Speaker 1: Welcome to zero. I am Akshatrati. This week we think
Speaker 1: about progress. I've been reporting on climate change for more
Speaker 1: than eight years. It's not because I care about an
Speaker 1: invisible gas in the atmosphere or about the mercury levels
Speaker 1: in a scientist thermometer, but because of what climate change
Speaker 1: could do to slow down the progress that humanity has
Speaker 1: achieved over the past two centuries. And as I keep
Speaker 1: reporting on what the world is doing to tackle climate change,
Speaker 1: I keep coming back to the question of human progress.
Speaker 1: At the start of twenty twenty five, with the staggering
Speaker 1: fires in Los Angeles and a range of climate leaders
Speaker 1: stepping down, it doesn't feel like progress. It feels like
Speaker 1: regress or perhaps something darker. But it's a narrative that
Speaker 1: we should be careful not to fall for. That's the
Speaker 1: message from Akim Steiner, the head of the United Nations
Speaker 1: Development Program, who I got a chance to talk to
Speaker 1: at COP twenty nine in November. He said that progress
Speaker 1: is happening, and there are many places in the world
Speaker 1: where you can see it. We talked about many of them.
Speaker 1: He's not denying that there are growing problems around the world,
Speaker 1: but he says that he has also never felt more
Speaker 1: optimistic about the human capacity to address them. This is
Speaker 1: the second time Akim is on the show. Previously, he
Speaker 1: made a passionate case for what humanity must do to
Speaker 1: thrive on this warming planet. This time he shared what's
Speaker 1: working and made the case for how to make it
Speaker 1: work better. Akim, Welcome to the show.
Speaker 2: It's good to be back with you. Thank you Ashen.
Speaker 1: Now, since we spoke eighteen months ago, I feel like
Speaker 1: the world has taken a turn for the worse. If
Speaker 1: we look at broad metrics like the Human Development Index,
Speaker 1: rich countries are doing better and poor countries are doing worse,
Speaker 1: reversing a trend that for the last fifty sixty years
Speaker 1: was where both rich countries and poor countries were progressing.
Speaker 1: There's been the rise of populism all around the world.
Speaker 1: Many elected leaders, even if they care about climate change,
Speaker 1: aren't able to do very much. And then there are,
Speaker 1: of course many elected leaders who are hostile to climate action.
Speaker 1: So we speak at COP twenty nine, where yet again,
Speaker 1: wor leaders are meeting country negotiators are coming together to
Speaker 1: try and figure out how do we keep climate action
Speaker 1: alive in what is a fracturing world. How are you
Speaker 1: seeing things well.
Speaker 2: I think, first of all, letter acknowledge, we are confronted
Speaker 2: with a degree of crisis, conflicts and wars, as you
Speaker 2: have just mentioned, in a way that I think none
Speaker 2: of us had anticipated, in certainly since nineteen forty five.
Speaker 2: It is without precedent. We have well over one hundred
Speaker 2: and twenty million people who are essentially forced to leave
Speaker 2: their home, whether in their countries or to flee across
Speaker 2: borders as refugees. We as undp work at the moment
Speaker 2: in fifty three countries that are deemed crisis context I
Speaker 2: through either economic or political civil strife or literally open
Speaker 2: wars across borders. We face the opposite of what a
Speaker 2: development program of the United Nations aspires to, namely to
Speaker 2: help countries to build a way forward to develop their economies.
Speaker 2: We are seeing development being destroyed. So I think, yes,
Speaker 2: it is a very sobering moment in time. And we
Speaker 2: see also the geopolitical polarization translating very quickly into domestic
Speaker 2: polarization radicalization. So the cohesiveness of so socide is the
Speaker 2: ability of governments to lead through tough times is being compromised.
