The Future is Equal

climate

Rich countries fail to submit ambitious plans to cut emissions

In response to the UNFCCC’s Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) Synthesis Report published today, Chelsea Hodgkins, Oxfam’s Climate Change Policy Lead, said: 

“This report shows world leaders are still failing to address the climate crisis —our planet is currently on track for a catastrophic global temperature rise of 2.5°C. Scientists are clear: it’s now or never to limit global warming to 1.5°C. Climate change is causing suffering across the world, and it will continue to do so. People are already being pushed from their homes, and are facing hunger and drought, floods, and other climate-induced disasters.”

“The climate crisis does not affect everyone equally —it has a disproportionate impact on people in poorer countries as well as women, Indigenous peoples and other marginalised groups. This is why governments must develop and implement NDCs with equity at the forefront. So far, progress on the inclusion and protection of women and Indigenous peoples’ rights, namely land rights, has been abysmal.” 

Oxfam supports calls from allies, including the Business and Human Rights Resource Center and Indigenous Peoples’ Rights International, for NDCs to include specific plans for ensuring equal access to clean, reliable and affordable energy and clear protections for land rights. NDCs should also guarantee the rights of environmental defenders and Indigenous peoples’ right to free, prior and informed consent. 

“Countries must work toward putting our world on a safer path by collectively reducing emissions by at least 45 percent from 2010 levels by 2030. Today’s report shows that the combined climate plans submitted will increase global emissions by over 10 percent by 2030. This is alarming.”

“Rich countries have yet again failed to prioritise our planet. They have shown a lack of interest and commitment to addressing climate change that they are largely responsible for. Every fraction of warming is a death sentence, especially for poor communities that are most affected yet least prepared. We call on countries that have not yet submitted their revised climate plans to do so with urgency. They must do so based on their fair share to limit warming to 1.5°C and with specific protections for women, Indigenous peoples, environmental defenders, and marginalised communities.”

189 million people per year affected by extreme weather in developing countries as rich countries stall on paying climate impact costs

Lower-income countries paying the highest price as emissions and fossil fuel profits rocket

An average of 189 million people per year have been affected by extreme weather-related events in developing countries since 1991 – the year that a mechanism was first proposed to address the costs of climate impacts on low-income countries – according to a new report published today.

The report, The Cost of Delay, by the Loss and Damage Collaboration – a group of more than 100 researchers, activists, and policymakers from around the globe – highlights how rich countries have repeatedly stalled efforts to provide dedicated finance to developing countries bearing the costs of a climate crisis they did little to cause.

Analysis shows that in the first half of 2022 six fossil fuel companies combined made enough money to cover the cost of major extreme weather and climate-related events in developing countries and still have nearly US$70 billion profit remaining.

The report reveals that 55 of the most climate-vulnerable countries have suffered climate-induced economic losses totalling over half a trillion dollars during the first two decades of this century as fossil fuel profits rocket leaving people in some of the poorest places on earth to foot the bill.

The report also reveals that the fossil fuel industry made enough super-profit between 2000 and 2019 to cover the costs of climate-induced economic losses in 55 of the most climate-vulnerable countries almost sixty times over.

Finance to address ‘loss and damage’ – the term used to refer to the destructive impacts of climate change that aren’t avoided by mitigation or adaptation – is set to be the defining issue of COP27, the UN climate talks taking place in Sharm El-Sheikh in November, as developing countries call for action after decades of delay.

The report estimates that since 1991, developing countries experienced 79 per cent of recorded deaths and 97 per cent of the total recorded number of people affected by the impacts of weather extremes. Analysis also shows that the number of extreme weather and climate-related events that developing countries experience has more than doubled over that period with over 676,000 people killed.

The entire continent of Africa produces less than four per cent of global emissions and the African Development Bank reported recently the continent was losing between five and 15 per cent of its GDP per capita growth because of climate change.

Lyndsay Walsh, Oxfam’s climate policy adviser and co-author of the report said: “It is an injustice that polluters who are disproportionately responsible for the escalating greenhouse gas emissions continue to reap these enormous profits while climate-vulnerable countries are left to foot the bill for the climate impacts destroying people’s lives, homes and jobs.

“This is not a future reality, it is happening now, as we are seeing with the devastating floods in Pakistan and unprecedented drought in East Africa.

“But it is not too late. COP27 starts in just two weeks and finance to address loss and damage must be agreed. News that the issue will be on the agenda for COP27 is welcome and an ambitious outcome is critical not only for those dealing with climate impacts in developing countries, but also for maintaining trust and credibility.

“We must end this delay. The best time to start was 31 years ago, the next best time is now.”

At COP26 last year, developing countries were united in calling for the establishment of a Loss and Damage Finance Facility, to ensure a comprehensive approach to climate impacts, but this was shot down by developed countries in favour of a three-year dialogue – the Glasgow Dialogue – with no mandated outcomes.

