Robust, multilateral agreement on climate adaptation funding for third world nations is essential. The talks in Copenhagen this week seek to replace the Kyoto Protocol. Ratified 12 years ago by 187 nations, Kyoto established an ‘Adaptation Fund’ to contribute financial aid to those developing countries affected by climate change. However, the clunking wheels of bureaucracy have so far stalled this body and it has yet to award funding to a single developing nation. This time, estimates of the funding to be offered range from $100 to 600 billion per year but even before the summit, fears arose that recession concerns would scupper this progression before it began.
Yet this aid is sorely needed. While it seems trite, I must once again reiterate the real and present threat posed to developing nations by climate change. The Maldives, only 8 feet above sea level at their highest point face not just enormous environmental change but complete destruction. In the Sudan, climate change has already had political implications. The economist Jeffrey Sachs writes "The deadly carnage in Darfur, Sudan, for example, which is almost always discussed in political and military terms, has roots in an ecological crisis directly arising from climate shocks,". In Bangladesh, a sea level rise of just 1 meter could force 30 million people from their homes. While refugee status can be afforded to those fleeing from persecution, there is no provision for those fleeing from climate disaster, a number which is rising exponentially.
Funding to tackle climate change in developing nations is inextricably linked to the success of the Millennium Development goals. One cannot exist without the other. How can developing nations hope to eradicate extreme starvation and hunger when weather patterns are changing so dramatically that farming methods used for centuries are suddenly null and void? How can they attempt to reduce child mortality when catastrophic floods bring disease and displacement?
Yet discussions in Copenhagen continue to be hampered to the point of impotency. An extract from the provisional agreement concerning the financial mechanisms that will govern the Adaptation Fund best demonstrates the lack of progress being made:
"To [establish] [define] an [X] body, which shall [work under the [guidance [and authority] of and] be accountable to the Conference of the Parties, [to implement the policies, programme priorities and eligibility criteria of the financial mechanism], pursuant to decision --/CP.15 (Finance)".
Vague? Inconclusive? Plenty of room to escape commitments? Yes. All the time in the world to discuss the issues at hand? No. So far the prognosis for developing nations does not look good.
The Head of the African bloc in Copenhagen has said that developing nations must be flexible in their demands for funding. I applaud his attempts to reach an agreement. However, the facts remain inflexible. Sea level rises in the Maldives will not be flexible. Crop failures in Sudan will not be flexible. Climate refugees cannot be flexible. We in the developed world can be flexible. We must be flexible. We must agree and act.