Speaker 2: Having said that, on the climate front, I would take
Speaker 2: a slightly different view. We are meeting in twenty twenty
Speaker 2: four at a moment in time where we can actually
Speaker 2: look back over the last ten years, and we should
Speaker 2: perhaps be astonished at what the world has accomplished. The
Speaker 2: International Energy Agency estimates in twenty twenty four there will
Speaker 2: be around three trillion dollars invested in new energy infrastructure.
Speaker 2: Did you know that two out of those three trillion
Speaker 2: will now be invested in renewables For a few years now,
Speaker 2: Already total investment in new electricity generating infrastructure for renewables
Speaker 2: is more than the combined total of oil, gas, coal,
Speaker 2: and nuclear. So to those who continue to argue that
Speaker 2: we are in a sense doomed if you want to
Speaker 2: stay or committed to staying with the fossil fuel based
Speaker 2: energy platform for the twenty first century, to them, I
Speaker 2: would say you are patently wrong. What you're witnessing right
Speaker 2: now is the product of years of the international community,
Speaker 2: private sector, public sector science, technology converging on that challenge
Speaker 2: of a ultimately decarbonized future. And it is happening already,
Speaker 2: not only in energy, we now see it also happening
Speaker 2: in mobility, the other major polluting sector, transporting goods across
Speaker 2: the planet, whether by ship, by plane, by car, by trucks.
Speaker 2: Even that is now rapidly shifting, with the country like
Speaker 2: China this year having every second car sold in China
Speaker 2: being an electric or hybrid vehicle. So I would say
Speaker 2: on the climate response front, we are seeing remarkable things happen.
Speaker 2: What you will also hear at every climate copp and
Speaker 2: in the media right now is how far behind we are,
Speaker 2: how late we are, But that should not negate the
Speaker 2: extraordinary exponential progress that we're now seeing, and obviously here
Speaker 2: in Baku the great challenges can we maintain that collective
Speaker 2: interest and momentum of countries despite all their differences which
Speaker 2: are very pronounced, and their abilities to act that we
Speaker 2: continue to drive forward with the Paris Agreement, which has
Speaker 2: proven to be remarkably resilient.
Speaker 1: I think that's a good reminder for this two track
Speaker 1: world we live in where we will see climate progress
Speaker 1: because a whole host of actions have been taken that
Speaker 1: have momentum. I think the dark word turn is one
Speaker 1: of whether that kind of momentum continues, because the gap
Speaker 1: between where we need to be and where we are
Speaker 1: does grow and climate impacts grow. So if you are
Speaker 1: thinking about it from a United Nations perspective, where countries
Speaker 1: like the United States, which contribute a fifth of the budget,
Speaker 1: are electing a populist leader who does not believe as
Speaker 1: much in a globalized world in the principles that created
Speaker 1: the United Nations in the first place. How much of
Speaker 1: a risk do you think Donald Trump is to the
Speaker 1: progress that the United Nations enables the world.
Speaker 2: Well, let me first of all answer your question by saying,
Speaker 2: as the United Nations official, we rarely try to speak
Speaker 2: in hypotheticals, So let the newly elected administration take off
Speaker 2: is let it in the sense set its priorities. But
Speaker 2: clearly you are alluding to a number of policy positions
Speaker 2: and also the track record of the incoming US administration
Speaker 2: that clearly has voice skepticism and also different views on
Speaker 2: energy pathways, for example. I think, as always in our democracies,
Speaker 2: these are dramas that play out in real time. So yes,
Speaker 2: we will see a lot of announcements. The fact of
Speaker 2: the matter is that, yes, the US left the Paris Agreement.
