Speaker 1: Welcome to Zero. I'm act from Charmil Chike Egypt Many Office.
Speaker 1: How are you going to be remembered? So today I'd
Speaker 1: like to share with you how the United States is
Speaker 1: media climate crisis allergency. You wish to be remembered as
Speaker 1: one who did a lot of nashing while in PA
Speaker 1: by signed law our proposal for the biggest, most important
Speaker 1: climate goal with history of our country, the flesh of adoption.
Speaker 1: No government in the world has enough money to be
Speaker 1: able to effect this transition at the speed we need
Speaker 1: without bringing the private sector to the table and improve
Speaker 1: what us in my ask for by the significant amount
Speaker 1: of three hundred and sixty eight billion dollars. We need
Speaker 1: trillions of dollars in the time to force action is
Speaker 1: right now right here as the African COP. It's been
Speaker 1: a busy first week at COP twenty seven. Loss and
Speaker 1: Damage made it onto the agenda. World leaders came and
Speaker 1: spoke in their dozens and everyone the Zero team included
Speaker 1: is running a little bit shot on sleep. But we're
Speaker 1: only halfway. Next week the negotiations will gather pace and
Speaker 1: we will get a clearer idea of what the outcome
Speaker 1: will be at the end of these two frenetic weeks.
Speaker 1: Later in the show, we'll be hearing from Patricia Espinoza,
Speaker 1: who until this year headed the United Nations Framework Convention
Speaker 1: on Climate Change, the body that organizes COP meetings. We'll
Speaker 1: hear what goes on behind the scenes to get each
Speaker 1: of the two hundred odd member states to agree on
Speaker 1: a deal. But first I'm joined by Bloomberg's West Africa
Speaker 1: bureau chief, Yinka Ibukum. Welcome to Zero. Thanks that shut Now.
Speaker 1: Every time I've seen you this week, you seem to
Speaker 1: have interviewed someone really interesting. It seems like you are
Speaker 1: the one who's got all the secret climate party invites. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean that wasn't intentional. I just really came with
Speaker 1: an open mind and had lots of conversations and some
Speaker 1: of those conversations spelled into COP after parties. Oh that's beautiful.
Speaker 1: Now tell me who are the people that you talked
Speaker 1: to and what's been like for you because it's your
Speaker 1: first one. Yeah. So COP has been very enlightening, also
Speaker 1: very sobering in some ways. But I think at the
Speaker 1: end of the day, it's going to help us make
Speaker 1: our reporting more focused on climate as we go back,
Speaker 1: because what I've realized from copies that really this conversation
Speaker 1: is not niche. It penetrates and insultrates every single area
Speaker 1: of life. So before now thinking of the climate coverage
Speaker 1: in terms of what happens to the oceans, what happens
Speaker 1: to the forests, because my part of the world has
Speaker 1: big forest area, But now I'm thinking of how we live,
Speaker 1: how we retrofit buildings, how we cook with clean fuels,
Speaker 1: how we power our cars, how we power our motorbikes,
Speaker 1: moto taxis. So it's really in every area of life.
Speaker 1: And do you think Africa was represented as it should
Speaker 1: be at a corp that is happening in Africa? And
Speaker 1: were the issues of inequity and financing met with solutions?
Speaker 1: Africa showed up prominently. There was an Africa Day, there
Speaker 1: were Africa events. The African Union was well represented by
Speaker 1: its president who was also the president of Senegal, President Marquisale,
Speaker 1: And there was a message to Africa by most of
Speaker 1: the world leaders really focusing from an Africa perspective. The
Speaker 1: United Nations Secretary General gave a message to Africa. The
Speaker 1: International Monetary Fund Managing Director gave her message to Africa
Speaker 1: as well. So I do feel that Africa had its place.
