A shudder. The financing to help developing countries fight against global warming slowly progressing. They posted an average of 57 billion dollars (about 50 billion) per year over the 2013-2014 period, says an OECD report released Wednesday. “A strong and updated estimate which will be useful to approach the COP 21,” says the coordinator of the study, Simon Buckle. It’s urgent. For at least two months of Parisian meeting (30 November to 11 December), the issue of funding is essential if the 196 parts members of the UN Climate Convention (195 States and the European Union ) want to achieve a universal and binding agreement. prerequisite: keep the promise made in 1992 to help developing countries. And materialized in Copenhagen in 2009 around the idea of reaching mobilize 100 billion dollars by 2020.
This report is only a prelude. The head of the Organization for Coordination and Economic Development, Angel Gurria, speaking of “GPS”. Other experts compass. Let’s say it is, at best, a first thread intended to show that it is playable. At worst, a smokescreen that hides inaction on the nature of the issues and the urgency of a real climate justice. “All that glitters is not gold”, says Oxfam. The idea is to give pledges, to show that it can be done, especially within two months of the COP. In short, to create a dynamic where possible a credible nothing. But it faces two obstacles: first, these figures are often business card monte and recycling it will take to further detail funding. “It will deepen the methodology and transparency,” acknowledges the report.
Rest, first, to draw a clear roadmap to achieve the 100 billion annually by 2020. While recognizing that this amount is far from what should be put on the table to prevent runaway climate. The only costs of adaptation to climate change in Africa, the continent most affected and most vulnerable, “could amount to $ 50 billion per year by 2050,” as noted on March 4 United Nations development program. At the finish, “it’s a start, says Alix Mazounie Climate Action Network. After, you must know what’s behind the numbers. How do they respond to real needs? How to find the remaining 40 billion by the beginning of the COP if it is to succeed? “Back in three figures on the anticipated report of the OECD.
Nearly 55 billion euros, that is what would have been decided for the year 2014, 10 billion more than in 2013 (52.2 billion). An average of 57 billion over the past two years. The OECD, magnanimous, this amount excludes any funding related to coal, even, and this is fortunate, money to improve plant efficiency in this most polluting energy. Exit therefore 3.2 billion paid by Japan, for example. How these aggregate 61.8 billion? By mixing a bit of everything and anything.
Already, 23.1 billion are his helpers and especially bilateral loans from development aid or “arrow” as such. 20.4 come from the support of multilateral development banks (World Bank, regional development banks; Asia, Africa, America, etc.). Finally, 16.7 billion is taken out of private funds mobilized through public money and … 1.6 of export credits. “It’s part of the things we have doubts, notes Roman Benicchio, Oxfam remaining trade policy instruments or economic diplomacy.”
16% of funding for adaptation
That is to say, the actions against the effects of climate change, when no less than 77% is spent on mitigation (measures to reduce greenhouse gas) and 7% of the projects, said transverse, addressed to both adaptation and mitigation. Worse, it is interesting to note that export credits are for 100% mitigation and 90% private aid to the same portfolio of business. However, the COP 20 Lima placed both on the same plane. But funding does not follow. “It’s a real problem, says Alix Mazounie. Some countries are critical choices of development. Senegal, for example, must be helped if it is to develop renewable energy, not coal. ”
In fact, the poorest countries are the most vulnerable. And those who most need help, if possible by donations. “We must show that the path is credible, and to do more to adapt,” adds Pascal Canfin, an adviser to the think tank World Resources Institute. However, do not necessarily seek to oppose the two key trends: adaptation and mitigation. Rural landscapes contribute eg by absorbing and storing carbon while moderating the effects of climate change and allowing farmers to diversify their livelihoods.
But then: mitigation funding is difficult to implement for the poorest countries, which do not emit few greenhouse gases. But to address climate change is urgent to limit the pressure on agriculture, water scarcity, health crises, etc. The current share dedicated to adaptation is a real bone of contention between the North and South. The cost of adaptation could reach, worldwide, 150 billion per year by 2030 and 500 billion dollars annually by 2050 if nothing is done to reverse the trend.
This is the maximum share paid to adapt the form of grants, according to Oxfam. Crumbs. “Yet strengthen mechanisms of resilience and adaptation to natural disasters for these people is essential if we are to sustain efforts for years in favor of development and the fight against poverty,” says Romain Benicchio. And France, yet host COP 21, is far from exemplary. At the General Assembly of the UN, Francois Hollande announced 4 billion more for development, of which 2 billion for climate finance, adding that the increase in these would not only makeup of loans but also donations. “Now, according to the information we were able to get us, it seems in reality that almost all of these are ultimately made 4 billion of loans,” says Romain Benicchio.
“The sensational declarations are not always hard cash,” let go of Holland. That’s the problem. Already because in the aftermath, Paris has cut the budgets of ecology and development aid. Then, because 60% of its public support “climate” distributed via the French Development Agency (AFD) has only concentrated on ten emerging countries when it allowed just 9% of its aid to 32 countries least advances. Last but not least, because “in total, over the period [2007-2014, ed], adaptation commitments represented only 12% of commitments climate AFD” write senators Fabienne Keller (Republicans) and Yvon Collin (various left) in a report released Tuesday.