Speaker 2: The US rejoined the Paris Agreement. No one followed the
Speaker 2: US leaving the Paris Agreement. In twenty seventeen and the
Speaker 2: world welcome the US back. In the meantime, I think
Speaker 2: we will also see in the United States. I think
Speaker 2: what we are seeing in many countries acting on climate
Speaker 2: change today is not any more focused on stopping to
Speaker 2: do things that was very often where the science had
Speaker 2: to awaken us and rattle us. If you want to say,
Speaker 2: do you realize that with what you are emitting into
Speaker 2: the atmosphere, you're essentially killing off economies in the future,
Speaker 2: and you're making life on this planet extremely untenable, expensive
Speaker 2: and economically very challenging. But in today's world, we're actually
Speaker 2: far more focused on the green economy that is emerging
Speaker 2: as an opportunity, the next strategy for industrialization, the next
Speaker 2: strategy for how we power our economies mobility in the world,
Speaker 2: but also looking at where jobs will come in the future,
Speaker 2: just on the simple preoccupation that many governments have, how
Speaker 2: do we create enough jobs? An investment in renewal energy infrastructure,
Speaker 2: on average, creates two to three times more jobs than
Speaker 2: one in the fossil fuel sector. If you essentially are
Speaker 2: worried about your automotive industry, as Europe and parts of
Speaker 2: North America are, ask yourself are you really going to
Speaker 2: manage to survive in a world where electric mobility has
Speaker 2: become not only affordable, ever cheaper and there are now
Speaker 2: major producers that are able to supply the world market
Speaker 2: because the US economy is large in monetary terms, but
Speaker 2: the vast majority of the world's population lives outside the
Speaker 2: United States. So are we going to see electric mobilities
Speaker 2: succeed on the African continent with soon one on five
Speaker 2: billion consumers so to speak? And is the old fossil
Speaker 2: fuel based diesel petrol based automotive industry really going to
Speaker 2: be a competitive proposition there? So, in domestic US policy terms,
Speaker 2: I think industry investors markets will be looking carefully at
Speaker 2: where does a policy ultimately undermine the competitiveness of a
Speaker 2: US enterprise. And secondly, you also have in the United
Speaker 2: States federalism, so state governments also represent a very significant
Speaker 2: part of the mandate that shapes policies. You asked me
Speaker 2: in terms of a United Nations perspective, we are obviously
Speaker 2: very concerned principally because when a major economy is such
Speaker 2: as the United States, takes a step back from an
Speaker 2: international consensus, it will always have an impact. It will
Speaker 2: slow things down, it will so distrust, it will create,
Speaker 2: let's say, more room for skepticism. And let's also be
Speaker 2: clear already now we are seeing signals where investors are
Speaker 2: holding back hundreds of millions, if not billions, will ultimately
Speaker 2: not be invested in the United States because the policy
Speaker 2: and regulatory framework is ultimately signaling that you're not welcome,
Speaker 2: and they will invest somewhere else because the demand is
Speaker 2: growing exponentially around the world.
Speaker 1: The other thing that has happened when you look at
Speaker 1: this turn in politics is one where climate or carbon
Speaker 1: cannot become the top priority for almost any nation. The
Speaker 1: top priority happens to be in most places, even in
Speaker 1: rich countries, economic growth, prosperity, affordability, cost of living, and
Speaker 1: those metrics have caused a right to return toward populism.
Speaker 1: So when I think about what's happening in the world,
Speaker 1: I am reminded of our previous conversation on how the
Speaker 1: sustainable development goals are this unifying set of principles that
Speaker 1: address multiple problems at the same time, where they address
Speaker 1: prosperity while they address climate change. But we're also not
Speaker 1: on track. You have said the world is likely to
Speaker 1: miss the UN Sustainable Development Goals for twenty thirty because
Speaker 1: there will be still plenty of poverty in twenty thirty,
Speaker 1: So is there any movement to try and re engage
Speaker 1: the world in the SDGs, Because it seems to me,
Speaker 1: if climate change is to be tackled, it really has
Speaker 1: to happen through a systemic lengs like the SDGs, rather
Speaker 1: than focusing on carbon We.