Professor Saleemul Huq, director of the International Centre for Climate Change and Development in Bangladesh, said: “As one of the few people who has attended every single COP over the last three decades, I have personally witnessed the resistance from the developed countries to every attempt by the vulnerable developing countries to discuss loss and damage from human-induced climate change. If it doesn’t get on the agenda from COP27 onwards the UNFCCC will have failed in its responsibilities.”

The catastrophic flooding in Pakistan this year, directly affected at least 33 million people and costs were estimated at over US$30 billion. Yet the UN humanitarian appeal for the floods is set at only US$472.3 million (just over one per cent of what is needed), and only 19 per cent funded. The flood response is not considered to be anywhere near enough to help the millions of people who have lost their livelihoods and homes and face hunger, disease and psychological impacts.

Pakistan will have to take out another IMF loan to help recover from the floods, in contrast, funds from a loss and damage finance facility would be new and additional and come in the form of grants, to ensure the country was not burdened by debt in the aftermath of a climate-induced disaster.

Every fraction of a degree of further warming means more climate impacts with losses from climate change in developing countries estimated to be between US$290 billion and US$580 billion by 2030. These estimates do not include non-economic losses and damages, such as psychological impacts and biodiversity loss, which are profound but cannot be translated fully into monetary terms, meaning the true cost is far higher than what is accounted for.

With current global policies projected to result in about 2.7°C warming above pre-industrial levels, and huge gaps between the amount of finance required by developing countries to adapt and what is being provided, the urgent need for finance to address loss and damage is clear.

 

Notes to editors:

  • The full report ‘The cost of delay: why finance to address Loss and Damage must be agreed at COP27’ is available here. (link will go live on 24 October – pdf available on request)

True value of climate finance is a third of what developed countries report

Reporting international climate finance remains flawed, and profoundly unfair.

Many rich countries are using dishonest and misleading accounting to inflate their climate finance contributions to developing countries – in 2020 by as much as 225 percent, according to investigations by Oxfam.

Oxfam estimates between just US$21-24.5 billion as the “true value” of climate finance provided in 2020, against a reported figure of US$68.3 billion in public finance that rich countries said was provided (alongside mobilised private finance bringing the total to US$83.3 billion). The global climate finance target is supposed to be US$100 billion a year.

“Rich country contributions not only continue to fall miserably below their promised goal but are also very misleading in often counting the wrong things in the wrong way. They’re overstating their own generosity by painting a rosy picture that obscures how much is really going to poor countries,” said Nafkote Dabi, Oxfam International Climate Policy Lead.

“Our global climate finance is a broken train: drastically flawed and putting us at risk of reaching a catastrophic destination. There are too many loans indebting poor countries that are already struggling to cope with climatic shocks. There is too much dishonest and shady reporting. The result is the most vulnerable countries remaining ill-prepared to face the wrath of the climate crisis,” says Dabi.

Oxfam research found that instruments such as loans are being reported at face value, ignoring repayments and other factors. Too often funded projects have less climate-focus than reported, making the net value of support specifically aiming at climate action significantly lower than actual reported climate finance figures. 

Currently, loans are dominating over 70 percent provision (US$48.6 billion) of public climate finance, adding to the debt crisis across developing countries.

“To force poor countries to repay a loan to cope with a climate crisis they hardly caused is profoundly unfair. Instead of supporting countries that are facing worsening droughts, cyclones and flooding, rich countries are crippling their ability to cope with the next shock and deepening their poverty,” said Dabi.

Least Developed Countries’ external debt repayments reached US$31bn in 2020.

For example, Senegal, which sits in the bottom third of the world’s most vulnerable countries to climate change, received 85 percent of its climate finance in form of debt (29 percent being non-concessional loans), despite being at moderate risk of falling into debt distress and with its debt amounting to 62.4 percent of its Gross National Income.       

“A keyway to prevent a full-scale climate catastrophe is for developed nations to fulfil their US$100 billion commitments and genuinely address the current climate financing accounting holes. Manipulating the system will only mean poor nations, least responsible for the climate crisis, footing the climate bill,” said Dabi.

“A climate finance system that is primarily based on loans is only worsening the problem. Rich nations, especially the heaviest-polluting ones, have a moral responsibility to provide alternative forms of climate financing, above all grants, to help impacted countries cope and develop in a low carbon way,” said Dabi.

“At the upcoming COP27 climate talks this November, rich countries must urgently commit to scaling up grant-based support to vulnerable countries and to fixing their flawed reporting practices.”