Speaker 1: The issue of inequity is one that pervades actually all
Speaker 1: parts whenever you speak about Africa. So financial inequity in
Speaker 1: terms of the interest rates as which African countries borrow,
Speaker 1: but also climate inequity because richer nations have already industrialized
Speaker 1: and polluted, and developing nations, particularly Africa, which accounts for
Speaker 1: just four percent, if not less, of global emissions, are
Speaker 1: now being told that they can't exploit fossil fuel or
Speaker 1: contribute to pollution, which obviously is important, but there's also
Speaker 1: this sense that those that have come ahead of them
Speaker 1: have already done it and now they're not able to
Speaker 1: do the same. Yeah, it might seem a little repetitive,
Speaker 1: but the main question is who will pay for the
Speaker 1: green transition in Africa. Last year, even though Africa Union
Speaker 1: as a whole has seven percent of the global economy,
Speaker 1: it only got one percent of table energy investment according
Speaker 1: to figures from Bloombergen e F. And there has to
Speaker 1: be a way to address that iniquity. Yes, and that's
Speaker 1: I mean, you've talked about renewable energy projects, but even
Speaker 1: when you look at the cup and credit market, Africa
Speaker 1: coups for fifteen percent of the trading volume. So there's
Speaker 1: just a need to unlock the finance. And there's been
Speaker 1: some solutions that have been brought. I mean last year,
Speaker 1: the IMF, the International Monetary Fund, did an injection of
Speaker 1: six hundred and fifty billion dollars into the world economy,
Speaker 1: and only thirty three billion of that amount went to Africa.
Speaker 1: That's just what France and Italy god. And that's less
Speaker 1: than half of what the US god. And at that
Speaker 1: point there was a move Richard nations were encouraged to
Speaker 1: actually on land or donate their their SDRs, their special
Speaker 1: drawing rights to developing nations, but that's not happened, and
Speaker 1: so these equities are growing. And you spoke with Maki
Speaker 1: sal the President of Senegal, who said that the Africa Union,
Speaker 1: which he chairs at the moment, is supposed to get
Speaker 1: a seat at the G twenty. Do you think getting
Speaker 1: that seat will help address some of these inequities. That's
Speaker 1: the hope, But you know, these inequities are very enshrined
Speaker 1: in the world. It's a system that has permitted for
Speaker 1: a very long time. And even the Miyamotli of Barbados
Speaker 1: said that the world today looks too much like what
Speaker 1: it used to look like in an imperialistic system. This
Speaker 1: world looks still too much like it did when it
Speaker 1: was part of an imperialistic empire. So yeah, that's definitely
Speaker 1: the hope that they will be able to have a
Speaker 1: bigger voice on a table, but it's going to be
Speaker 1: a long journey to get there. The global North bars
Speaker 1: between interest rates of between one to four percent, the
Speaker 1: global South of fourteen percent, and then we wonder why
Speaker 1: the just energy partnerships are not working. Talking of world leaders,
Speaker 1: actually you were in the room when President Joe Biden
Speaker 1: spoke on Friday fresh off fo S one or what
Speaker 1: were the main highlights of his speech? Well, luckily podcast
Speaker 1: listeners got a preview of what his speech was going
Speaker 1: to be because we had his National Climate Advisor Alizadi
Speaker 1: on the episode on Friday in the morning. And I
Speaker 1: suppose the new thing that he talked about was giving
Speaker 1: five hundred million dollars alongside the European Union to Egypt
Speaker 1: to build more renewable energy. There was also for US
Speaker 1: president speeches a very unusual moment. As I stand here
Speaker 1: before you, we've taken enormous strives to achieve that but
Speaker 1: I don't stand here alone. Midway through his speech, there
Speaker 1: were shouts and noises, and climate activists got up on
Speaker 1: the table and unfiled a message for the president. He
Speaker 1: didn't seem particularly perturbed. He paused for a moment and
Speaker 1: just kept going with his speech. Security came very quickly
Speaker 1: and took the protesters down so quickly that the media
Speaker 1: that was sitting far behind couldn't really see what the