Speaker 2: Perhaps begin by saying, particularly to those listeners who are
Speaker 2: not so familiar perhaps with the twenty thirty Agenda as
Speaker 2: it was called, and the Sustainable Development Goals, that these
Speaker 2: are seventeen goals that in twenty fifteen the international community
Speaker 2: agreed to collaborate on addressing. And to some, you know,
Speaker 2: they want to argue that the STGs are some form
Speaker 2: of political theorem or an ideology, they're not at all.
Speaker 2: They're the most pragmatic way of looking at the conundrum
Speaker 2: that we are now facing, as eight billion people soon
Speaker 2: on this planet. How are we going to survive in
Speaker 2: the twenty first century together when our planet is under stress,
Speaker 2: Our societies are struggling with inequality and a lot of
Speaker 2: political strife, and ultimately we still have generations of young
Speaker 2: people who are leaving schools, in universities looking for jobs
Speaker 2: in many countries, that equation is no longer delivering. So
Speaker 2: the first thing that we need to accept is yes,
Speaker 2: life is more complex in the twenty first century. And
Speaker 2: to give you a very simple illustration of how we
Speaker 2: interpret on the United Nations Development Program, when we go
Speaker 2: and offer our support to developing countries, we don't tell
Speaker 2: them or you must do something on SDG thirteen climate change.
Speaker 2: We say to them, how can we help you with
Speaker 2: your development? We are an organization that can help you
Speaker 2: think about the future of your economy and then make
Speaker 2: the investments today. Now we might do exactly the same project,
Speaker 2: for instance, to address access to affordable and clean energy,
Speaker 2: which is Sustainable Development Goals seven that automatically delivers on
Speaker 2: SDG thirteen on climate change, reducing carbonation, but actually also
Speaker 2: on STG one reduction elimination of poverty. You know, in
Speaker 2: designing one project, we can address poverty, reduction, access to
Speaker 2: clean and affordable electricity fundamental to any society, any nation
Speaker 2: for its development, and reduce the risk of climate change.
Speaker 2: It's a smarter way of thinking about development. Now. The
Speaker 2: SDGs have, indeed, in terms of the targets and indicators
Speaker 2: that were supposed to be met by the year twenty
Speaker 2: thirty fallen way behind. But we've had a pandemic, we've
Speaker 2: had wars. There are reasons why this is happening. Does
Speaker 2: it make the goals somehow less relevant or correct? I
Speaker 2: don't think so at all. On the contrary, Our challenge, however,
Speaker 2: is that there is a second element to the STGs
Speaker 2: that is extremely important, and in twenty fifteen in the
Speaker 2: General Assembly Hall of the United Nations, in the presence
Speaker 2: of the Pope, of the Secretary General of literally one
Speaker 2: hundred and thirty heads of state and government, there was
Speaker 2: also an acknowledgment that interdependence is something we have to
Speaker 2: accept as a reality in today's world. Whether it's the pandemic,
Speaker 2: whether it is cybercrime, whether it is the energy transition,
Speaker 2: climate change. None of these challenges are really manageable within
Speaker 2: a national jurisdiction alone. We depend on the actions of others,
Speaker 2: including for example, in the world of digital and AI.
Speaker 2: Those countries that have the weakest national legislation, institutions and
Speaker 2: capacity to deal with cyber crimes cyberterrorism become their killers.
Speaker 2: Heel to a essentially interconnected global economy, so our work
Speaker 2: as the UN in some ways is more important than
Speaker 2: ever because where countries may not be able to cooperate
Speaker 2: directly with each other because they have big differences, they
Speaker 2: can still agree that they have something common. In this September,
Speaker 2: actually countries adopted the Pact for the Future in New York,
Speaker 2: which was a reaffirmation that despite the fact that we
Speaker 2: may not like our neighbor, we have to work together
Speaker 2: on these core issues of our time.
Speaker 1: I spoke to a minister here at COP twenty nine
Speaker 1: from a developing country who expressed frustration with international institutions.
