YALI2018 / Mandela Washington Fellow Alexis from Cameroun shares his feelings about Healthcare

His name is Alexis Awungia Tazinya from Cameron. He has over two years of experience in the field of public health specially in implementation community-based projects. He is a Mandela Washington Fellow 2018 and follow 6 weeks training in Business and Entrepreneurship at Drake University at Des Moines, Iowa.

In this video, he shares with us his feelings about what he is learning during the fellowship…

Kenya : The first meeting of the ad hoc open-ended expert group on marine litter

In December 2017 the United Nations Environmental Assembly took place in Nairobi Kenya under the theme ‘Towards a Pollution Free Planet’ and adopted 11 resolutions one of which was on Marine Litter and Microplastics. Our oceans are so contaminated with plastics to the extent that it is estimated by 2050 there will be more plastics in the oceans than fish. Which mean that by 2050 our fishermen and women will harvest more plastics than fish. This will impose serious social, economic and ecological problems including problems related to nutrition and food security, incomes, health, tourism, etc.

In Africa countries in the west and north of the continent are more affected than those from the southern part due to the direction of flow of ocean currents that normally wash away plastics and other marine litter from the southern towards the northern and western parts of the continent. Already the western part of the continent is facing problems in the tourism sector due to the amount of plastics and other litter in their coastal waters.

Pursuant to resolution 3/7 of the United Nations Environment Assembly of the United Nations Environment Programme https://papersmart.unon.org/resolution/uploads/k1800210.english.pdf at its third session, on marine litter and microplastics, an ad hoc open-ended expert group on marine litter and microplastics was established and requested to further examine the barriers to and options for combating marine plastic litter and microplastics from all sources, especially land-based sources:
(a) To explore all barriers to combating marine litter and, including challenges related to resources in developing countries;

(b) To identify the range of national, regional and international response options, including actions and innovative approaches, and voluntary and legally binding governance strategies and approaches;

(c) To identify environmental, social and economic costs and benefits of different response options;
(d) To examine the feasibility and effectiveness of different response options;
(e) To identify potential options for continued work for consideration by the United Nations Environment Assembly.

The first meeting of the ad hoc open-ended expert group on marine litter and microplastics took place at the UN Office in Nairobi Kenya; the meeting started on Tuesday 29th May and ended on Thursday 31st May. UNEP member states and other stakeholders are attending the meeting to discuss documents prepared by the UNEP Secretariat on the 5 (a-e) areas of work assigned to the ad hoc open-ended expert group on marine litter and microplastics.

WELFARE TOGO and EcoConscience TV participated in this meeting as a member of the UN Major Groups Network. They are represented by the Technical Adviser Dr. Yahya Msangi. The meeting is expected to provide the basis for continued work on resolving the problem.
Agenda of the meeting include discussion on:

  • 1. Feasibility and effectiveness of different response options
    Delegates will discuss 3 possible response options:
    Option A: Maintaining the status quo which calls for strengthening of existing instruments
    Option B: Revising existing instruments to enable them address the issues related to marine litter and microplastics
    Option C: Developing a new international instrument i.e. a new specific convention
    2. Barriers to combating marine litter and microplastics, including challenges related to resources in developing countries,
    3. National, regional, and international response options, including action and innovative approaches, and voluntary and legally binding governance strategies and approaches.
    4. Environmental, social and economic costs and benefits of different response options ,
    The outcome of this meeting will be submitted to the 4th Environmental Assembly that is expected to take place in March 2019 in Nairobi Kenya. The General Assembly will take a decision on whether there is a need of a new specific convention to deal with Marine Litter and Microplastics. Once and if this decision is taken it will trigger the negotiation process.

For further information consult us at togowelfare@gmail.com and ecoconsciencetv@gmail.com

Kpalime, Agoméyo: “Cascade Camalo” small Waterfall to discover in 5 min

Affectionately, it is called “Camalo Waterfall”, a small source of water, which offers an incredible biodiversity to this place located on the Koumakonda road, in the village of Agoméyo, in Kloto prefecture, in Kpalimé. An ecological site that continues to attract visitors with its beauty.