Speaker 1: message was. But these things tend to not happen, especially
Speaker 1: don't tend to happen in a country where protests have
Speaker 1: been so limited. Yeah, it's ironic that they even got
Speaker 1: in there in a context where there's been so little
Speaker 1: protest space at COP twenty seven. Absolutely. I mean there
Speaker 1: have been sporadic protests within the blue zone, which is
Speaker 1: controlled by the UNF Triple C that organizes the meeting,
Speaker 1: but nobody can really protest there because it's very heavily
Speaker 1: surrounded by police, and you can't be bringing whatever signs
Speaker 1: you would like. Everything has to go through security and
Speaker 1: has to be approved. The one place where I really
Speaker 1: heard the voice of activists loudly was at the Bloomberg
Speaker 1: event that we had on Thursday, actually, where young activists
Speaker 1: spoke about one of the lack of protests, but also
Speaker 1: they were much more clear headed than a lot of
Speaker 1: the policymakers that we've heard so far about really the
Speaker 1: urgency of saving the planet. And one of the person
Speaker 1: who also stands out for me was Hindu Ibrahim, who
Speaker 1: is an indigenous leader from Chad and a COP veteran,
Speaker 1: and she had a lot of interesting things to say,
Speaker 1: but also she said that indigenous voices were not being
Speaker 1: listened to, and I thought that that was really interesting
Speaker 1: to me. I mean, just walking the pavilions, you would
Speaker 1: see people who look like indigenous people with the colorful dress,
Speaker 1: and people take pictures of the man. You always see
Speaker 1: people getting taken pictures of But the question is that
Speaker 1: they're being heard and was their contribution. Well INGA thanks
Speaker 1: for coming on the podcast. I know you're off back home,
Speaker 1: so safe travels. Thanks so much, it's been a pleasure
Speaker 1: speaking with you. Acshal. After the break, how do you
Speaker 1: get a deal done at a climate conference with two
Speaker 1: hundred nations attending? Former unf TRIPALC executive secretary Patricia Espinosa
Speaker 1: gives us the inside track. Joining me now is Patricia Espinosa,
Speaker 1: who was the head of the UNF TRIPALCY between twenty
Speaker 1: sixteen and twenty twenty two. The UNF TRIPALC is the
Speaker 1: main organizing body of the annual climate conferences. Patricia, welcome
Speaker 1: to the show. Thank you, Thank you for inviting me.
Speaker 1: You were the executive Secretary of the UNF PPULC for
Speaker 1: the last six years. Now you've passed on the baton
Speaker 1: to Simon Steele, but let's just start there. Paris Agreement
Speaker 1: was a landmark agreement when it came to climate change.
Speaker 1: For the first time countries agreed on very clear targets
Speaker 1: that they had to meet. But agreements, voluntary as they are,
Speaker 1: are worth nothing if they can't be implemented, and you,
Speaker 1: in your tenure had to make sure that implementation of
Speaker 1: the many, many promises in there could happen. If you
Speaker 1: look back, what do you think you succeeded on and
Speaker 1: where did you fail? Well, first of all, yes, I
Speaker 1: want to fully conquer with you and underline the fact
Speaker 1: that the Paris Agreement is really one of the most
Speaker 1: important achievements of multilateralism in the history of the United Nations. Now,
Speaker 1: as you say, also yes, this wonderful agreement is nothing
Speaker 1: if we don't implement it. The agreement was adopted in
Speaker 1: Paris in twenty fifteen. I came to the Secretariat in
Speaker 1: twenty sixteen, just after the agreement had been adopted. Imagine,
Speaker 1: the Secretariat and parties had spent twenty five years discussing
Speaker 1: what an agreement like that would look like, and so
Speaker 1: when I came, the big issue was and now what
Speaker 1: are we going to do? What is next? The first
Speaker 1: point in trying to address implementation was to work on
Speaker 1: the guidelines for implementation, because the Paris Agreement provides a
Speaker 1: very broad general framework. But then we needed the tools.
Speaker 1: While Paris, for example, says that transparency is key for
Speaker 1: the future of climate change, there was no clarity on
Speaker 1: how we would be achieving that transparency. Yeah, another example
Speaker 1: would be Paris never says NED zero by twenty fifty.
