African Group denounces push back on achievements of Durban, Doha by developed countries

LIMA, Peru 2 December, 2014 (ClimDev-Africa) - The African Group of Negotiators (AGN) today reiterated the importance of the ongoing 20^th session of the United Nations Climate Change Conference which opened here yesterday, but warned that any push back on the achievements of Durban and Doha could compromise the talks.

In a press release distributed to the media, the group’s Chair, Nagmeldin Goutbi Elhassan assured that the “African Group is committed to the success of the Lima conference, although there is serious concern that Annex I countries may want to rescind the commitments of Duban and Doha on adaptation, finance, and technology transfer which of high importance to Africa.

The release says that African countries, united in the talks as the African Group, intend to use this opportunity to build the multilateral rules-based system through a comprehensive outcome to curb the growing threat posed to the African continent.

“We have a mandate from science, from our people, from the continent of Africa, and from the United Nations itself to push for enhanced global climate action to cut GHG emissions as well as strengthen adaptation,” the release reads.

Elhassan further alludes to the group’s priority on the two key objectives of the Lima Conference: raising international climate action in the pre-2020 period, and negotiation of a new agreement coming to effect in 2020.

Africa is concerned with pre-2020 action, especially on climate finance because this is what is needed to spur action on the ground.

“Recent pledges to the Green Climate Fund are a small first step, but funding around $2.4 billion per year is not close to the actual need, and is a far cry from the $100 billion pledged for 2020.  Lima should therefore provide a clear roadmap for how finance contributions will increase step-by-step to 2020”, the press release reads.

The release also emphasises the need to respect the single nature of the mandate from Durban for negotiations on the agreement to be concluded in 2015 in Paris and to go into force from 2020 onward.

The African Group’s concern (expressed earlier in the negotiations in October) that some parties are ‘pushing back’ on understandings in Duban and Doha by proposing an asymmetric 2015 agreement that focuses on one element (mitigation) to the exclusion of others –adaptation and finance, for example.

“The 2^oC global goal poses serious risks for Africa. The IPCC has showed that 2^oC of warming means substantial adaptation measures are needed in Africa to ensure food security and support sustainable development” Elhassan argues in the release. He adds that given those risks, adaptation must be central to the post-2020 agreement and we need far greater transfers of finance and technology to countries which are particularly vulnerable to adverse effects yet have little historical responsibility for climate change.

African negotiators been positive about recent about recent announcements by the EU, US and China on the 2030 emission targets but are quick to note that the commitments fall far short of the minimum that science requires.

They have therefore, challenged the EU and US to match stronger mitigation targets with intended contributions on finance, adaptation, technology transfer and capacity building, in accordance with their international obligations.

“Lima must clarify requirements for national mitigation contributions, and their assessment for adequacy and equity”, says Seyni Nafo of Mali.

Elhassan also echoed assertions by the African Union Committee of African Heads of State on Climate Change (CAHOSCC) that a fair agreement in Paris for Africa is one that includes all of the pillars of the Durban mandate, not merely mitigation -- that is, mitigation, adaptation, finance, technology development and transfer, capacity-building and transparency of action and support.

“It is not acceptable to relegate the group’s call for prioritisation of adaptation, to “political parity”, as the group is looking for material and legal parity between mitigation and adaptation. Finance, technology and capacity building should not be seen as peripheral to the agreement, just because it may be inconvenient to some of our negotiating partners, Elhassan insists.

Issued by ClimDev-Africa Programme