APCEL Fireside Chat: COP26 Unmasked

APCEL Fireside Chat: COP26 Unmasked

29 November 2021

(From top left: Linda Yanti Sulistiawati, Beatriz Garcia de Oliveira
From bottom left: Jolene Lin, Rose-Liza Eisma-Osorio)

On 29 November 2021, APCEL hosted a panel discussion about the Glasgow Climate Change Conference (COP26). APCEL’s Jolene Lin and Linda Yanti Sulistiawati were joined by Rose-Liza Eisma-Osorio (College of Law, University of Cebu) and Beatriz Garcia de Oliveira (Western Sydney University).

Professor Eisma-Osorio began by discussing the damaging effects wrought by climate change upon indigenous communities, particularly in the Philippines. She highlighted the urgent need for policies and social action to respond to and apply sound climate science. Further, she emphasised the need for governments to engage local communities and increase their climate adaptive capacity. For this, adaptation funding is crucial and must be distinct from that for mitigation and loss and damage. Not only should climate funding flow from the governments to the people but developed countries must support developing countries with at least as much climate funding as promised in order to build such capacities in the first place.

Extrapolating on the point of government action, Dr. Garcia de Oliveira discussed the gap between promise (government pledges) and reality (actual implementation). She noted that while the deforestation pledges made at COP26 (i.e., the Glasgow Leaders Declaration on Forests And Land Use; the Global Forest Finance Pledge) were important and positive developments, they are only as good as the implementation efforts of governments. In other words, these non-legally binding pledges mean nothing if governments do not fulfil them – this is the third edition of deforestation pledges but the previous two remain unfulfilled. Therefore, it is crucial for all other stakeholders to monitor government action and hold them to account when necessary. In practical terms, one major point for enforcement and monitoring is the link between deforestation and (global) supply chains. This link must be made more transparent and traceable – by academics, for example – to make concrete progress towards deforestation-free supply chains.

Supporting this point, Dr. Sulistiawati expounded on government action in Indonesia. Specifically, she highlighted the gaps in government environmental targets and actual implementation on the ground. She noted that this, coupled with increasing public awareness, will warrant a rise in environmental litigation against governments. This trend has already begun, and countries should prepare for it. While Indonesia does not have specialised environmental courts and tribunals to hear such cases, the judiciary receives environmental law training. It was also noted that judges are engaging more with environmental issues and prioritising environmental interests.

Finally, Dr. Lin discussed some key developments that are crucial to the implementation of the Paris Agreement. She focused on the rules for carbon markets under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement which were finalised at COP26. She noted that the Article 6 regulatory architecture bears strong resemblance to that of the Clean Development Mechanism, for example, relying on Designated Operational Entities (DOEs) to carry out monitoring and verification. Given the DOEs scandal and major criticisms about ‘hot air’ credits in the CDM market, much caution should be exercised to ensure the environmental integrity of carbon trading under Article 6.

The event concluded with a Q&A segment between panellists and attendees, which focused on the challenges and potential of climate finance, and on the reduction of other greenhouse gases such as methane.