Countries have agreed to a deal at COP27, that offers a firm step forward with a historic loss and damage fund for responding to rising climate impacts, renewable energy singled out as the route to addressing the energy crisis, and strong calls to reform international finance institutions to unlock more finance and fiscal space for climate action along the lines of Barbadian PM Mottley’s Bridgetown Initiative.
However, more generally, there was little assurance on the acceleration needed to keep temperature rise below 1.5C. Tensions over ending the use of fossil fuels rose to the surface at COP27 but are left to the next years to fully address, according to E3G, as they reported to IFA Magazine:
Climate impacts were the central thread at COP27, with a huge change in politics from last year, and remarkable diplomatic efforts in the last weeks. A historic step forward was taken by governments yesterday: for the first time, a Loss and Damage fund and financial arrangements were established. The outcome also highlights the crucial role of MDBs and debt service suspension clauses, which will be key to ensuring new, additional, predictable and adequate finance for Loss and Damage. The fight is not over: details on who will contribute to the fund or on the accessibility to the financial arrangements will have to be negotiated in the upcoming years. But we can finally say Loss and Damage won fair recognition at COP27 – and that deserves to be celebrated.
Commenting on the Loss and Damage fund, Ines Benomar, E3G Researcher and Loss and Damage expert said: “Through the leadership of vulnerable country groups, who pushed very hard for a tangible loss and damage outcome at and during COP27, we reached for the first time in 30 years a breakthrough agreement. It is not perfect, and leaves many questions unanswered. But it addresses the basic needs of developing nations, who have been calling for it for so long. The details will have to be ironed out over the next year(s), and it can result in a difficult process over the question of who pays, who receives and how vulnerability is defined. The burden of loss and damage, and how it affects developing countries, was long overdue and deserves to be recognized. But it is crucial to ensure 1.5 stays alive – or see losses and damages escalate.”