Speaker 1: They were at two layers. One where as a developing
Speaker 1: country they have access to fossil fuels, but they are
Speaker 1: not getting any funding to tap those fossil fuels, even
Speaker 1: though their development indexes very low, because the international community
Speaker 1: or international funding bodies have decided no. The only investments
Speaker 1: that can go are in clean energy. So if you
Speaker 1: want a gas power plant that's on your own, you
Speaker 1: need to find the money for it. The other frustration
Speaker 1: was the sheer number of international funds being created. So
Speaker 1: we had the Loss and Damage Fund. There is going
Speaker 1: to be the Global Environment Facility. There is the new
Speaker 1: target that will be agreed on at COP twenty nine,
Speaker 1: which will be hundreds of billions of dollars. Multilateral development
Speaker 1: banks have to figure out how to give that money out.
Speaker 1: And for a country, it is becoming hard to realize
Speaker 1: even if there is money to be accessed, how to
Speaker 1: access it? How many rules do we have to follow?
Speaker 1: Is there room for the UN to actually simplify things
Speaker 1: for developing countries? And what about sometimes the need for
Speaker 1: fossil fuels in the very places where development is still
Speaker 1: far far behind the world average.
Speaker 2: Well, let me first of all respond to the role
Speaker 2: of international institutions. It's a little bit of a chicken
Speaker 2: and egg situation. And yes, international institutions can also be
Speaker 2: complicating factors. They are governed by broad constituencies, lowest common
Speaker 2: denominator consensus, the extreme attention that is put on fiducial
Speaker 2: integrity and accountability. Yes, if we were a startup, if
Speaker 2: we were an NGO, we could operate very differently. But
Speaker 2: we're not. We are custodians of literally billions of dollars
Speaker 2: of taxpayers money. Therefore, the United Nations the international financial
Speaker 2: institutions are by definition a garanto or fiduciary integrity even
Speaker 2: then we also run into problems and difficulties. I mean,
Speaker 2: there are criminals, there are those who will try and
Speaker 2: cheat HS. We make mistakes, but that is not I
Speaker 2: think the biggest risk. The biggest risk is that member states,
Speaker 2: because of the sometimes competing interests but also sometimes very
Speaker 2: particular interests, create many of these structures. Why do we
Speaker 2: have a Global Environment Facility followed by a green Climate fund,
Speaker 2: followed by a fund to address laws and damage well
Speaker 2: in part because countries are trying to also to address
Speaker 2: particular needs. Take the world of developing nations right now,
Speaker 2: we have emerging economies in the China, Middle Eastern nations,
Speaker 2: some of the wealthiest nations in Asia and Latin America
Speaker 2: that are middle upper middle income countries, alongside, for instance,
Speaker 2: small island developing states hyper capita GDP, but extremely vulnerable
Speaker 2: and can lose a third of the GDP with one
Speaker 2: hurricane in eight hours, the least developed countries. We have
Speaker 2: now this phenomenal investment in renewables, but do you know
Speaker 2: that last year only two percent of that total trillions
Speaker 2: of investments actually landed on the continent of Africa, where
Speaker 2: the most people without access to electricity live. Today so
Speaker 2: there is also a kind of public policy hedging that happens.
Speaker 2: And the product of this over years is that we
Speaker 2: get a very broad range of funds and platforms. I
Speaker 2: think it is time to review them, to consolidate them.
Speaker 2: The G twenty, in fact, took the initiative under the
Speaker 2: Brazilian presidency and already with India before to ask the question,
Speaker 2: can we streamline the finance? The problem is right now
Speaker 2: here in Baku. What you see is, however, the first
Speaker 2: litmus test. Is there enough trust to even believe that
Speaker 2: we are ready and willing to invest and co invest
Speaker 2: enough to work together on climate change? Or are we
Speaker 2: even debating what is an adequate level of investment If
Speaker 2: that is not established, and it's difficult to do the
Speaker 2: more difficult job of reforming the international financial architecture, as
Speaker 2: the secret General of the UN has repeatedly called for
Speaker 2: over the last three years, because we live in a
Speaker 2: world where there is more than enough money and wealth
Speaker 2: in our financial system, but it is concentrated in one
Speaker 2: part of the world that is struggling to find ways
Speaker 2: to invest. While the majority of the world's population is
Speaker 2: desperately looking for capital, we can't access it and Ultimately,
Speaker 2: this is an imbalance that we need to address.
