• About Us
  • Our Practice Areas
    • Banking & Financial Services
    • Competition & Antitrust
    • Digital & Tech
    • EU & International
    • Food & Drink
    • Green Transition
    • Healthcare, Life Sciences & Wellbeing
    • Trade & Investment (including EU-UK)
    • Transport, Travel & Logistics
  • Our Team
    • FIPRA International
    • Special Advisors
  • FIPRA Network
  • Latest News
  • Events
  • Careers
Skip to content

FIPRA

Search for:
Analysis

COP26 was a curate’s egg – good in parts

By Mary Creagh
Tuesday, 7 December 2021
COP26 was a curate’s egg – good in parts

The dust has settled after COP26 and the eyes of the world have returned to business as usual – the Omicron covid variant, supply chain shortages, soaring energy prices and the migration crisis.  Now is a good time to reflect on the Glasgow summit, the largest gathering of heads of state since the Paris COP in 2015, and ask whether it was a success.  Was it a feast of blah blah blah and greenwashing? Or did we witness a pivot point, a moment where actions finally began to match the imperative of tackling climate change? My view is that it was better than anyone imagined, but nowhere near what is needed. 

Was it a feast of blah blah blah and greenwashing? Or did we witness a pivot point, a moment where actions finally began to match the imperative of tackling climate change?

Mary Creagh, Chair, Responsible Business Practice, Lexington

So what went well?

First, the summit was billed as the last chance to keep 1.5 degrees Celsius of global heating alive.   Did it achieve that goal?  Only just, and the goal is on life support.  But the fact it is still in the final text as a target is welcome progress.  The five-year review period for 2030 NDCS (Nationally Determined Contributions) has been shortened to a year which mean all eyes will be on COP27 in Egypt next year.  The problem can no longer be kicked down the road.  The Paris Rulebook has been completed, so countries have a common, transparent approach to emissions reporting, and there are rules for international carbon markets, which should help achieve the target. This decade of climate action will see 2022 COP reviews putting the heat on governments, business and citizens, as never before.

Second, there was a real sense of urgency building around the 2030 decarbonisation goal.  This COP saw a big increase in ambition and commitment from all countries, regions, states, cities and investors.  90% of global GDP is now covered by Net Zero commitments, up from less than 30% at the start of the UK’s COP presidency.  India’s promise of 50% renewable energy by 2030, and to achieve Net Zero by 2070, and China’s pledge to achieve it by 2060 represents real progress and is a huge undertaking.  China has done a huge amount to reduce the cost of solar, batteries and wind and is likely to invest heavily in green steel and hydrogen to achieve its target earlier than 2060.

Third, side deals, which avoided the need for consensus from all 196 countries, were an innovation at this COP. Reducing methane is key to reducing short term global emissions and 105 governments signed up to reduce their emissions by 30% by 2030.  There was disappointment that large methane emitting countries like Australia, China and India did not sign up to the deal.  The spotlight will now fall on oil and gas companies to give life to this promise.

The side deal to end and reverse deforestation and land erosion by 2030 was signed by 100 leaders, including Bolsonaro of Brazil, a sign of the massive value that forests have in tackling global heating.

Mary Creagh, Chair, Responsible Business Practice, Lexington

The side deal to end and reverse deforestation and land erosion by 2030 was signed by 100 leaders, including Bolsonaro of Brazil, a sign of the massive value that forests have in tackling global heating. The £14 bn of public and private funding over the next 5 years to 2025 (including $2 bn from Jeff Bezos for land restoration in Africa) will also provide money for indigenous communities.  The declaration was accompanied by declarations from large financial institutions and agricultural commodity companies to end investment in deforestation and in supply chains – a multi-pronged systems-based approach which will be closely monitored by civil society groups.  With nearly a quarter of global emissions coming from agriculture and logging, this is a key weapon in the fight against climate change.

Fourth, a Global Energy Alliance for People and Planet (GEAPP), a collaboration between governments, development banks, multilateral banks, the private sector and philanthropists was launched at COP. It seeks to invest $100 bn over ten years into in green energy transitions and renewable power solutions worldwide.  The goal is to create and de risk the financing pipeline for energy poor countries, to avoid investment in polluting, high carbon industries and to bring green energy to a billion people in low-income countries. There was an agreement to help South Africa phase out coal.

So what went badly?

