The South African government, climate scientists and activists who attended the COP28 climate summit, which ended Wednesday in Dubai, had mixed reactions to the historic deal struck in overtime, which included for the first time a transition away from fossil fuels and the adoption of a global goal on adaptation.
Environment, forestry and fisheries minister Barbara Creecy welcomed the adoption of the global goal on adaptation and the “just, orderly and equitable” transition away from fossil fuels in energy systems, but environmental lawyers and youth leaders slammed the deal for failing to deliver on the phase-out of fossil fuels or “go far enough to keep 1.5°C alive”.
Nearly 200 countries party to the Paris Agreement of 2015, have agreed to try to limit the rise in average global temperatures to 1.5°C above preindustrial levels, with an upper threshold of 2°C. This is a key threshold which, if breached, is likely to trigger further extreme weather events and dangerous climate tipping points.
Wits professor Laura Pereira, one of the authors of the first Global Tipping Points Report presented at COP28, said: “It was a win to have fossil fuels in the final agreement, but ‘transition’ rather than ‘phase-out’ is obviously weaker than the original text.
The text does not address the urgency and magnitude of the crisis.
— Natural Justice head of campaigns, Katherine Robinson
“Developed countries have to bring money to the table for developing countries to act. The main sticking point was definitely finance, which talks to implementation,” she said.
Wrangling over key points about how to prevent the earth overheating to catastrophic levels, pushed the summit 24 hours past the December 12 closing. All 198 countries must reach consensus for the adoption of the final agreement.
After banging down his gavel COP president Sultan Al Jaber said: “An agreement is only as good as its implementation. We are what we do, not what we say. We must take the steps necessary to turn this agreement into tangible actions.”
Natural Justice head of campaigns Katherine Robinson found the deal disappointing. “The text does not address the urgency and magnitude of the crisis. The presidency is overstating the success of COP28.
“The final text runs counter to the science ... it does not go far enough to keep 1.5°C alive and does not adequately uphold human rights, particularly those of indigenous peoples and the billions already suffering the devastating effects of the climate crisis,” she said.
South African negotiators prioritised adaptation at COP28, but progress towards this goal was slow until the final days, when thematic areas for action (such as health, food, ecosystems, infrastructure) and targets for adaptation were adopted.
Adaptation is preparing communities, sectors and infrastructure to be resilient in coping with more intense and frequent natural disasters triggered by climate change.
Creecy welcomed the adoption of the global goal as a big step forward. “This is something our country, with the African continent and other vulnerable nations, have struggled to achieve for many years,” she said.
The decision had measurable and time-bound targets and recognised “the importance of securing adequate public finance for adaptation from developed countries”.
Dhesigen Naidoo, climate adaptation lead at SA’s Presidential Climate Commission, however, viewed the commitments on adaptation as insufficient. “The global goal on adaptation has been the net victim of COP28. In the run-up we’ve been very clear, particularly as the developing world, that assistance with the global goal on adaptation is critical.
“People are dying on a daily basis. Infrastructure is being destroyed. Economies are crashing. In spite of this, the text on the global goal on adaptation is weak. It’s defining ... the direction we need to move in, [but] we know that direction.
“What we needed, like loss and damage, is a concrete set of goals with concrete commitments, particularly by the big emitters and the developed world, around organising collectively for us, as a global community, to be in a much more resilient space than we are now.”
Despite this, Africa’s leadership on adaptation and the security risk posed by the climate crisis — the economic risk, social risk and risks associated with migration — was a “great gain”, he said. “Hopefully this will catch fire globally so that by the time we get to COP29 in Azerbaijan, we will have prepared the ground a lot better to move the global goal on adaptation.”
Lisakhanya Mathiso, representing the African Climate Alliance and Project 90 by 2030 at COP28, said wealthy countries failed to take adaptation seriously.
“I hate how these countries think developing countries just need the loss and damage fund. We are already living with the effects and adapting to these drastic changes is hard, so why do they always choose to ignore adaptation when it’s on the agenda?” she asked.
A number of South African delegates noted that financing to accelerate action was a key gap at COP28, like past summits, though they commended the launch of the loss and damage fund.
“The establishment of the loss and damage fund to help developing countries cope with natural disasters caused by climate change, was an early win at the summit on day one,” said Pereira, calling, however, for “monetary commitments across the board — for adaptation, the just transition and loss and damage”.
Tipping points were mentioned in the final agreement, “which is very important as this could potentially urge further urgency for action”, she said.
Robinson said this decade is critical for action, but the developed world was failing in this. “We have under seven years to get this right, but governments, particularly those in the global north, continue to fail us, persistently failing to fulfil their obligation to equity and historical responsibility.
“They fail to provide climate finance and expand fossil fuels, while pointing fingers at the global south — which is the least responsible, most affected and least able to transition. This is what happens when you have 160 climate denialists and 2,456 fossil fuel lobbyists here.”
On the decision to hold COP29 next year in Azerbaijan, Mathiso asked: “What is with hosting COPs in countries where human rights are oppressed? As a representative of the youth, I’m mad!”
She said the decision to hold the summit in “another fossil-fuel reliant country signalled the long fight ahead. “We understand [the just energy transition] is not an overnight thing, but at least work with us and not against us,” she appealed to leaders.
Mathiso felt that the solidarity among civil society organisations fighting for climate justice at the summit, through “unified loud or quiet actions”, was encouraging.
The unified actions of civil society in Dubai showed their power, said Pereira. “They were literally lining up to ‘hold the line’ of 1.5°C that requires the phase-out of fossil fuel.”
She said: “Countries are starting to acknowledge the critical need to phase-out fossil fuels, even if it’s not in the text due to some powerful interests. The discourse is shifting, and that’s why these annual COPs are important.”
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.