But what is striking at a glance is the informal nature of the eco-tourism activity that is practiced here. The site is not officially developed …

In our program “ON A VU” section, ECO CONSCIENCE TV takes you to the heart of this “little natural nest” …

What we think about the National Agriculture Campaign (2018-2019) in Togo

The National Agriculture Campaign (2018-2019) was officially  launched in Lome by the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries.  This is a move that need to be appreciated by all of us. Agriculture is the backbone of our economy and is the main employer in rural communities.

Farmers  need fertilizer to increase farm productivity.  We commend the idea of providing each farmer 3 bags of fertilizer.  Indeed farmers in developed countries enjoy such kind of support from their governments.  It is time now that we provide similar subsidies to our farmers.  We need to produce enough food for ourselves in order to avoid hunger and mulnutrition,  use of our meagre foreign reserves to import food or be dependent  of foreign  foods.

Though we commend the government  for this action there are concerns  that need to be taken into account.

First concern  is the fact that farm productivity  does not depend on fertilizer alone.  A farmer can have enough fertilizer  but still fail to increase farm yields due to other factors.  For example, yields depend on the knowledge  of the farmer on fertilizer application.  Improper application  of fertilizer can have no effect or in severe cases reduce instead of increasing yields. Fertilizer has to be applied at correct rates and times.  How many of our farmers  know about this? Will the farmers receive fertilizer in time?  Do we have enough extension officers in rural areas to assist these farmers?  If not this free fertilizer may not achieve the intended results.

Second,  due to bureaucracy and corruption has the ministry put in place a system that will ensure farmers receive the fertilizer?  Is there a system that will ensure farmers receive it without any charge?  Will the distribution be fair to all farmers? If the Ministry has no such systems in place the support may end up in wrong hands or will benefit those who are not targeted by the government.

Third,  is the issue of sustainability of the support.  Will this kind of support be sustained for at least 10 years or is it a 1 season support?  Has the ministry sustainability plan?

Fourth,  apart from fertilizer does the ministry consider other important  issues such as irrigation,  mechanization, storage, transportation  and marketing?

We know there are some NGOs and individuals who may criticize this government  support based on their perceptions; in particular on their perceptions about organic or ecological agriculture.  Due to limited knowledge in Agronomy  they will think provision of NPK and Urea is bad to agriculture.  This is not true.  NPK (Nitrogen,  Phosphorus  and Potassium)  are needed for plant growth.  NPK can be available  naturally or manufactured industrially.  The truth is our soils do not have sufficient  amounts of natural NPK.  Farmers are forced to add industrialli manufactured NPK otherwise they will produce less and become more poorer.  The only possible argument is that:do we have proper soil analysis to guide our farmers when adding NPK?  Adding more than necessary  is also harmful.  It can destroy the soil structure,  texture and composition.  So providing industrial NPK to farmers is not as bad as many would like all of us to believe.  The only problem is we do not have good soil fertility maps to guide farmers.

Organic farming where manure and compost are the main fertlizers is good.  But one must know that there are many farming communities that do not keep livestock.  Neither do they have enough quantities of materials to produce compost.  One should also know that for 1 hectare a farmer need 4 tonnes of farm yard manure in order to get recommended  amount of Nitrogen.  How many farmers can collect 4 tones of manure in our rural communities?  How much work and time is needed for that task alone?

Another factor that one need to consider is that organic farming is not only about using manure or compost.  You need consumers who are willing to buy organic products.  In Africa such consumers do not exist.  Consumer buy the cheapest not the safest food product in the market.  You also need a special government support to offset crop losses for at least 10 seasons.  Organic farmers in the EU enjoyed this support.  The government  pay the farmer to become organic.  In Africa governments do not provide this support.  Therefore encouraging a rural African farmer to produce organically is similar to asking him or her to sign his or her own death warrant!  She or he has no market advantage over a normal farmer neither is his or her government providing him or her a special subsidy to offset crop losses.

We are not saying organic or ecological farming is bad but in the current situation it cannot work in many rural areas of Africa.  We need to sensitive consumers and the government  has to give them special financial support.