Speaker 1: After the break, Akim tells me where he's seeing promising
Speaker 1: climate leadershi on the global stage. And if you've been
Speaker 1: enjoying this episode, please take a moment to rate and
Speaker 1: review the show on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. It helps
Speaker 1: other listeners find the show. So are there examples of
Speaker 1: specific countries over the last eighteen months where you see
Speaker 1: some of this progress actually playing out in the right way?
Speaker 2: Oh, I can give you dozens. This is why I
Speaker 2: sit here deeply traveled by how we have fallen behind
Speaker 2: in terms of addressing the science of climate change. But
Speaker 2: I am actually very optimistic about our capacity to do so.
Speaker 2: You see, twenty years ago we face challenges that we
Speaker 2: thought we had no solutions for. Today we live in
Speaker 2: an age where we actually have the solutions technologically, economically,
Speaker 2: financially speaking of what we are not doing is acting
Speaker 2: on them. Just to give you a simple example, when
Speaker 2: you invest hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies for
Speaker 2: fossil fuel extraction, then don't be surprised if it seems
Speaker 2: that somehow fossil fuels are cheaper at the pump for
Speaker 2: the consumer. But who is paying those subsidies the very
Speaker 2: same consumers, who are the taxpayers. The IMF estimates that
Speaker 2: the total impact of fossil fuel subsidies somewhere in the
Speaker 2: range of trillions of dollars right now. But you ask
Speaker 2: me for positive examples, I will give you just three
Speaker 2: or four. Let me take you to Uruguay, for example,
Speaker 2: not one of the world's wealthiest countries at all. Together
Speaker 2: with Uruguay, UNDP and the Inter American Development Bank work
Speaker 2: with the Ministry of Finance on bringing a sustainability link
Speaker 2: performance bond to the financial markets. Uruguay raised over one
Speaker 2: point five billion dollars with an interest rate tied to
Speaker 2: its emissions performance and its forest deforestation performance. Now, these
Speaker 2: are instruments that are raising literally billions of dollars on
Speaker 2: the markets today. So we see the financial markets moving.
Speaker 2: Let me jump to India for a moment. India already
Speaker 2: has an installed capacity renewables of around two hundred gigabots
Speaker 2: right now, few people realize that India in the next
Speaker 2: four and a half years will add another three hundred
Speaker 2: and fifty gigawards, not megabots, gigawards have installed renewable electricity
Speaker 2: generating capacity. This is unprecedented in human history, even faster
Speaker 2: than China's investment was. And we can then go to
Speaker 2: a country such as Kenya, a classic developing economy on
Speaker 2: the African continent today producing well over ninety percent of
Speaker 2: its electricity with renewables, and we can go to Namibia,
Speaker 2: where a green hydrogen investment is now happening again signaling
Speaker 2: how Namibia can leverage its enormous, ultimately endless supply of
Speaker 2: energy through solar and wind to produce something that the
Speaker 2: world economy will need in the coming year, is named
Speaker 2: the green hydrogen to decarbonize the so called heavy to
Speaker 2: abatement high energy consuming sectors. And I could go on.
Speaker 2: This is all happening before our very eyes, and it
Speaker 2: is transforming, let's say, the pathway towards a net zero future.
Speaker 1: Within that one specific constraint that we talked about the
Speaker 1: last time debt crisis, which is affecting developing countries hugely
Speaker 1: after the pandemic. Are there reason which developing countries have
Speaker 1: managed to deal with some of these problems? Obviously they've
Speaker 1: not gone away, but are there potential solutions like the
Speaker 1: Urogoaz sustainability link ons that are coming to help deal
Speaker 1: with what is a real fiscal crisis for many countries.