Speaker 1: Those are not words that exist in the Paris Agreement.
Speaker 1: And yet if you have a one point five degrees
Speaker 1: celsius goal, somebody had to do the work to translate
Speaker 1: that into an emission target. And now we have NED
Speaker 1: zero by twenty fifty, correct, correct. So out of Paris
Speaker 1: we managed to get Also the IPCC report on one
Speaker 1: point five. That then has allowed us to be much
Speaker 1: clearer about the specific goals that we will need to
Speaker 1: achieve in the coming years, including, by the way, by
Speaker 1: twenty thirty forty five percent reduction of emissions, which is
Speaker 1: only eight years from now. So I think the one
Speaker 1: success was that we did manage to finalize in those
Speaker 1: six years the implementation rules for the Paris Agreement. So
Speaker 1: now we can go into full implementation. And what are
Speaker 1: the lessons that you learned during your time leading this effort,
Speaker 1: running cop meetings, bringing together two hundred countries getting an
Speaker 1: agreement in Glasgow that you would like to pass on
Speaker 1: to Simon Steele, who is in your position. Now, let
Speaker 1: me go back also to the point that you were
Speaker 1: asking before about what would be the shortcomings that I
Speaker 1: would see. I would probably refer to them to the
Speaker 1: pace in which we have made a progress. Yes, progress
Speaker 1: is made. There is no nobody except for the US,
Speaker 1: for a short period of time, has gone back and
Speaker 1: said we don't want to be part of this anymore. However,
Speaker 1: it took six years until we finalize the operating rules
Speaker 1: for the Paris Agreement. That's too long. That's too long.
Speaker 1: We don't have the luxury of time, and to my successor,
Speaker 1: I would say that, you know, while we do not
Speaker 1: have the time anymore, there needs to be an acceleration
Speaker 1: of the way we work in that process. Well, it's
Speaker 1: nice of you to take that as a shortcoming or
Speaker 1: a failure, but the reality is it's a global problem.
Speaker 1: There isn't a global government. You do not have the
Speaker 1: power to force governments to do what they need to
Speaker 1: be doing right. You can only bring them together and
Speaker 1: make them talk. So it is a shortcoming, but it
Speaker 1: is not all on you. Yes, I know, but it's
Speaker 1: important to take responsibility. Now you've been on the ground,
Speaker 1: you are, I'm sure clued in to the negotiations that
Speaker 1: are happening around loss and damage. What do you think
Speaker 1: we should be looking out for towards the end of
Speaker 1: this cop give us some reporters notes. No, So let
Speaker 1: me let me say that I want to be really
Speaker 1: very very respectful of the role of Simon and you
Speaker 1: know also of the old negotiators. So I want to
Speaker 1: what I would share with you is what I hope,
Speaker 1: I personally hope that we should be achieving here. If
Speaker 1: we look at the scenario, the overall scenario in which
Speaker 1: this conference is taking place, with so many challenges, and
Speaker 1: with the fact that attention by world leaders has been
Speaker 1: directed to other priorities. I think the fact that now
Speaker 1: we have an agenda item on a loss and damage
Speaker 1: is good news. Is a step forward, but a very
Speaker 1: small step forward, right, or a big step forward, but
Speaker 1: we still have a very long way to go, however
Speaker 1: you want to look at it. I think that it
Speaker 1: would be positive first if we could manage to have
Speaker 1: in this session the start of a very respectful, open
Speaker 1: and well informed conversation about loss and damage. What do
Speaker 1: we really understand about loss and damage? Right? All of
Speaker 1: that could be done with a forward looking approach, so
Speaker 1: that we look towards what is coming, the disasters that
Speaker 1: we know are going to becoming, the losses and damages
Speaker 1: that will be coming, in order to try to avoid
Speaker 1: this more confrontational scenario where we would be looking at
Speaker 1: history and what are the responsibilities of the different actors.
