Climate change is with us - here and now

Just days ago, a typhoon described by CNN as 'worse than hell' hit the Philippines.  So far, it is expected that over 10,000 people in just one area may be dead as a result, with a more thorough count yet to be made.

Mere hours ago, the same typhoon made landfall in Vietnam.  Over 600,000 people were evacuated from key areas.

In a world committed to a minimum of 2 degrees warming, this is the new reality.  It is no longer a case of speculation - as New Zealand's negotiators said to stakeholders today, "the effects of climate change are with us, here and now".  

The Warsaw United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP 19) began this morning, keenly aware of this fact.  Developing nations are insistent that developed states take action, and recognise the principle of common but differentiated responsibility agreed upon in Rio in 1992.  The principle seems simple; those nations that have most influenced our climate's changing - in most cases, those same ones with more resources, both financial and technological, to help address the problem - carry the same responsibility as others, but must do more in accordance with their greater capacity.  In reality, though, this principle isn't as easy to enforce as it would seem on paper, and it would seem that economic interests are destined to always take precedence.  In reality, no nation will make the sacrifice of taking drastic action until it is clear they won't be alone.  It's a glorious, tragic stalemate.

It comes as no surprise, then, that the COP opened this morning with an impassioned address from the Philippines' negotiator, Yeb Sano.  His urgency was clear; he's even announced he will be undertaking a hunger strike until a climate deal is in sight.  It's too late to expect a world where Typhoon Haiyans aren't the new normal - as our negotiators said in Auckland last week, we've "missed the boat" as far as that's concerned.  

We can, however, take mitigating action to make sure that 'normal' isn't any worse than that.  We can take action to soften the blow, helping nations adapt to this reality.  

But that action has to be now.

Climate change engagement for non environmental NGOs

I attended a workshop this morning about trying to get climate change issues into NGOs who don't purely focus on environmental issues. The workshop was targeted more for those working within the NGOs and focused on both what problems they have faced, and also ways around those problems. I have compiled a list of their suggestions below:

Problems:

-People didn't respond to direct messaging, they don't change lifestyle or acknowledge how they are influencing the environment.

-Some organisations that are apolitical and find events or causes that have a political stance scary. Specifically for COP, some organisations are not even sure if they should be at COP as observers

-Getting environmental issues into already existing strategies and programmes is hard.

-Hard showing link to other issues

-There are challenges with capacity to integrate the ideas. With everyone focused on what they are doing within the organization, trying to find ways of integrating it into what they are already doing can be challenging eg time, capacity, money, interest.

-Hard to phrase Global responsibility in a way that the organization wants to include it in its mandate.

-Excuse of not being an nature or environmental organization.

-The organisation doesn't feel like they have the expertise to talk about the issue or get involved in it.

-The people involved, or the people the organisation targets, does not care about the environment or it is not a major issue in their mind.

Solutions:

-Meeting people, making connections.

-Making links between organization culture and how that is tied to climate change issues

-If they don't feel like they have the needed expertise then they can team up with an organisation that does eg Scouts and Greenpeace.

-Find groups in your region that you can team up with to do joint programmes with.

-Rather than preaching, create the space for conversations.

-A good example is carbon conversations. This gets groups of people together to discuss challenges involves with reducing their carbon impact.

-Practice what we teach and think strategically. We have to watch what our carbon footprint looks like and those of our family and community.

All posts by Institute delegates reflect their own thoughts, opinions and experiences, and do not reflect those of the Institute.

For official Institute updates, take a look here.

Language barrier

I would just like to reiterate how lucky we are that COY9/CEE Power Shift/COP19 all use English as the main language, even though we are in Poland. I wonder if there would be more Polish youth engagement if CEE Power Shift was separate and they were able to discuss all this amazing information we are learning in Polish? I also wonder how would that change the outcomes and direction of the workshops and other discussions at the conference? Interesting to consider. I will be closely examining language barriers at the COP19 conference!

All posts by Institute delegates reflect their own thoughts, opinions and experiences, and do not reflect those of the Institute.

For official Institute updates, take a look here.

Corporate interests at COP19 and unethical funding

I went to an enlightening session run by Corporate Europe Observatory on how this COP is the most obviously influenced by corporate interests and the significant greenwash by sponsors claiming their polluting products are sustainable. Whilst it is often suggested, it is less easy to demonstrate the greenwash and influence corporates have on these events and general politics [although see the bottom of this post  for one  quick example]. Corporate capture has a massive impact on these negotiations through lobbying, funding, and giving weight to solutions which are in their interests rather than the common interest thus ultimately distorting the debate and discourses of finding solutions to anthropogenic climate change.  

I want to tread very carefully here and be careful of the general anti-capitalism, anti-corporation, socialist, communist labels I’m opening myself up to here. Labels are used too quickly and sully useful climate change debate. Whilst undoubtedly some corporates are using very dirty tactics, to avoid the labels and maintain integrity, I think it is vital to adapt the adage ‘attack the point, not the person’ to ‘attack the action, not the corporation’. It is also important to not generalise and say that one bad action makes a bad corporation, but conversely it should be known if a corporation has a pattern of suspicious, unsustainable and non-transparent actions, so they can be held accountable and responsible.

It is already difficult enough to achieve proper corporate social and environmental responsibility given the power imbalances that exist. Financially it is more difficult as it is impossible for civil society and social enterprises to compete with large corporations that have the money to sponsor such conferences. Given the lack of opportunity for civil society and smaller enterprises to have their agenda known through sponsorship partner profiles, this makes me question the ethics and legitimacy of such sponsorship options given there is a systemic bias of corporate representation.

COP19 corporate capture and greenwash:

LOTOS Group: As the second largest Polish, majority state-owned, oil company and COP19 partner, LOTOS are providing 11,000 felt document bags for the conference attendees. Its partner webpage states “LOTOS’s petroleum is products pose probably the lowest possible nuisance to the environment". LOTOS lobbies through their astroturf company and front groups such as the Citizens Coalition for Responsible Energy which help support their interests in oil and shale gas. Through their wide web of connections in various lobby groups, they fight tighter regulation and promote EU energy security “by enabling the cheapest and most available indigenous energy sources”. To have such a company as a partner of COP19 is highly questionable given their clear interests which I believe are mutually exclusive with the mitigation required.

For more information – visit Corporate Observatory Europe

All posts by Institute delegates reflect their own thoughts, opinions and experiences, and do not reflect those of the Institute.

For official Institute updates, take a look here. 

A pack a day keeps the doctor away...

Don't smoke? Think again... It really depends in the levels of pollution in your region. In some regions of Europe you can be smoking half a packet a day quite unintentionally, simply by spending part of your day outside! So much for going outside to get some fresh air!

Krakow is the third most polluted city in Europe, and the most polluted city in Poland. There are severe long-term health impacts that occur from exposure to pollution. These include cancer, mutations, asthma, as well as other negative effects on the blood, heart and brain!!! This is not something to be taken lightly, especially as many of the most affected people are children. Many children are born with problems that are directly linked to air pollution- including lower IQ, heart defects and lower birth weights. This means that in only a 9month period, the fetus is being significantly affected by this pollution.

The pollutants that are causing so much havoc on climatic processes in the atmosphere are also having a significant direct impact on individuals back on Earth. This is why so many health experts are promoting the co-benefits of climate change mitigation!

Scary thoughts from a really interesting workshop on the effects of coal on health from the scientists at HEAL who use science to change policy. 

All posts by Institute delegates reflect their own thoughts, opinions and experiences, and do not reflect those of the Institute.

For official Institute updates, take a look here