For more info or debate contact

Dr.  Yahya MSANGI

International  Tech Adviser


COP23 / NEPAD lunched new Africa envrionment Partnership Platform

The platform will seek to deliver a paradigm shift in addressing environmental degradation in Africa, in both public and private sectors and to develop innovative models. The platform will engender the prerequisite political support, needed institutional structures and adequate human capacity at national and regional levels to ensure integrated environmental management. The environment, though a cross cutting, will remain distinct and adequately harmonized with other sectors and priorities like agriculture, infrastructure and energy. Climate related risks will increasingly be mainstreamed into development and adaptation actions will be carried out in priority regions and sectors.
The Africa Environmental Partnership Platform will learn from the successes and lessons of the Comprehensive Africa Agricultural Development Programme Partnership Platform (CAADP PP) which has provided a framework for developing African agriculture and rallying support for agricultural transformation. Synergies and complementarities between the two platforms will be maximized at all levels.

2.0 Objectives of the Platform

The coming into force of the Paris Agreement and adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals provides a unique opportunity for Africa to strategically address its environment and sustainable development goals as contained in the Africa Agenda 2016 and other development priorities of the continent. Therefore, the goal of the platform is to promote sustainable environment management through enhanced partnership, coordination and harmonization of activities on environment and pooling of resources at various levels. The overall objectives of the platform are to place a premium on partnership to establish synergies and a more vibrant global partnership to drive Africa’s environmental sustainability agenda and strengthen the continental architectures for sustainable environment management. The platform is expected to enhance synergies and to standardize discussions with other stakeholders such as RECs, Civil Society, private sector as well as important multilateral and bi-lateral partners that are working on environmental issues in Africa. The work and priorities of the platform will be guided by the Environment Action Plan as well as periodic decisions by the AU System.

2.1 Specific Objectives:

Enhance coordination of environmental management among stakeholders at all levels on the continent
To mobilize sufficient resources for the implementation of Africa’s priority environmental programmes/projects in Africa.
To enhance linkages between Africa’s environment and key productive socio-economic sectors such as trade, infrastructure and the extractive industry
To harmonize and synchronize AUC/NPCA and RECs programmes/projects for effective and efficient implementation as well as donor coordination.
To raise the profile of environment by building a collision of partners across the continent
To engage governments and partners to prioritise environment in their development strategies and mainstream the EAP national environmental planning processes
To enhance knowledge sharing and capacity development initiatives on the environment
To facilitate the monitoring and evaluation of environmental priority programmes/ projects at regional and continental levels

Key Focus Areas of the Platform

Resource Mobilization

The platform will operate as a forum for galvanizing resource mobilization efforts and for pursuing resource mobilization strategies, approaches to support the implementation of environmental initiatives, particularly those identified in the Environment Action Plan. The platform will also serve as a collaborative platform to identify innovative sources of financing for environmental programmes and projects including those from domestic sources. Overall, the platform will identify and support different financing mechanisms which are predictable from a wide range of partners. In this regard, a robust mechanism will be put in place to coordinate and monitor activities of the platform to ensure its relevance as the central pillar for supporting the implementation of the EAP through various funding mechanisms. This will ensure that all programmes and activities implemented within the framework of the platform should contribute to the achievement of the objectives of the EAP.

Partnership Building

Building partnerships is a critical success factor for the sustenance of the platform given the multiplicity of actors and its ability to deliver on the mandate assigned to it by AMCEN. The platform will create an avenue for constructive dialogue, especially as Africa could benefit from the experience of countries across the world that have achieved considerable environmental sustainability. The platform will also promote exchange of ideas among African leaders and policy makers at the regional, national and local levels; as well as between African leaders, policy makers and development partners on environment and natural resource issues in Africa. In line with the growing importance of South-South cooperation and the opportunities to learn from successful practices in other developing regions, environmental sustainability will be included in dialogue with emerging countries. Through the platform, efforts will also be made to engage development partners that promote environmental sustainability as part of their development assistance programmes. In addition the platform will seek to put environmental matters on the agenda of major events such as the AU Summits and on Africa’s engagements with development partners including (G8, G20, BRICS, APF, ADF, AEC, Regional Banks, World Economic Forum)