Speaker 1: It's not wanting to ignore that there are some that
Speaker 1: are responsible and some that are more responsible than others.
Speaker 1: That's very clear to me. But I think at this
Speaker 1: point in time, with the urgency of the situation, we
Speaker 1: need to focus on the lutions. One of the best
Speaker 1: things about coming to cop meetings is just the sheer
Speaker 1: number of people from different places, with different languages, wearing
Speaker 1: their traditional clothes, walking around talking about trying to help
Speaker 1: world tackle this problem. But there's a lot that goes
Speaker 1: into making it happen. You've been working on that in
Speaker 1: your role at the UNF tripleC. Give us some behind
Speaker 1: the scenes that people don't get to see the good
Speaker 1: and the bad of making such an event happen every year. Well, yeah,
Speaker 1: it's a very unique process as well. By the way,
Speaker 1: I would divide it into two big areas of work, right,
Speaker 1: one has to do with the logistics and the organization
Speaker 1: and bringing people to their place. The other has to
Speaker 1: do with the negotiations. Of course. Now on the logistics side,
Speaker 1: it's a big enterprise. Um. It involves the negotiation of
Speaker 1: an agreement that we call the host country agreement, where
Speaker 1: the responsibilities and and also the rights of the different
Speaker 1: actors are defined, mainly of the host country and the secretariat.
Speaker 1: What is the secretariat going to be providing, what is
Speaker 1: the host country going to provide? And here also in
Speaker 1: terms for example of security, the Department of Safety and
Speaker 1: Security from the UN in New York is also involved.
Speaker 1: Why because the Secretariat doesn't have a big enough group
Speaker 1: of security officers. And actually, you know, this is one
Speaker 1: of the things that I could comment is in order
Speaker 1: to put together the team, the security officials that come here,
Speaker 1: people from different UN venues are brought together, right. And
Speaker 1: it's more than a hundred world leaders coming in one place,
Speaker 1: which yes, I don't know if it happens apart from
Speaker 1: anything like the UN General Assembly, which is always in
Speaker 1: one place in New York, correct, correct, And this conference
Speaker 1: has become the biggest conference that is held every year,
Speaker 1: even the bigger than the UN General Assembly. Yes, yes,
Speaker 1: because you know, the General Assembly doesn't have the action zone,
Speaker 1: doesn't have this inclusive space for all the different actors
Speaker 1: to come together. So it is it is bigger than
Speaker 1: the General Assembly, not in the number of heads of
Speaker 1: state and government, but certainly in the number of participants.
Speaker 1: And I would say also the diversity of participants, right, yes, yes,
Speaker 1: And then it is beautiful the see of humanity. Correct, correct,
Speaker 1: I also enjoy it. I also enjoy it. And you know,
Speaker 1: I think that the challenges include in the everyday work,
Speaker 1: you know, include from the designing of the different spaces
Speaker 1: to also trying to engage with a host country in
Speaker 1: order to make sure that hotels are available, that transportation
Speaker 1: is available, that at the airport people are taking care
Speaker 1: of that. You know, it's every single little and big
Speaker 1: detail needs to be addressed. Now, why is it that
Speaker 1: some COUP meetings end up in countries that are not
Speaker 1: really climate forward? We're sitting in Egypt, which we can't
Speaker 1: really count as a climate forward country. We're going to
Speaker 1: the UAE next year again and oil producing nation. Why
Speaker 1: is it that these are the host of the cup meetings? Well,
Speaker 1: as you may know that the venue of the conference
Speaker 1: is rotating in the different regional groups. One of the
Speaker 1: objectives of that rule is to give every every region
Speaker 1: in the world the opportunity to be hosts and also
Speaker 1: in line with the principle of quality within the United Nations,
Speaker 1: every country has the right to come forward and present
Speaker 1: a candidacy for hosting the conference and then it is
Speaker 1: normally up to the regional group to decide on what
Speaker 1: who will be the host for the region. And this
Speaker 1: is what has happened in this case. It was you know,
Speaker 1: a discussion within the African group. In the case of
Speaker 1: the UAE. It was also a decision by the Asian Group.
