Editor’s Desk: COP reform is happening quietly, behind the headlines
With the COP31 climate summit in Turkey looming, all eyes are on China to see what the country will push for in the negotiations.
At COP30 last year, China helped to secure a “dialogue” on climate-related “unilateral trade measures”, as well as a two-year “work programme” concerning climate finance.
The nation also championed south-south cooperation throughout the conference and co-led a summit on methane, alongside Brazil and the UK.
In a recent press conference, China’s environment vice-minister Li Gao noted the need to “uphold multilateralism” and send a “clear political signal” that the global community is united around climate action.
Li also pledged to advocate for an “open and efficient” trade system that “facilitates” adoption of clean-energy technologies.
On the more traditional topics of mitigation and finance, Li highlighted the need to “address insufficient emission reduction efforts by developed countries and inadequate financial support” for developing countries.
Carbon Brief asked six leading experts on China what they believe China wants from COP31 and what signals they will be watching for.
Their responses have been edited for length and clarity.