Looking ahead to Cancun

* David Sheppard



 

Climate change is a fundamental challenge for the Pacific Islands Countries and our communities.
No longer an abstract concept, climate change impacts on coasts, forest ecosystems, our oceans, freshwater supplies, and indeed all aspects of life on Pacific islands are very real. 
Particularly to the communities of our small low-lying countries where the effects of sea level rise and changing weather patterns are already creating social and economic disruption.
All these impacts will affect the very fabric of island livelihoods.
The issue has been on the political agenda for the region for the past two decades, and Leaders have mandated a strong Pacific voice in the international negotiations on climate change.
The region has managed through concerted efforts over the years to get their message heard at the international level, but is this message being listened to?
The Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) has been mandated by the Pacific Heads of Government as the lead regional agency for the co-ordination of the Pacific’s response to this challenging threat and is committed to assisting its members to plan and respond effectively to climate change and its adverse effects.
In carrying out this mandate, SPREP has sought to strengthen cooperation with relevant stakeholders, including other regional agencies in the Pacific, such as the Secretariat of the Pacific Community.
We also support Pacific countries to engage in climate change negotiations, access international funding sources and meet their responsibilities under international agreements such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
As such, we provide continued support and technical advice at international meetings and opportunities for negotiations skills strengthening.
While the region has many talented, articulate and knowledgeable negotiators, most of these also wear other hats, and there is a need to develop further a cadre of capable personnel.
At Copenhagen last year, the Pacific was very well represented with eight Heads of Government and Ministers from other Pacific Islands Countries.
The delegations showed effective negotiations acumen, but in the final analysis the agreement that was nearly reached was negotiated in the absence of the Pacific.

Legal status
A small group of ministers developed the Copenhagen Accord, which did not reach consensus and was therefore noted and not adopted by the conference, creating doubts about its legal status and reach.
Pacific governments have been debating for months whether to associate with the accord and eventually about half of the countries did so but all expressed reservations about elements of the accord that they were not in agreement with.
An analysis of the Accord text was provided by SPREP to the members, highlighting its pros and cons, which were discussed at an informal consultation held in Cairns in March.
The Pacific, working through the Alliance of Small Islands States (AOSIS), decided to maintain much of the same positions taken prior to Copenhagen, with some refinements in details and in strategy.
The recent Framework for the Convention for Climate Change meetings in Bonn in June saw a greater degree of outreach to other groups of vulnerable countries.
These included the group of Least Developed Countries, the Central American group, the African group and several others. Building such alliances and cooperation will be important to gain better traction for the concerns articulated by the Pacific region.
The current negotiations are best described as working at a slowed down pace, and this has also contributed to the overall perception of down-playing expectations for the next climate conference in Mexico (Cancun) in December.
There are also procedural obstacles, particularly in the form of a key science compendium request by the Pacific and AOSIS, but which was blocked towards the end of the last meeting.
The negotiating text has been further streamlined in the process, but in doing so, most Pacific delegates felt that too much of the key AOSIS positions had been diminished or lost, while at the same time issues where there was little consensus had been retained.
The Pacific, through AOSIS, has also maintained its call for a limitation of long-term warming to 1.5 degrees. As evidenced by reports of coral bleaching and other impacts throughout the Pacific, it has become clear that a two-degree rise is too much for too many countries, and that the 1.5-degree target would also result in impacts.
Pacific negotiators are convinced though that this ambitious target is achievable as well as economically feasible.
In terms of substance, mitigation remains one of the trickiest issues. The level of ambition reflected in the pledges for mid-term emission reductions by Annex I countries does not match the science, as has been pointed out repeatedly by the Pacific.
While there remains a need for engaging the non-Kyoto Parties and ensuring the comparability of Annex I countries’ emission reductions efforts and agreeing on what happens to the mechanism of the Kyoto Protocol, it is still very difficult to settle on a legal framework for mitigation and monitoring, review and verification that is acceptable to both developed and developing countries.
In terms of the way forward, SPREP will continue to support Pacific delegations in the negotiations, in particular assisting them with information on the urgency for Pacific Islands to arrive at a meaningful and legally binding agreement at Cancun. This despite the significant obstacles that have been erected against such an outcome at this stage.
There have also been discussions with climate change delegates for establishing a higher profile for the Pacific within the negotiations.
SPREP will seek to assist the Pacific in not only making its messages heard at the international level.
Our Pacific future depends upon it.

* David Sheppard is the director of SREP and he is based in Apia,  Samoa.