I used this space last week to explore some of
the key issues for the Caribbean at COP27 which closes in Sharm El-Sheikh,
Egypt on Saturday, describing some of them as required “reality checks.”
One is the unreliability of financial flows to
support adaptation measures in the developing world, and the other critical one
is the fact that the 1.5-degree threshold for global warming appears
increasingly difficult to achieve.
The truth is, what we are attending to is a
global phenomenon that requires multiple hands at work simultaneously and with
an eye on the same objectives.
The implications for some key features of the
planet are serious and far-reaching. Our natural environment, including plant
and animal life, is already undergoing change through diminished biological
diversity and the incursions of invasive species, among other impacts.
This, in turn, will have effects on already
acknowledged food insecurity and the long list of dependent economic activities
such as tourism, upon which most of our countries rely.
Extreme weather events also do not only mean
heavier than average spells of rainfall, but a rising incidence of dry spells.
In our region, there are already acknowledged water-scarce and challenged
states.
We already know that even with heavy rainfall,
water quality issues and their attendant costs pose serious issues for the
availability of potable water.
Our very model of infrastructure-led
development may also find itself confronting strong hurdles as the
decarbonisation process worldwide slows some areas of productive endeavour.
It has also long been recognised that the small
island and low-lying coastal developing states of the world require far more
urgent decision-making and change on this matter.
I argued here last week that the real engine
room at COPs comprises politicians, official negotiators, and a cadre of
eminent scientists, both from our regions and of the Global North.
It is good that the civil society space is
typically occupied and active at these events, but there is not much evidence
that such activism has been effective in influencing the desired change, nor
has it grown sufficiently to harness much broader, enlightened public opinion.
Had that been the case, our political parties
in the Caribbean would have made the climate crisis (and it is a “crisis”)
focal points of their recent election campaigns, and the issue would have
framed a considerable cross-section of the parliamentary discourse.
Arguments and cross-talk about the incidence of
extreme weather events would have included even passing mention of the
phenomenon, and when it did, explanations of the distinction between climate
and weather proffered.
We have already experienced 1.3 degree growth
in global temperature – most of it at the hands of human activity. Even the
most ardent flat-earther devotees have backed away from their earlier
opposition to a notion of an anthropogenic connection.
It would be equally sensible though to heed the
warnings that the 1.5-degree threshold seems set to be breached. Projected
impacts on human populations, even at 1.5, appear dim.
This has real implications for how we undertake
the develop assignment. This includes greater reliance on science, data-driven
decision making, and broader alliances of civic elements.
Apart from the usual NGO suspects, who expected
anything to emerge from sectors including construction, local government, law,
energy, tourism, food production ahead of COP27?
Hopefully, someone will remind me of a
spectacular submission from any of them.
Contrastingly, some of us in the reviled media
have worked over many years to ensure that our coverage of the climate change
challenge is founded on the available science and best practice policy
responses.
In 2005, the Association of Caribbean Media
Workers, together with Caricom’s Mainstreaming Adaptation to Climate Change
(MACC) Project launched a handbook for journalists on the subject.
Then, in 2021, we introduced “Reporting the
Climate Crisis - A Handbook for Caribbean Journalists” which I co-authored
together with scientists Steve Maximay and Dr Dale Rankine.
Some of our better environmental reporters have
been at Sharm El-Sheikh. I look forward to their comprehensive evaluations of
the proceedings.
They would hopefully include the prospects for
an all of society, all of world approach. Some of us need the reassurance that
opportunities exist to achieve this.