c. Enhance coordination between Environment and other thematic sectors
The environment, though a cross cutting, will remain distinct and adequately harmonized with sectors and priorities like agriculture, infrastructure, energy and the extractive industry among others. The platform will serve as coordinating avenue for integrating environmental issues in the development of key thematic continental priority programmes and projects. In particular, the emerging issues of climate change and the green economy will be highlighted as integral components of thematic socio-economic sectors. It is also expected that key players in these thematic sectors will contribute to expected outcomes of the platform decision making processes. The outputs from the platform will include policy and practice recommendations to be implemented at regional and national levels that incorporate environmental issues in sectoral policies. The platform will link closely with key continental Initiatives under the Regional Flagship Programmes such as the Africa Renewable Energy Initiative (AREI), the Africa Adaptation Initiative (AAI) amongst others in order to build synergies.

Align support for implementation of EAP and its Regional Flagship Programmes
The platform will also serve as reference point to support the implementation of the components of the Environment Action Plan. The platform will seek support for implementing pilot EAP programmes and projects in the five AU Regions as indicated in the Action Plan. The platform will also align itself to civil society and private sector organizations that are involved in implementing various aspects of the EAP. This is to support the development of opportunities for working closely in order to maximize out comes, impact, and learning.
Knowledge Generation and Sharing: Analysis and Outreach

Analysis and outreach activities in the context of knowledge generation and sharing will aim at informing the development discussions on the environment particularly around the emerging issues of climate change and the green economy. The Platform will provide the space for sharing best practices with the view of documenting state-of-the art practices and developing frameworks for sharing and replicating best practices. This process will include wide consultations and information sharing that will result in reports, tailored briefs, and communication material based on the analysis of environmental experiences. The outputs/deliverables of the platform will constitute a valuable body of knowledge, which will contribute in enhancing the awareness and knowledge of African leaders and stakeholders (civil society, private sector, among others) in particular and the international community in general on environmental sustainability. It will also help to build a relationship between Africa and its development partners based on the common understanding and interest established in environmental management and implementation of the EAP. In addition, constructive high-level dialogue will create political will among African leaders and policy makers on environmental management and facilitate engagement on development practice between different stakeholders, including the academia, civil society, private sector and development partners.

Africa development: Two development Agenda 2030/2063 and Self imposed development hurdles

At the same time as it was participating in the construction of the global development agenda (Agenda 2030) Africa was busy constructing its own development agenda (Agenda 2063). A critical look at the two reveal that they both address similar development challenges including gender inequalities, poverty, environmental pollution and degradation, climate change, access to essential services (water, education, health and housing), infrastructure development, peace and serenity etc.
It is also worth noting there are also differences between the two agenda; for example while Agenda 2030 is based on 17 Goals Agenda 2063 is based on priority areas for action.