There was unhappiness from poorer countries that the $100 billion promised in Paris to help low-income countries deal with the effects of climate has still not fully materialized a year after the 2020 deadline. How the money should be allocated is another point of contention, with an agreement that the amount going to climate adaptation, currently $20 bn, should double by 2025. A call for donor countries to pay loss and damage to countries severely affected by climate events was discussed but did not bear fruit, to the bitter disappointment of countries on the climate frontline.  A “Glasgow Dialogue” has begun, but the arguments around the need to avert, minimize and address such damage will be a key battleground at COP27 next year.

Many were disappointed by the US, China and Germany’s refusal to sign up to end the production of internal combustion engines by 2040.  The COP President, Alok Sharma, was blindsided at the last minute by a refusal from India to agree to phase out coal. After intense talks, an exhausted, tearful and apologetic Sharma presented a changed text promising to “phase down” coal.  But this is still significant progress and the looser language reflects the political constraints in countries that are still heavily coal dependent.

Progress was not held back by lack of unanimity. Perfection was not the enemy of the good.

Mary Creagh, Chair, Responsible Business Practice, Lexington

COP26 was a curate’s egg – good in parts

Coming after a year of drought, floods and forest fires there was consensus on the climate science and significant momentum on the ambition, funding and actions needed to tackle global heating through system wide change by state and non-state actors.  Progress was not held back by lack of unanimity. Perfection was not the enemy of the good.  The International Energy Agency declared the promises made at Glasgow would keep emissions to around 1.8 degrees. 

The campaigners are right to say it is not enough.  They are right to point out that past declarations have not led to meaningful change.  Climate Action Tracker is right that current policies put us on track for 2.4 degrees of warming.  Difficult decisions lie ahead. But Glasgow’s acceleration of promises, and the refocusing of the global financial system on keeping 1.5 degrees alive means we can hope for a net zero emissions future sooner rather than later.   

Want to learn more?

FIPRA is represented in the United Kingdom by Lexington Communications, the UK’s leading independent public affairs and communications agency, specialising in providing an issues-based approach to the political and media challenges that organisations face.

FIPRA’s Green Transition, Energy & Industrials team provides expertise to help clients navigate the inner workings of EU institutions such as the Commission, Council, and Parliament.

 