Speaker 1: It is then a coincidence somehow that we are into
Speaker 1: Arab countries too, countries that are actually quite close. On
Speaker 1: the other hand, I would say that it is important
Speaker 1: also that we do respect the principle of equality between
Speaker 1: all countries. I understand what you are saying as these
Speaker 1: countries not being very ambitious in terms of climate change.
Speaker 1: But part of the objective is that this possibility of
Speaker 1: hosting a conference will boost the climate agenda also nationally.
Speaker 1: So the process seeks to be a very constructive and
Speaker 1: forward looking process. Now I can tell you from my
Speaker 1: experience as a COP president in twenty ten in Mexico,
Speaker 1: it was absolutely critical that we hosted the COP. The
Speaker 1: members of parliament at that time were very interested and
Speaker 1: curious to participate, and that made it possible in a
Speaker 1: few months time to approve the Climate change Law. That's
Speaker 1: very interesting. We were also told by Sali Mulhak who
Speaker 1: the professor at the Independent University in Bangladesh, that not
Speaker 1: many countries put their names forward for hosting. Is that true?
Speaker 1: It is true. It is a huge endeavor. You know,
Speaker 1: it's not easy for any country to be able to host.
Speaker 1: We had a very unique experience you may remember in
Speaker 1: twenty seventeen when we had COPED twenty three, presided over
Speaker 1: by Fiji but held in bond. Why because Fiji literally
Speaker 1: cannot host a conference like this in their own country.
Speaker 1: There were some meetings that were held in Fiji, of course,
Speaker 1: but it's not only about the physical place but also
Speaker 1: giving the responsibility to countries from all regions, in all
Speaker 1: different capacities. Do you think there could be any progress
Speaker 1: made on climate change without having COP meetings? I don't.
Speaker 1: I don't think so. I think you need to have
Speaker 1: a platform where countries and now increasingly also entities from
Speaker 1: private and public sector come together joint effort. Otherwise we
Speaker 1: would have, you know, disperse efforts everywhere. This is a
Speaker 1: global problem. It cannot be addressed effectively by one or
Speaker 1: two or even one region. Climate change doesn't recognize borders,
Speaker 1: political realities. Climate change is there and we have to
Speaker 1: work together, and this is the platform to do that.
Speaker 1: And some of the most memorable moments that come out
Speaker 1: of COP meetings are emotional moments. You see people in tears,
Speaker 1: you see people talking in ways that you won't be
Speaker 1: able to virtually and that I do eye contact is
Speaker 1: very important. Absolutely, it's you know, you are absolutely right.
Speaker 1: You get emotional because this is really the sense of
Speaker 1: working around a problem that represents the biggest threat to humanity,
Speaker 1: has a very very special way. It's not just any job. Well,
Speaker 1: thank you for giving us an insight into these amazing
Speaker 1: meetings that happen every year, and thank you for the
Speaker 1: work you do. Thank you, thank you very much, Thanks
Speaker 1: for the opportunity. Thanks so much for listening to Zero.
Speaker 1: If you like the show, please rate, review and subscribe,
Speaker 1: Tell a friend, or tell a climate activist. If you've
Speaker 1: got a suggestion for a guest or topic or something
Speaker 1: you just want us to look into, get in touch
Speaker 1: at Zero pod at Bloomberg dot net. Also, until November eighteenth,
Speaker 1: the Bloomberg Green paywall is down. Head to Bloomberg dot
Speaker 1: com slash green to read all our latest coverage and
Speaker 1: everything in the archives for absolutely free. Zero's producer is
Speaker 1: Oscar Boyd and senior producer is Christine driscoll. Our theme
Speaker 1: music is composed by wonder Lee. Special thanks to Kira Binzim,
Speaker 1: Laura Milan and Stacy Wong. I'm Kshatrati back next week
Speaker 1: with more from COP twenty seven