To create synergies between two agenda that are based on different approaches on foundations is as tricky as playing chess over a bottle of Vodka! There are other differences such as those related to institutional arrangements and evaluation regimes.
It is these similarities and differences that force some of us to ask ourselves these questions:
Why did Africa find it necessary to take part in the design of two closely – identical development agenda? What was or is the added value? What would have happened if Africa under the African Union stuck to its own home grown agenda and ignore the New York – bred Agenda? Would the rest of the world move on and ignore Africa or would it come running and embrace the African development agenda?
How will AU member states implement two development agenda that have two different timeframes, different goals, targets and indicators for measuring progress?
What will be the situation in September 2030 when the international community get together to formulate the 3rd Global Development Agenda because by then there will remain 33 years for Agenda 2063? How will these be taken into account?
How will Africa inform its people about two different development agenda while time has shown us how difficult it is to create awareness amongst our people due to several factors including low level of education, poverty and lack of finance? How many Africa rural communities are aware of Agenda 2063 or Agenda 2030? Why are we bombarding them with two heavy agenda and expect them to participate actively in their implementations?
These questions need answers otherwise as Africa we our performance may be less than our performance during the MDGs era; by then we had only one agenda and we still did not develop to the level that we had envisaged!
Apart from the challenge posed through participating and implementing two development agenda Africa need to address some anti-development hurdles that it has imposed on itself; for example why are each African country so obsessed with issuing visa to non citizens? What has prevented us from having a visa free African Union? Why are we praising the Schengen States visa arrangement for simplifying our entry into their countries and yet we impose visa on each other when we come back home? How can we develop if a young entrepreneur from Tanzania or Togo is required to secure visa before entering another African country to explore investment potentials in that country and yet we offer incentives to an entrepreneur from Europe or US or China to enter our countries without much ado?
Another self imposed hurdle that Africa needs to remove with immediate effect is the thinking of each country in Africa to have its own national airline. Why can’t we pull together our resources and expertise and establish one powerful African Airline? Is it not a collective shame when a person from one African country who wants to fly to another African country has to fly first into Europe or the Gulf before reaching another African country? Why do we think it is only possible to establish an African peace keeping force but not an African Airline or Shipping Line?
Another self imposed obstacle is our reliance on foreign funding for our economic development. Our reliance on foreign assistance is the main reason why in both the MDGs and SDGs there were/are specific goals on partnerships (MDG 8 and SDG 17). But really do we need foreign aid from example to construct regional roads that can connect all our countries like in European Union? For example it is approximated that the road from Lome Togo to Mombasa Kenya is only 7000 kilometres long. It is a 7 day journey if each day one drives 1000 kilometre! This road will cross several African countries – Togo, Cameroun, Nigeria, Congo Brazzaville, DRC, Rwanda, Tanzania and Kenya! Surely these countries alone have more resources needed for construction of such a road! We do not need a penny from anywhere!
These are a few examples of self imposed hurdles!

Will we really develop by 2030 or 2063?

Dr Yahya Msangi

Social Media: a blessing or a curse for Africa?

Social media has become the most powerful segment of communication and information industry. It has revolutionized and transformed the way we communicate and exchange information. It is faster, cheaper and more user-friendly than the former communication methodologies.

In Africa social media platforms such facebook, tweeter, whattsapp, Skype, LinkedIn and others have captured the hearts and minds of the youth to an extent that it has now become an addiction to many.

As Africans have we really taken time to assess the social-economic, political and ecological impacts of social media to us? Are there no negative impacts? 

For example, some observations have shown that addiction to social media has caused young people to loose their jobs as they are deemed less productive. Addiction to social media has also caused marital problems in various ways. For example a spouse feel ignored if his or her partner is so much addicted to facebook, whattsap or otherwise social media platform. In severe cases acts if violence or divorce happen.

Addiction to social media is a problem in schools, meetings, places of worship, offices or recreational facilities. There is a deep and unwanted lack of concentration.

Social media has also provided an avenue for abuse of human rights. For example it has made easier intrusion of privacies, spread of hate ideas, radicalization, trafficking of children and adults, trafficking of drugs, spreading of insults and defamatory information, etc.

Perhaps as Africans we need to ask ourselves a few questions: why are we not using social media to advance research and education? Why are we confining this good innovation to chatting, gossiping, joking, abusing each other, spreading hate, encouraging disunity, destruction of our nations?

We need to borrow a leaf from the Arab Spring. Social media played a big role in the Arab Spring and we need to make a critical analysis by asking ourselves thus: are the youths in Egypt, Tunisia and Algeria better or worse off than they were before the Arab Spring? Are their countries better or worse off?

These are important questions that we need to ask ourselves in order to avoid the mistakes and problems that were brought about by wrong use of the social media.

Sustainable Development and it’s goals particularly Goal Number 16  can only be achieved if we use social media in a manner that will not cause damage to our economies, peaceful existence and social harmony.

Today many African governments have adopted the concept of e-government. Nowdays it is fashionable to talk about e-democracy. Do we really know what exactly do we need to achieve with these new concepts or are we being driven by the needs of others? How has everything governance for example assisted us to overcome our development challenges? For example how has everything governance helped a rural women to have better access to essential services such as water, electricity, housing, food and education?

What really is e-democracy and in which way will it help we as Africans to overcome our socio-economic, political and ecological challenges?

