To help you assess the outcomes of the COP-19, we have compiled a series of commentaries published by some of our partners during/after the final hours of the Warsaw climate conference. To provide a diversity of views covering different aspects of the COP19 decisions, we compiled the responses by CAN, ACT-Alliance, IBON, CIEL, Oxfam as well as by the Least Developed Countries.
Many of our partners who walked out of the conference on Thursday 21st November did not comment on the final outcomes of the conference but instead focused on expressing their frustrations with the slow pace of the process and the role of the polluting businesses in Warsaw.
CAN - Climate Action Network
CAN-International, the largest network of NGOs working on climate change, emphasized the role of vested interests in the Warsaw climate conference and how both the fossil fuel industry and conservative governments (incl. Japan and Australia) contributed to undermining the outcomes of the conference.
ACT - Alliance
The ACT-Alliance, a coalition of over 140 religious organizations, also noted the inadequacy of the loss and damage mechanism established in Warsaw and which will fall short of addressing the needs of the most vulnerable.
IBON
IBON, a Southern NGO supporting capacity building of social movements, noted the last-hour weakening of the language of the roadmap towards the Paris climate conference, presaging a weaker outcome in 2015.
CIEL - the Centre for International Environmental Law
CIEL highlighted some limited progress in relation to the REDD+ safeguards and the establishment of a Loss and Damage mechanism, highlighting that further negotiations would however be required in order to improve these mechanisms.
OXFAM
OXFAM noted the emergence of an unholly alliance among the planet largest polluters, both industrialized countries and emerging economies, to undermine the process leading to a 2015 climate agreement.
Least Developed Countries (LDCs)
Additionally, the final statement by the LDCs also sheds light on areas where further progress by countries should take place in order to deliver the means of implementation already committed and to achieve an adequate 2015 climate agreement.