Speaker 2: Well, the answer is yes and no. For the wealthier countries,
Speaker 2: this notion of a soft landing that has often been
Speaker 2: invoked after the pandemic, the high inflation, high interest rate
Speaker 2: phase is clearly beginning to come down to more normal
Speaker 2: economic and financial market times. But no, for many of
Speaker 2: the developing countries, it has gotten even worse. And this
Speaker 2: is a great tragedy, not only in terms of the
Speaker 2: impact it is having on people. When you know dozens
Speaker 2: of developing countries today have to their health and education
Speaker 2: budgets in order to just service the interest that has
Speaker 2: exploded in terms of cost of their foreign debt. This
Speaker 2: is ultimately undermining the very essence of development, which is
Speaker 2: to invest in your people human capital. Secondly, let us
Speaker 2: be very frank the G twenty has looked after itself barely,
Speaker 2: but it has and has not tackled the issue of debt,
Speaker 2: particularly for least developed countries and for those that are
Speaker 2: most indebted in our global economy today. So many of
Speaker 2: the instruments have been very slow and frankly, we are
Speaker 2: seeing many developing countries today not able to invest in
Speaker 2: their future because they simply haven't got access to money.
Speaker 2: And we want next year all the signatories to the
Speaker 2: Convention of the Paris Agreement to come to the Brazilian
Speaker 2: cop in biling with new national strategies, higher levels of ambition.
Speaker 2: But for many of these countries, all we're offering them
Speaker 2: is please do more, do it quicker, and you can
Speaker 2: borrow some money from us, Thank you very much. I
Speaker 2: can hardly pay the interest on the loans I already have,
Speaker 2: and now you ask me to borrow more money. It
Speaker 2: just doesn't add up. This is why this whole finance
Speaker 2: discussion needs to become a lot more honest. And let
Speaker 2: us also be clear when we talk about international climate finance,
Speaker 2: we're not talking about a taxpayer in Lancashire, in the UK,
Speaker 2: or I don't know, in Sicily, in Italy or in
Speaker 2: Ohio and the United States subsidizing economies such as China
Speaker 2: or India. They are moving forward with their green economy
Speaker 2: investments out of their own resources. And I think one
Speaker 2: of the big misperceptions in today's world is that when
Speaker 2: we talk about one hundred billion dollar climate finance, are
Speaker 2: now one point three trillion. That's public but also private investment,
Speaker 2: that this is all somehow taxpayers money from the North.
Speaker 2: Few people realize that China is investing hundreds of billions
Speaker 2: of dollars a year off its own taxpayer revenue to
Speaker 2: make the green transition happen. Many developing countries are using
Speaker 2: their resources to invest in climate change action, exceeding by
Speaker 2: far what the wealthiest nations are willing to put on
Speaker 2: the table as a co investment.
Speaker 1: It's always a joy talking to you because you come
Speaker 1: with examples and you show progress as it's happening while
Speaker 1: acknowledging the big challenges that we face. One thing that
Speaker 1: has been missing for me has been trying to find
Speaker 1: leaders who can speak to that inspiration for the larger public.
Speaker 1: You know, last time, when Donald Trump was elected, there
Speaker 1: was a bulwark of leaders here in Europe or in
Speaker 1: Asia that stood up and said we will take the
Speaker 1: baton on of multilateralism of climate change. Those leaders aren't
Speaker 1: speaking up or do not sit in power today. But
Speaker 1: if you were to think of leaders that people should
Speaker 1: be listening to at this moment, who would they be?
Speaker 2: To your listeners, I would say, sometimes we may not
Speaker 2: hear the voices of lead because we are listening to
Speaker 2: something else. We're listening to a lot of noise. Right
Speaker 2: here in Bako yesterday i attended the launch of a
Speaker 2: G zero platform. Four countries are stepping forward as the
Speaker 2: first nations that are carbon neutral or carbon negative as economies,
Speaker 2: and they're saying we have done this, We are an example,
Speaker 2: and we also look to the world to work with us.