Written by
Mary Creagh
FIPRA UK / Lexington Communications
Profile
The FIPRA Network
The FIPRA Network
The FIPRA Network is a global collective of owner-operated, independent public affairs consultancies providing high-level, expert advice on complex political, policy and regulatory issues in more than 50 countries.
More
Latest News
  • Analysis
    European Parliament’s New Year Resolution: build a powerful but child-friendly online gaming industry
    19 January 2023
  • Analysis
    Drone Strategy 2.0: A vision for the future, actions for today
    12 December 2022
  • Analysis
    Connected but vulnerable: the EU’s plans to ramp-up cybersecurity standards 
    28 October 2022
  • Analysis
    A Forward Look: EU Green Deal key initiatives and their role in securing a green transition  
    3 October 2022
  • FIPRA Network
    Italy general election 2022
    26 September 2022
  • FIPRA in Argentina
    FIPRA in Argentina
    is known locally as InfoMedia Consulting
    FIPRA in Argentina
  • FIPRA in Australia
    FIPRA in Australia
    is known locally as Richardson Coutts
    FIPRA in Australia
  • FIPRA in Austria
    FIPRA in Austria
    is known locally as Mastermind Public Affairs Consulting
    FIPRA in Austria
  • FIPRA in Belgium
    FIPRA in Belgium
    is known locally as Greenlane Public Affair
    FIPRA in Belgium
  • FIPRA in Brazil
    FIPRA in Brazil
    is known locally as JG Assis de Almeida & Associados
    FIPRA in Brazil
  • FIPRA in Canada
    FIPRA in Canada
    is known locally as Earnscliffe Strategy Group
    FIPRA in Canada
  • FIPRA in China
    FIPRA in China
    is known locally as Yuan Associates
    FIPRA in China
  • FIPRA in Croatia
    FIPRA in Croatia
    is known locally as Vlahovic Group
    FIPRA in Croatia
  • FIPRA in Czech Republic
    FIPRA in Czech Republic
    is known locally as PAN Solutions
    FIPRA in Czech Republic
  • FIPRA in Denmark
    FIPRA in Denmark
    is known locally as European Advisers
  • FIPRA in Estonia
    FIPRA in Estonia
    is known locally as META Advisory Group
    FIPRA in Estonia
  • FIPRA in France
    FIPRA in France
    is known locally as Cabinet Samman
    FIPRA in France
  • FIPRA in Georgia
    FIPRA in Georgia
    is known locally as BGI Advisory Services Group
    FIPRA in Georgia
  • FIPRA in Germany
    FIPRA in Germany
    is known locally as Miller & Meier Consulting
    FIPRA in Germany
  • FIPRA in Greece
    FIPRA in Greece
    is known locally as One Team S.A
    FIPRA in Greece
  • FIPRA in Hungary
    FIPRA in Hungary
    is known locally as CEC Group
    FIPRA in Hungary
  • FIPRA in India
    FIPRA in India
    is known locally as Chase India
    FIPRA in India
  • FIPRA in Ireland
    FIPRA in Ireland
    is known locally as Vulcan Consulting
    FIPRA in Ireland
  • FIPRA in Italy
    FIPRA in Italy
    is known locally as Telos A&S
    FIPRA in Italy
  • FIPRA in Japan
    FIPRA in Japan
    is known locally as GR Japan
    FIPRA in Japan
  • FIPRA in Korea
    FIPRA in Korea
    is known locally as FIPRA Korea
  • FIPRA in Latvia
    FIPRA in Latvia
    is known locally as Meta Advisory
    FIPRA in Latvia
  • FIPRA in Luxembourg
    FIPRA in Luxembourg
    is known locally as Huggard Consulting Group
    FIPRA in Luxembourg
  • FIPRA in Malta
    FIPRA in Malta
    is known locally as Maritimus Company Limited
    FIPRA in Malta
  • FIPRA in Mexico
    FIPRA in Mexico
    is known locally as InStrag
    FIPRA in Mexico
  • FIPRA in The Netherlands
    FIPRA in The Netherlands
    is known locally as Public Matters
    FIPRA in The Netherlands
  • FIPRA in Norway
    FIPRA in Norway
    is known locally as First House
    FIPRA in Norway
  • FIPRA in Poland
    FIPRA in Poland
    is known locally as CEC Group
    FIPRA in Poland
  • FIPRA in Portugal
    FIPRA in Portugal
    is known locally as Initium
  • FIPRA in Singapore
    FIPRA in Singapore
    is known locally as Landmark Public Affairs
    FIPRA in Singapore
  • FIPRA in Slovakia
    FIPRA in Slovakia
    is known locally as FIPRA Slovakia
  • FIPRA in Slovenia
    FIPRA in Slovenia
    is known locally as MC Public Affairs S.a.r.l.
    FIPRA in Slovenia
  • FIPRA in South Africa
    FIPRA in South Africa
    is known locally as Ethicore Political Lobbying
    FIPRA in South Africa
  • FIPRA in Spain
    FIPRA in Spain
    is known locally as Influence Spain
    FIPRA in Spain
  • FIPRA in Sweden
    FIPRA in Sweden
    is known locally as Hallvarsson & Halvarsson (H&H)
    FIPRA in Sweden
  • FIPRA in Switzerland
    FIPRA in Switzerland
    is known locally as Hirzel.Neef.Schmid.Counselors
    FIPRA in Switzerland
  • FIPRA in Tunisia
    FIPRA in Tunisia
    is known locally as Mediterranean Development Initiative
    FIPRA in Tunisia
  • FIPRA in Turkey
    FIPRA in Turkey
    is known locally as FIPRA Iletisim
  • FIPRA in Ukraine
    FIPRA in Ukraine
    is known locally as Stober Poltavets & Associates
    FIPRA in Ukraine
  • FIPRA in the United Kingdom
    FIPRA in the United Kingdom
    is known locally as Lexington
    FIPRA in the United Kingdom
  • FIPRA in the United States
    FIPRA in the United States
    is known locally as Alpine Group
    FIPRA in the United States
FIPRA Network

FIPRA

© FIPRA 2023.
All rights reserved.

Follow us on Twitter  Find us on LinkedIn

  • Privacy Policy
Explore
  • About Us
  • Our Practice Areas
  • Our Team
  • FIPRA Network
  • Latest News
  • Events
  • Careers
  • FIPRA Tools
  • Contact Us
Practice Areas
  • Banking & Financial Services
  • Competition & Antitrust
  • Digital & Tech
  • EU & International
  • Food & Drink
  • Green Transition
  • Healthcare, Life Sciences & Wellbeing
  • Trade & Investment (including EU-UK)
  • Transport, Travel & Logistics
Contact

info@fipra.com

Brussels Office  map
FIPRA International SRL
Rue de la Loi 227
Brussels 1040
+32 (0)2 613 28 28
Company number: 0733.774.811

London Office  map
FIPRA International Limited
201 Borough High Street
London
SE1 1JA
+44 (0)203 805 7770
Company number: 3936157