By Emily Robinson
The handling of COP29 led many in the climate action community to question the point and, especially, the effectiveness of the conference. An overhaul of the process is long overdue – and the Commonwealth is in a unique position to help in this transition, particularly with the vacuum left by the US’ withdrawal from the Paris Agreement and the World Health Organisation.
With a combined population of 2.7 billion, 60 percent being under the age of 30, the Commonwealth can focus on amplifying the voices of the most vulnerable member states, providing a platform for Small Island Developing States (SIDS) and Least Developed Countries (LDCs) to articulate their unique challenges and priorities to effectively combat the impacts of the climate crisis. The diversity within the 56 nations of the Commonwealth is a strength, allowing for a rich exchange of ideas, resources, and expertise – and by pooling efforts, member states can exert a stronger influence on global affairs than they could individually, particularly in global climate negotiations.
The Commonwealth has long been proactive in drawing attention to the climate vulnerabilities of its member states, particularly the 25 SIDS. These nations are disproportionately affected by the impacts of climate change: rising sea levels, extreme weather events, and environmental degradation. During COP meetings, the Commonwealth was able to highlight these issues and showcase a wide range of projects aimed at mitigation and adaptation, emphasising the need for urgent action and international cooperation.
Effectiveness of Commonwealth diplomacy and the role of its ‘big emitters’
The effectiveness of Commonwealth diplomacy in influencing global climate policy can be seen as a mixed bag. On one hand, the Commonwealth has successfully raised awareness about the specific challenges faced by its most vulnerable members and has advocated for greater support from the international community. This has led to some positive outcomes, such as increased funding for climate resilience projects and the inclusion of SIDS and LDCs in key climate negotiations. In Baku, governments agreed to set a more ambitious goal on climate finance with at least US$300 billion per year pledged by 2035, tripling the previous target set in 2009. An agreement to secure efforts of both public and private entities to scale up finance to developing countries to US$1.3 trillion per year by 2035 was also put in place.
On the other hand, the traction gained by these activities has been limited by several factors. Because the Commonwealth is a voluntary association of independent countries, its 56 member states have diverse interests and priorities, which can lead to conflicting positions. The presence of ‘big emitters’ within the Commonwealth, such as India, Canada, South Africa and Australia, complicates efforts to present a unified front on climate action. These countries have significant economic interests tied to fossil fuels and have been seen as impediments to more ambitious mitigation efforts.
The role of Commonwealth ‘big emitters’ is indeed a contentious issue. These nations, with their substantial greenhouse gas emissions, bear a significant responsibility in the global effort to combat climate change. However, their domestic policies and economic dependencies often hinder more aggressive climate actions. For instance, Australia’s reliance on coal exports and India’s growing energy needs pose challenges to their commitments to reducing emissions.
While these countries have made some progress in adopting renewable energy sources and improving energy efficiency, their overall impact on global emissions remains a grave concern. The reluctance of ‘big emitters’ to commit to more stringent targets undermines the credibility of Commonwealth diplomacy and its ability to achieve meaningful outcomes for its member states. In 2019, this led a coalition of vulnerable states spearheaded by Vanuatu to seek clarification from the International Court of Justice (ICJ). With the decision expected later this year, the ICJ is expected to advise on States’ obligations on two points:
What is their duty to protect the climate? What are the legal consequences when they cause significant harm through their actions or inactions?
The involvement of the ICJ only further highlights the need for robust legal frameworks and international cooperation to address the pressing challenges of climate change and ensure accountability for major emitters.
Financial assistance deadlock
Another critical issue is the deadlock over financial assistance to offset the ravages of increasingly severe climate events and rising sea levels. Many Commonwealth countries lack the resources to implement effective mitigation and adaptation measures on their own.
They rely heavily on financial support from developed nations, which has been slow to materialise. Recognising the needs of its most vulnerable members, the Commonwealth established their Climate Finance Action Hub in 2016. The fund aims to enhance the resilience of all member states and address the challenges posed by climate change effectively. Over US$400 million has been allocated for climate adaptation and mitigation projects in many SIDS and climate-vulnerable states. Although this is a drop in the ocean of what is necessary, it is a good starting point and a model for climate finance initiatives on a global scale.
The promise of US$100 billion per year in climate finance, made by developed countries in 2009, remains difficult to access, particularly for SIDS, or are largely unmet. Because the pledges from nations are voluntary and not legally binding, they can be difficult to track. The UN Trade and Development estimated SIDS received only US$1.5 billion in climate finance in 2019. It has led to frustration and disappointment among developing Commonwealth nations, who see this as a failure of international solidarity and a major impediment to their climate resilience efforts. The lack of sufficient and timely financial assistance exacerbates the vulnerability of these countries and significantly hampers their ability to recover from climate-induced disasters.
The road to COP30 in Brazil
Ultimately, the perception of Commonwealth diplomacy and its outcomes for member countries is influenced by the broader geopolitical and economic context. The Commonwealth’s efforts to address climate change are commendable, but they are often constrained by external factors such as global power dynamics, economic inequalities, and the varying capacities of member states to implement climate actions. When it comes to addressing these issues, the Commonwealth must prioritise the development of a unified media strategy. By promoting collaboration among media outlets from different member states, the Commonwealth can encourage the sharing of diverse stories and perspectives and by establishing platforms for collective messaging when it comes to climate issues.
By fostering a cohesive media presence, the Commonwealth can enhance its ability to communicate its goals and achievements effectively within its member states and to a global audience. A key to this will be climate education within the Commonwealth. By developing and implementing comprehensive educational programmes that include input from across the Commonwealth, the marginalised SIDS and LDC communities are assured that their perspectives are included in the Commonwealth’s narrative.
For Commonwealth diplomacy to be more effective, there needs to be a concerted effort to bridge the gap between rhetoric and action.
- Emily Robinson is the Honorary Secretary of the Commonwealth Human Ecology Council.
The post COP no longer ‘fit for purpose’? How the Commonwealth can help appeared first on Caribbean News Global.
