I don't know what you all have read and think about the recent COP27 conference. But, from what I have read, it can only be thought of as a failure. Just one of the many statistics to come out of the event – there were over 600 lobbyists from the fossil fuel industry present. Accordingly, they got exactly what they were no doubt paid a lot of money to secure – a toothless agreement to continue to talk about possibly doing something at some vague future point. As noted in the article in the url below:
"It really does beggar belief, that in the course of 27 Cops, there has never been a formal agreement to reduce the world's fossil fuel use. … It is no surprise, then, that from Cop1 in Berlin in 1995, to Egypt this year, emissions have continued – barring a small downward blip at the height of the pandemic – to head remorselessly upwards."
Of course, to plumb these depths, COP27 had to out-do the disastrous COP26, a year earlier:
"Expectations were never especially high over the course of the 12 months since Glasgow's Cop26. Even so, COP27 has to be a new low – held in a country cowed by a malicious dictatorship, the world's biggest plastic polluter on board as a sponsor, and hosting more than 600 fossil fuel representatives and many others who are there to prevent, rather than promote progress and action. Some old hands have labelled it the worst COP ever, and I doubt many would argue."
A big part of the problem, according to the author of the article, is the scale of each COP meeting, which takes place in front of the world media:
"In all honesty, it is becoming increasingly difficult to view these events as anything other than photo opportunities for presidents and prime ministers who turn up simply to make the world think they care. The reality is that, in most cases, they have no inkling of how bad climate breakdown is set to be and little interest in finding out."
So, where do we go from here? The author of the article suggests moving away from massive, global meetings (where compromise almost always seems to mean the lowest common denominator) and move towards smaller groups of people with the authority to make decisions. Arguably, the best thing to come out of COP27 had nothing to do with the COP process, itself – China and the U.S. agreed to resume working bilaterally on this issue. Given that they collectively emit close to 40% of greenhouse gas emissions, if that small group of two can decide to do something, and then can secure the buy-in of the EU, we might make some meaningful progress:
"What is needed is an apparatus that is less cumbersome and more manageable – something leaner and meaner that zeros in on the most critical aspects of the climate crisis, that does its work largely hidden from the glare of the media, and which presents a less obvious honey pot to the busy bees of the fossil fuel sector. One way forward, then, could be to establish a number of smaller bodies, each addressing one of the key issues – notably energy, agriculture, deforestation, transport, loss and damage, and perhaps others."
And, essentially, these would be standing committees, rather than very large groups of constantly shifting people who meet one week a year in a different location, each time:
"Such bodies would operate full-time, liaising with one another and perhaps coming together a few times a year. Ideally, they would be made up of representatives from both developed and majority-world countries. In direct contact with representatives of national governments, part of their remit would be to negotiate agreements that are workable, legally binding, and which actually do the job – whether reversing deforestation, cutting methane emissions, or drawing down coal usage. As and when all terms and conditions are agreed, these could be validated and signed off by world leaders as a matter of course and without the need for the ballyhoo of a global conference."
As they say, what's the worst that could happen? You could argue 'global climate calamity,' but that is the direction we are heading in with the current arrangement.
Take care
David
David Chandler
© Sage Publications, 2023
Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler6e
Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/
The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/
The big takeaway from COP27? These climate conferences just aren't working
By Bill McGuire
November 20, 2022
The Guardian
