- What timeline options were delegates debating?
- How did the timeline discussions unfold?
- What were the main points of disagreement?
- Why is the IPCC in a ‘serious funding crisis’?
- How have scientists reacted?
- What other issues remain unresolved?
- How are the IPCC AR7 reports progressing?
- How might the IPCC use AI and enhance gender inclusivity?
I am reminded of a surprising and cherished memory of a gift that arrived at my office door one July afternoon—four tiny raspberries. As I sat at my desk, deeply immersed in writing, Shyra, my partner in life and business, returned from a short walk. In her hand, she held these delicate ruby-coloured gems, her face alight with excitement and curiosity as she asked, “Are these wild raspberries?”
My affirmation brought a look of elation to her face, but I could see the question forming in her eyes. Why were these berries so much smaller than the ones we typically see in stores? This simple question transported me back to a cherished memory, a lesson from my grandmother that has stayed with me for years.
The Sacred Role of Berries in Nature and Community
I remember clearly the day my grandmother and I walked along the east side of a large hill she lived on. With a subtle gesture—a point of her chin—she directed my attention to a patch of raspberry bushes. “These are raspberries,” she said. “They have been here for many years. There is just enough for us to enjoy their sweetness.”
Curious about their diminutive size, I asked her why they were so small. Her response was simple and profound: “I believe they are tiny because they serve a purpose: to create more raspberries.” She explained that raspberries are keepers of their seeds, designed to be eaten so humans, birds, and animals can disperse them. This natural process ensures the growth of new raspberry plants, perpetuating their life cycle and maintaining the balance of nature.
Her teachings revealed a sacred truth: these berries are not merely food but an essential part of the ecosystem, holding a sacred role in sustaining biodiversity of creating sacred spaces. The small size of wild raspberries isn’t a flaw but a feature that ensures their purpose is fulfilled. Every berry, every seed, every bite connects humans, animals, and the land in a cycle of interdependence.
Climate Change and the Balance of Nature
This delicate balance, however, is increasingly under threat from climate change. Rising temperatures, unpredictable weather patterns, and habitat destruction significantly impact the growth, health, and distribution of wild berries, including raspberries. Warmer winters disrupt dormancy cycles, leading to poor fruit production, while more frequent droughts stress plants and reduce yields. Unseasonal frosts can damage early blooms, and shifting climate zones are forcing plants to adapt to conditions they may not survive.
Other native berries in Ontario, such as blackberries, blueberries, serviceberries, elderberries, and strawberries, are also experiencing similar challenges. These plants, which once thrived in harmony with the local environment, are now vulnerable to changing precipitation patterns, invasive species, and soil degradation. This impacts the plants and the entire ecosystem that relies on them, from pollinators to humans.
For Indigenous communities, these berries are more than sustenance—they are integral to cultural identity and practices, traditional medicines, and food sovereignty. They symbolize the reciprocal relationship between humans and nature, which is strained by environmental degradation and climate change. The loss of these berries would represent an ecological crisis and a profound cultural loss.
Berries as a Foundation of Food Sovereignty
Berries like raspberries hold a sacred role in food sustainability and sovereignty. Their abundance supports a diverse food web, providing nutrition to countless species, including humans. In Indigenous food systems, berries are central to seasonal diets, ceremonial practices, and economic sustainability. Harvesting wild berries fosters a connection to the land, reinforcing the principle that food is a gift from Mother Earth to be shared responsibly.
The role of berries in the local food economy is also significant. Wild and cultivated berries contribute to community-based economies, supporting local growers and Indigenous harvesters. These plants embody the principles of balance and reciprocity, teaching us that sustainable food systems depend on healthy ecosystems. When climate change disrupts this balance, the consequences ripple through the food economy, threatening food security and sovereignty.
A Call to Protect the Sacred Role of Berries
Climate change is a threat to the environment and a challenge to the sacred relationships that sustain life. Berries like raspberries remind us of the interconnectedness of all living things and the importance of preserving these relationships. Protecting these plants means addressing the root causes of climate change, restoring habitats, and respecting Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) that has long guided sustainable stewardship of the land.
We must recognize the sacred role of berries as decision-makers in the health and well-being of people, plants, and animals. They are not mere commodities but vital participants in the dance of life, shaping ecosystems and supporting the cycles that sustain us all. Safeguarding their future is a moral and ecological imperative.
Honouring the Lessons of the Raspberry
As I savoured the sweet-tart flavour of the raspberries Shyra had found, I was grateful for her thoughtful gesture, the spirit of the berry, and the enduring wisdom of my grandmother’s teachings. These tiny berries, with their significant purpose, remind us of the beauty and fragility of the natural world. They teach us that food is not just sustenance but a sacred gift, a testament to the balance and wisdom of nature.
These lessons are more critical than ever in our modern world, where food systems are often disconnected from the land. The impacts of climate change compel us to reexamine our relationship with food, the environment, and each other. By protecting berries and the ecosystems they support, we honour the sacred balance of life and ensure a future where food sovereignty and sustainability are possible.
Let us walk gently on this Earth, remembering that even the smallest berry carries the wisdom of the land and the power to nourish life. By protecting these treasures, we uphold our responsibility to future generations and the sacred cycles that sustain us all.
By Rye Karonhiowanen Barberstock
(Image Credit: Christian Wiediger, Unsplash)
The post Small Berries, Big Lessons: A Reflection on Nature’s Wisdom and the Impacts of Climate Change appeared first on Indigenous Climate Hub.
