Bunkers for Adaptation
Posted on 10. Dec, 2009 by Philip Ireland in Australia
Is it getting that bad I hear you ask? That we need to move into bunkers to adapt to climate change?
Well, if you read some of the recent science it may well be…. However, they are not the kind of bunkers I am talking about now.
Shipping | Creative Commons
The kind of bunkers I am talking about have the possibility of providing long-term predictable funding for adaptation and mitigation in the developing world. Bunkers in the UNFCCC negotiations refer to emissions from international aviation and shipping.
Now… I know this may seem a bit dry, but exploring the bunker debate and how it feeds into other streams of the negotiations is a really good way of getting a sense of the negotiations. Also, it provides a small window of hope in what otherwise has been a rocky few days.
So…. How do bunkers relate to adaptation? Good question. Bear with me and I will take you through it.
Firstly, as you all know financing for adaptation in the developing world is really important. In Copenhagen so far, wealthy nations (including Australia) have failed to put up significant financing proposals for adaptation in the global south.
In addition to this issue, the global South is looking for long-term predictable funding. As you know governments come and go, and sometimes even leaders, who have very different positions, change (not mentioning any names…. Tony Abbott).
So my point is, even if governments do commit money, it is still subject to the election cycles we have all come to love. How do we deal with this issue I hear you ask?….. in come the bunkers.
There are a range of proposals on the table to place a levee or tax on all international shipping and aviation. These sectors are generally exempt from national emissions counting as the emissions are made outside national boundaries (that could be wrong so please don’t quote me on that… but they are generally exempt).
Now, there is talk that the funds gathered from the taxes and levees from all around the world could go to mitigation and adaptation for the Global South. This would in turn provide long-term predictable funding that is, in large part, immune to the whims of national governments and voting constituencies.
The politics around this though are tricky.
Just today, after some difficulty, they officially established a ‘drafting group’ in the UNFCCC process to create some text on this issue. There was some contention on this issue in the first instance as there are some powers (I will not name names, but I am sure you can guess) that do not want to see any taxes on international aviation and shipping. As I understand it though, in the end, Australia did support this decision.
So, in summary, a levee or tax on all international and shipping could provide long-term predictable financing for adaptation in the developing world that is less politicised and more likely to be sustained.
There is still a long way to go on this issue though.
We are by no means over, or near, the finish line.
In the past few days I have asked questions of a number of the delegation, and in person, the Minister for climate change, Penny Wong, and I could not get clear answers. I suspect Australia is still developing its position (and is no doubt consulting with parties whom it might affect, once again I will leave it up to you to fill in the spaces).
I don’t mean to complicate things further…. But in order to give you a more full picture, there are many other questions around adaptation. If we do manage to find a mechanism that can raise the necessary funds for adaptation, how will it be spent? There are a plethora of different interests that would love to get their hands on billions of dollars of ‘development aid’ which would potentially not be used in the best interest of the poor who need it. More on that later….
For now though, it is late and I must say goodnight (or good morning), and get what little rest I can before another day of shenanigans in Copenhagen.
Tracking for you,
Phil.
Ps. Take action and tell Penny Wong to remember the poor at A Climate For Change