Speaker 2: They are the Kingdom of Bhutan, Surinam, Panama and Madagascar.
Speaker 2: Now most people may not even necessarily be able to
Speaker 2: pinpoin where those countries are on the map, but they're
Speaker 2: all over the global context, so it's not one particular
Speaker 2: corner of the world. And you have His Majesty the
Speaker 2: King of Bhutan, the President of Surinam yesterday here the
Speaker 2: Prime Minister of Bhutan in fact leading the session yesterday.
Speaker 2: That's an example of leadership. Do we celebrate that leadership?
Speaker 2: Do we even reward it? Do we support it? No,
Speaker 2: we take it for granted. But these are people who
Speaker 2: have taken their countries through extraordinary change. The renewables investment
Speaker 2: programs of India did not fall from heaven somewhere. They
Speaker 2: were the deliberate outcome of a series of policy decisions
Speaker 2: where India has bet its own energy future on a
Speaker 2: rapid transition towards cleaner energy. But let me also talk
Speaker 2: to other leaders who are actually here in Baku, Prime
Speaker 2: Minister Starmer of the UK putting forward a remarkably robust
Speaker 2: new national climate strategy, committing the UK and recommitting it
Speaker 2: also to its financial pleasures that its preceding government had
Speaker 2: almost walked away from. We saw Brazil, the next host
Speaker 2: of the Conference of the Parties next year, putting forward
Speaker 2: a national climate strategy with ambitions built into its own
Speaker 2: trajectory as a developing economy that are remarkable. What you're
Speaker 2: seeing over the last few years is that the leadership
Speaker 2: on climate action is rapidly shifting towards the developing world
Speaker 2: because for many of them, building the next generation of
Speaker 2: their economies infrastructure, energy industries, mobility, infrastruction structure is essentially
Speaker 2: one that is far more likely to succeed in a
Speaker 2: green economy scenario than in a twentieth century fossil fuel
Speaker 2: based scenario. Europe. Final example, through the European Parliament, because
Speaker 2: let's also look to our parliamentarians have past legislation that
Speaker 2: commits Europe to a ninety percent emission reduction pathway in
Speaker 2: less than sixteen years by twenty forty. So we have
Speaker 2: a lot of leadership out there. It's just a pity
Speaker 2: that some have nothing better to do than to denigrate it,
Speaker 2: to talk it down, or maybe something to just take
Speaker 2: a step back and say, it's not only about me,
Speaker 2: it's amazing what you have done. Let me join you,
Speaker 2: because together we will get twice as far. It sounds
Speaker 2: so banal, but in all the technocratic language, in all
Speaker 2: the dynamics, in all the chessboard that is playing out
Speaker 2: at the conference of the parties, someone's going back to
Speaker 2: first principles can be immensely clarifying.
Speaker 1: Find better stories because they do exist.
Speaker 2: Thank you for plenty of them, and ever more, thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you for listening to Zero. And now for the
Speaker 1: sound of the week. Those are the sounds of temple
Speaker 1: bells in Bhutan. If you liked this episode, please take
Speaker 1: a moment to rate and review the show on Apple
Speaker 1: Podcasts or Spotify. Share this episode with a friend or
Speaker 1: with someone who is carbon negative. You can get in
Speaker 1: touch at zero pod at Bloomberg dot Net. Zero's producer
Speaker 1: is Mike Lira, Bloomberg's head a podcast is Sage Bowman
Speaker 1: and Head of Talk is Brendan Nuna. Our theme music
Speaker 1: is composed by Wonder Late Special thanks to Sharon Chan,
Speaker 1: Shewan Wagner and Jessica beg I am Aksha Darati back
Speaker 1: so