Notes to the editor

  • Download a full copy of the report, Climate Finance Short Changed Report 2022: The real value of the US$100 billion commitment in 2019-20, here:
  • The 2020 reported climate finance totalling US$83.3 billion included public finance (US$68.3 billion), private finance mobilised (US$13.1 billion) and export credits (US$1.9 billion) in 2020. Oxfam has assessed the value of finance provided, IE the public finance element. OECD (2022), Climate Finance Provided and Mobilised by Developed Countries in 2016-2020: Insights from Disaggregated Analysis, Climate Finance and the USD 100 Billion Goal, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/286dae5d-en
  • Overreporting of loans is incentivising the use of loans which are dominating climate finance provision. According to the latest assessment by the OECD, loans made up 71 percent of public climate finance in 2019-20– a significant share of which were non-concessional – while only 26 percent was provided as grants.[i]  [i] OECD (2022a), Climate Finance Provided and Mobilised by Developed Countries in 2016-2020: Insights from Disaggregated Analysis, Climate Finance and the USD 100 Billion Goal, OECD Publishing, Paris.
  • Oxfam’s US$21-24.5 billion figure includes the estimated grant equivalent of reported climate finance rather than the face value of loans and other non-grant instruments. It also accounts for overreporting of climate finance where action to combat climate change is one part of a broader development project. For more details please check Oxfam methodology note.
  • Senegal’s debt instrument figures are based on 2013-2018 climate finance reports, according to Oxfam “Climate Finance in West Africa” report, 2022. Please also see (2021). Climate Change: OECD DAC External Development Finance Statistics – Recipient Perspective. Retrieved 10 August 2022.
  • Senegal ranks Senegal is 134th out of 182, or in the bottom 30 percent in terms of vulnerability according to the ND-GAIN Index.

Oxfam reacts to Government’s farmgate emissions pricing system

In reaction to the Government’s farmgate emissions pricing system, Oxfam Aotearoa climate justice lead Nick Henry says: 

“A system for pricing agricultural emissions is starting to shape, but there are some major holes that need filing if Aotearoa is to do its part in keeping global warming to 1.5 degrees. Farming is responsible for almost half of New Zealand’s emissions. The system must be transparent, fair and effectively reduce emissions. 

“The governments proposed cautious approach does little to help people across the Pacific and beyond to keep their homes and their livelihoods. This is not a business deal; this is our future.   

“We already know what it is going to take to tackle agriculture emissions: we need an effective system to price and reduce emissions, with support to turn around the farming sector from being Aotearoa’s biggest polluter, into a solution for tackling climate change and restoring nature. That involves a phase out of synthetic nitrogen fertiliser, and investing billions to support agriculture to transition to low emissions and regenerative agriculture.” 

Oxfam responds to New Zealand International Climate Finance Strategy – Tuia te Waka a Kiwa

In response to Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta and Climate Change Minister James Shaw’s Aotearoa New Zealand International Climate Finance Strategy – Tuia te Waka a Kiwa, Oxfam Aotearoa Communications and Advocacy Director Dr Jo Spratt said:

“This is a substantial piece of work that was well-consulted, carefully considered and provides a solid framework to guide significant investment from the New Zealand Government. We are pleased to see a Pacific-led approach that makes way for our Pacific whānau to build climate resilience on their own terms.

“We are also pleased to see the Government acknowledge that too often communities are not included in how climate finance is allocated, and Minister Mahuta and Minister Shaw’s willingness to make sure communities are able to benefit from it. It is good to see a focus on equity and inclusion for the people who are so often left out and left behind.

“It is excellent to see recognition of both the economic and non-economic costs of climate destruction that communities cannot adapt to and the willingness of Aotearoa to promote countries’ access to finance to address loss and damage. We look forward to engaging with the Government on this in the lead-up to COP27 where loss and damage will be a focus. Other mechanisms, not just mitigation and adaptation, will be necessary to address the unavoidable loss and damage people in the Pacific and beyond face every day.”

Oxfam reacts to Commission’s advice on the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme

Oxfam Aotearoa welcomes the latest advice from the Climate Change Commission to the Government calling for an urgent decision about how it will prioritise emissions reduction in the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme (NZ ETS). Oxfam Aotearoa Interim Executive Director Dr Jo Sprat said: 

“The Commission is on the right track: All sectors of Aotearoa’s economy, including agriculture, need to do their fair share in reducing climate pollution. 

“Aotearoa can’t just rely on planting permanent pine forests, or paying other countries to reduce emissions for us. The role of international carbon credits and carbon off-setting, including whether these will be integrated into the ETS or kept separate is as clear as mud. The Government must urgently provide clarity, just as the Commission recommends.  

“What also concerns us is how the Government will make sure human rights are upheld, including indigenous and community land rights. If it is not done right, using international credits as an alternative to reducing our own carbon emissions from industries like agriculture could do serious harm to communities – especially those on the frontlines, such as our Pacific friends and family who experience the worst impacts of climate destruction every day. 

“The Commission’s advice underscores the urgent need for a comprehensive plan for a just transition, in consultation with tangata whenua and all communities, to support a move to a less polluting and more equitable economy in Aotearoa. We couldn’t agree more. A just transition would make sure the rising cost of carbon pollution in the NZ ETS doesn’t unfairly fall on those least able to pay.”