Dr. Yahya Khamis Msangi

Pilot Project on Legal Action to Fight Corruption: A Tool to End Financial Crime

Financial crimes formerly unpunished will now be prosecuted through the Pilot Project of Actions in Fight Against Corruption officially launched on Tuesday 29 August 2017 in Lomé. The aim is to support the Togolese State in its efforts to eradicate this scourge, which has contributed enormously to the impoverishment of the population by not promoting the development of basic social services.

This project will strengthen the capacity of several actors from civil society organizations, state institutions including the Court of Auditors, criminal justice, the Togolese Revenue Office (OTR) and others, the High Authority for the Fight against Corruption and Related Offenses (HALCIA) as well as media professionals, so that they can master the tools necessary to use for its success. It will be implemented for 36 months by the National Alliance of Consumers and Environment, ANCE-TOGO.
Everything about the launch of this ambitious project is available in the report …


UNFCCC Interssessional negociations : the key issues

It has been standard practice in the UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) negotiations to hold intersessional meetings in between the Conference of Parties (COPs). The first such intersessional meeting in between COP 22 (held in Marrakesh 2016) and COP 22 (to be held in Bonn in November 2017) started on 8th May 2017 and will end on 18th May 2017 here in Bonn Germany. It should be noted that the current presidency of the COP is under Morocco and in COP 23 Fiji will take over the Presidency. It is equally important to note that though Fiji will take over the presidency and host COP 23 the COP (COP 23) will take place in Bonn Germany. Fiji is a tiny island in the Pacific where logistics needed for organizing such a meeting face some challenges hence the arrangement for COP 23 to be held in Bonn.

Before explaining what are the key issues that are under discussion in this intersessional meeting let me first revisit the outcomes of COP 22 that was held in Marrakesh from 7-19 November 2016.

Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs)

COP 22 in Marrakesh was held while there was an on-going battle between developing and developed countries on the interpretation of what was agreed in Paris in 2015 (the Paris Agreement). The first item that different interpretations arose was disagreements over interpretation of the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). In the APA (Adhoc Working Group on the Paris Agreement) informal consultations on producing guidance on what constitute NDCs regarding their features, their scope and information needed there were clear disagreements between developing and developed countries. In Paris 9COP 21) there were ‘big fights’ that eventually resulted into the adoption of Article 3 of the Paris Agreement.

Article 3 states that ‘As nationally determined contributions to the global response to climate change , all Parties are to undertake and communicate ambitious efforts as defined in Articles 4, 7, 9,10, 11 and 12 with the view of achieving the purpose of this Agreement as set out in Article 2’.

Developed countries and some developing countries were of the view that the focus of work under the ‘further guidance’ requirement should be confined only to MITIGATION and not include the full scope of the NDCs as referred to in Article 3 of the Paris Agreement.

Majority of developing countries led by the main architects of Article 3 a group known as the Like Minded Developing Countries (LMDC), the African Group and the Arab Group strongly emphasized that discussions over NDCs should cover the whole scope of NDCs as elaborated in Article 3. Developed countries disagreed which led the co-facilitators of APA consultations to conclude that ‘there was agreement that Parties must respect the Paris Agreement (PA) and the ‘national determination’ character of the contributions’ but that ;Parties had divergent views on the features of NDCs’. Therefore here in Bonn, negotiations over the features of NDCs will continue to be a major contentious matter.

The principle of common but differentiated responsibilities

The differentiation between developed and developing countries and how it should be operationalized in the Paris Agreement affected other issues including the transparency framework on action and support, facilitating implementation and compliance, the global stocktaking and adaptation communications. Many developing countries stressed the need to integrate the principle in the design of various modalities, procedures and guidelines (MPGs) but developed countries demanded a common approach where every country will be subjected equally. Here in Bonn this topic is expected to generate more in fighting between developed and developing countries.

Adaptation fund

There is was a hot debate on the future of the Adaptation Fund (AF) under the Paris Agreement. Developing countries demanded that the decision taken in Paris during COP 21 was for the AF to serve the Paris Agreement (PA) and that the work in Marrakesh was to give effect to the decision. Developed countries on the other hand disagreed that such a decision was taken and insisted that preparatory work was needed to clarify that the AF serves the PA.