Small Berries, Big Lessons: A Reflection on Nature’s Wisdom and the Impacts of Climate Change
Continue Reading
Climate Change
Paris Agreement committee names three countries snubbing it over NDCs
Three countries have been named by the Paris Agreement’s compliance committee for failing to submit a nationally determined contribution (NDC) and repeatedly snubbing offers of help with their climate plans.
After months of internal debate over whether to identify serial non-responders, the Paris Agreement’s Implementation and Compliance Committee (PAICC) named the three countries which have failed to engage with it over their NDCs on Friday.
It named Democratic Republic of Congo, Senegal and North Korea in a footnote of its annual report, adding that it decided to name them “with a view to facilitating engagement”, adding that representatives of the three nations had been invited to its meeting in early 2027 “with the purpose of identifying any challenges and constraints”.
“The Committee noted the importance of Parties engaging with the Committee in a timely manner, while noting that some delays may be due to the national capabilities and circumstances of the Parties”, the report said.
In July, PAICC said 12 countries had ignored its repeated attempts to discuss why they had not published an NDC as required every five years under the 2015 Paris accord.
Members of the committee had been divided over whether to name them, but at a September meeting decided to do so in their annual report to the annual climate COP summit.
By the time the report was published on Friday, only Congo, Senegal and North Korea “had not communicated an NDC or submitted a [Biennial Transparency Report] and had not yet responded to any of the Committee’s notifications, despite several reminders issued by the Committee in this regard”.
Rainforest and renewable energy ambitions
The silence from Congo and Senegal is notable because the former is home to much of the Congo Basin rainforest while the latter has sought billions of dollars in climate finance to support its renewable energy ambitions.
After Brazil, Congo has more rainforest than any country in the world. This forest, and the country’s peatlands, absorb huge amounts of greenhouse gas but are fast being lost to expanding farmland, charcoal production, logging and mining.
Senegal signed a Just Energy Transition Partnership with Canada and wealthy European nations in 2023, to help it meet its renewable energy targets under the-then government of Macky Sall. It was chair of the Least Developed Countries group between January 2022 and December 2023.

Tejas Rao, who is researching the PAICC as part of a doctoral thesis at Cambridge University, said the governments of the three countries should engage with the committee.
“Engagement costs these governments very little and the committee has shown it will listen,” he said.
“Silence leaves the committee with no basis to help, and it leaves the [governments] exposed to the narrative that they are simply disengaged,” he told Climate Home News.
Paris Agreement requirement
The 2015 Paris Agreement requires all parties to publish an NDC every five years outlining their emissions reduction targets, with each plan meant to be more ambitious than the country’s last NDC.
The latest set – the third round of plans, with new targets for 2035 – was due in February 2025. While most countries missed this deadline, all but around 30 – mostly small emitters but including Egypt, Vietnam and Argentina – have now submitted them.
Over the year, the PAICC – which is made up of government climate officials from developed and developing countries – has been communicating with governments that have not submitted NDCs and trying to overcome barriers to them doing so.
Some nations have cited exceptional circumstances as the reason for not submitting an NDC, a process that requires a significant amount of work in tracking emissions and consulting on how to curb them across the economy. For example, a letter from a Sudanese official to the PAICC, seen by Climate Home News, said that the country’s civil war had led to the suspension of its NDC preparation.
The US and Iran are not signed up to the Paris Agreement and so do not have active NDCs, nor does Taiwan, which is not a UN member state.
Rao said that because the PAICC is “facilitative and non-punitive”, naming the countries “is meant to open a door, not close one – the invited consultation is the point”.
“In recent months, governments that explained their constraints, whether capacity, finance or domestic process, have been met with follow-up and support rather than sanction, and the number of silent governments has fallen sharply,” Rao said.
The post Paris Agreement committee names three countries snubbing it over NDCs appeared first on Climate Home News.
Paris Agreement committee names three countries snubbing it over NDCs
Climate Change
Q&A: Why a pivotal IPCC meeting in Ethiopia ended in ‘profound disappointment’
Countries have failed – for the sixth time running – to agree on the timeline for publishing the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) next set of influential reports.
The IPCC’s 65th session (IPCC-65) was seen by many to be the final opportunity for countries to agree on a schedule where its seventh assessment report (AR7) would be published in time for the UN’s second “global stocktake” of climate action.
Before last week’s meeting in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, IPCC chair Prof Sir Jim Skea had warned that releasing the reports in time for the stocktake in 2028 would depend on a timelines being agreed by the end of 2026.
But the week-long meeting descended into fraught disagreements between governments, resulting in Skea “suspending” the talks on Friday evening with no decision made.
Countries were also unable to agree on the IPCC’s budget for the rest of the AR7 cycle, leaving the body with a “serious funding crisis”.
The IPCC has pledged to reconvene the meeting at the “earliest opportunity”; however, it has not yet given an indication of when this will be.
In his concluding remarks, Skea described the Addis Ababa summit as a “profound disappointment” and “among the most difficult IPCC meetings”, according to reporting from the Earth Negotiations Bulletin (ENB).
Some countries have reacted with dismay to the breakdown of negotiations, warning that a failure to have the IPCC’s latest assessments on climate adaptation and mitigation ready for the UN stocktaking exercise would undermine global climate action.
A climate envoy from a Pacific island state said it was a “travesty that a handful of countries continue to delay the IPCC’s reports – the science we need back home to help us save lives and livelihoods”.
Below, Carbon Brief explores the key developments, debates and disagreements at the IPCC meeting.
- What timeline options were delegates debating?
- How did the timeline discussions unfold?
- What were the main points of disagreement?
- Why is the IPCC in a ‘serious funding crisis’?
- How have scientists reacted?
- What other issues remain unresolved?
- How are the IPCC AR7 reports progressing?
- How might the IPCC use AI and enhance gen