Transparency Framework for Action and Support

Four issues were at stake: i. guidance on features, information and accounting of NDGs, ii. Guidance related to the adaptation communications iii. Modalities, procedures and guide lines (MPGs) iv. Modalities and procedures for effective operation of the committee to facilitate implementation and promote compliance and iv. Further matters related to the implementation of the PA. In general developing countries demanded more transparency while developed countries demanded that issues under transparency should not take be divided into ‘developed’ and developing’ countries but rather focus on the capacity of countries to carry out the specific transparency MPs. These discussions will continue here in Bonn.

Focus on Post 2020 or Pre 2020?

Developed countries demanded the focus of climate actions to be mainly on post 2020 contributions by all countries under the PA while developing countries demanded the focus to be on the implementation of current commitments of developed countries under the various decisions of the UNFCCCC and the Kyoto Protocol in the pre-2020 timeframe.

Controversy over the roadmap to US 100 billion financing for developing countries

In COP 15 it was agreed that by 2020 an amount equaling 100 billion USD will be mobilized as climate financing for developing countries. Developed countries committed themselves to raise this amount of money. It was observed that mitigation consumed 70% of financing and that finance for adaptation that was extended to developing countries was only 25%. While developed countries claimed that this was a success developing countries on the other hand demanded more finance for adaptation, more compliance to commitments.

These were some of the issues that were hotly debated in Marrakesh. There were many other that for the sake of this brief report I could not cover.

However, there are new issues that these Bonn climate talks will have to take into account. These include:

  1. Uncertainty over the US

Bonn meeting started over uncertainty whether the US will stay put in the Paris Agreement or withdraw from it.

Rise in temperature

The Bonn climate talks will begin amidst yet another warning of rising temperature and concentrations of Carbon Dioxide levels in the atmosphere. New data released early this year from the UK Meteorological Office, the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) showed that the Earth’s temperature has now risen about !.! C above the level seen before the industrial revolution.

The issue of conflict of interest

Under Agenda 21 came out of the first Earth summit in 1992 in Brazil the United Nations adopted 9 Major Groups: Farmers, Workers and Trade Unions, Local Governments, Youth, Women, Indigenous people, NGOs, Industry and Business and Research and Academia. Recently a group of NGOs have complained that the Industry and Business major group has a conflict of interest as they represent major CO2 emitting companies. They are calling for adoption of a policy on the conflict of interest similar to such a policy in another UN Convention. There are other NGOs who are calling for a complete exclusion of the Industry and Business major group from UNFCCC process. Yet there are others who acknowledge the nature of the conflict of interest but do not support exclusion of one major group under the call that nobody should be left behind.

Of course there are many other issues that will be covered here in Bonn over a period of two weeks. There are also many interesting side events including on topics such as ‘The rights of Children and Climate Change’ and ‘Gender and Climate Change.



UNFCCC presessional meetings opens in Bonn Germany – COP 23 preparations

The Bonn Climate Change Conference opens today and will continue until 18 May. The meeting comprises the 46th
sessions of the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI 46) and Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA 46), as well as the third part of the first session of the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Paris Agreement (APA 1-3). APA 1-3 is expected to continue its work on the elements of the Paris Agreement work programme within its mandate, due for completion by 2018.

These elements include: nationally determined contributions (NDCs); adaptation communications; ransparency framework for action and support; global stocktake; and mechanism to facilitate implementation and promote compliance. APA 1-3 will also begin considering matters related to the Adaptation Fund and take up further matters. SBI 46 has a lengthy agenda, including: reporting; matters related to the Clean Development Mechanism; least developed countries; national adaptation plans; third review of the Adaptation Fund; capacity building; and response measures.

In the context of the Paris Agreement work programme, the SBI will discuss modalities and procedures for the operation and use of public registry/- for NDCs and adaptation communications, and the scope and modalities for the periodic assessment of the Technology Mechanism. SBSTA 46 is expected to consider, inter alia: the Nairobi work programme; agriculture; science and review; response measures; and methodological issues under the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol. In relation to the Paris Agreement, SBSTA will consider several issues, including: the technology framework; matters related to Article 6 (cooperative approaches); and modalities for accounting financial resources provided and mobilized through public interventions.

More information : http://enb.iisd.org


1 2 3