MYD Suffers Horrendous Ordeal to COP22

by admin | Dec 6, 2016 | MYD2016

Nah, I just needed to get your attention. This article is about my journey to Morocco, not an analogy for my personal development and growth, but quite literally my logistical journey from Cardiff to Morocco.

One of the (super) most important things to confirm you have in order, are your logistical arrangements (Thomas is probably nodding his head vigorously at this). This includes travel and transport, hotel and VISA. Please also remember to notify the Malaysian Embassy in whichever country you travel to for COP that you will be attending it. Among other reasons, it will help them reach you and your family in cases of emergency i.e natural disasters, war, and violence, etc.

Morocco requires Malaysian-passport holders to apply for a visa in order to enter the country. If you are accredited with a pink or yellow badge, you would receive a Visa Confirmation Letter for a Visa Upon Arrival which would save you the hassle of trudging up the visa offices to get it done the conventional way.

My case was slightly different; I received my funding and accreditation pretty late. I had also maxed out on the number of days I could apply for a leave of absence for my trip to COP22; any more and I would have to defer a year. This meant that I relied entirely on my VCL for my visa as I was unable to make the trip to London because I would have to miss classes. The problem was, I had not received my letter via e-mail, even the night before my flight!

I rang the Moroccan Embassy in the UK for several days before that to inquire, but I was either put on indefinite hold or they never picked up. I finally left a message the day before my flight and resigned myself. I was unsure as to whether I should travel to the airport the next morning considering it was a 3.5-hour train journey and I was likely to reverse my journey without my letter anyway.

I took a leap of faith and took the train to London, and miraculously the Moroccan Embassy decided to call me back. I received my visa letter before arriving at London and printed it at the airport. All good, right? No.

I was denied boarding. Despite showing the staff my accreditation letter, my passport, and the visa letter, I was not allowed to board my flight. It was one of those incredulous moments where I stood dumbfounded at the blatant dismissal of my precious, legitimate travel documents. A lady who was boarding the same flight and attending COP tried to vouch for me but she was disregarded like a babbling child as well.

So I made my way to the customer service with the other passengers with issues; through the security check, immigration, baggage collection, etc. I speak to the customer service and they can’t seem to help me because although they didn’t find a problem with my documents, it was the ‘manager’ that made the call to deny me boarding. I kept intending to speak to this manager, but mysteriously she only communicated to me through everyone else.

I discovered several things:

1. The airline, EasyJet was terribly ignorant about one of the biggest events of the year that was happening in Morocco despite flying several trips to the country daily.
2. Their customer service left a lot to be desired because, at one point, I was asked questions that tried to imply that the fault was mine, or that my documents were not in order while keeping me waiting for at least 45 minutes for the manager who never arrived.
3. I was not going to board any flight to Morocco with this airline anytime soon. They required (the exact same) letter delivered by hand by the Moroccan Embassy, except it was Friday after hours and I had no way to get it by Monday, which is when COP22 starts.

So about 4 hours later, I realised it was a battle lost and having never travelled to London (aside transits) before, I was on my own in a foreign city without certainty about my flight to Morocco by Monday. Fortunately, a few friends helped me book a hostel I gratefully crashed at.

That night tested my faith and determination – with all my teammates either in Morocco or flying there with no issues, the niggling voice of naysayers at the back of my mind amplifying my doubts, a part of me refused to back down. I was like a dog with a bone; have been from the start of MYD. I was getting my funds, getting my badge, getting there, period. Backing down was not an option. I was told in one of the meetings that I had to ‘die die’ want to go to COP. Well, I didn’t think it per se but I did not think of going back, so I must have wanted to ‘die die’ go after all.

The whole time, I kept the MYD team updated on my status and they offered me useful advice and unicorns. The next day, I followed Adrian’s advice to camp at the airport until I got my flight sorted out. I had no plan, but I decided to go to Heathrow Airport instead of returning to Gatwick Airport.

I waited for two hours to show my documents to a staff from Royal Air Maroc that verified that it was sufficient for entry. By that point, I was already a disheveled, raving, desperado, frantically pointing to the COP22 banners and asking her repeatedly if I really would be allowed in. After I explained my position, she stopped looking at me like I was a lunatic and replied that there was no reason why I should be denied boarding.

I immediately booked my ticket to Morocco on that day before tickets were sold out or booking closed, and managed to fly with no problems.

Arrival at the Marrakesh Menara Airport

So folks, my advice to you is to plan ahead and always have a contingency plan. I kept in touch with the team and they were updated every step of the way, and because of that, I not only received useful tips, but also their warm support and encouragement. More importantly, never give up. The night before my flight, Thomas told me to take that train when I was doubtful.

‘You came this far, don’t give up now.’

Reunited with the team. From L-R: Nacha, Jasmin, Moon, Dulanga, Kelvin

I’m glad he did, and I’m glad that things happened the way they did because when you lug around a 12 kg backpack, fall on your face, spend two days trying to figure out an alien place on your own for the first time, you learn a lot about yourself, the way you deal with adversities and realise how far you are willing to go to reach your destination. You measure the worth of something by how much a person is willing to pay for it. Likewise, I realised the lengths I would go to, just for COP22.

Written by Nachatira Thuraichamy
Edited by Choy Moon Moon

Left out of the Conversation

by admin | Dec 6, 2016 | MYD2016

Malaysian Youth Delegation in traditional attire at COP22

Reporting for the last time from the Red City, Marrakech; at the end of one of the most important climate conferences of the decade – COP22. For two weeks, the negotiators, UN observers, civil society observers and activists have poured their heart and soul to make this year’s Conference of the Parties an impactful one in reaching the 2-degree temperature goal promised through the Paris Agreement. But where were the youth? Most participants at COP represented the baby boomers, rare was the representation of Generation Y.

For two weeks I observed the negotiators take the spotlight, I saw CSOs take charge and voice out, seldom did I see a youth voice out. Even rarer was an audience listening to that seldom youth who was voicing out. Most youth presentations and speeches were delivered to a handful of ministers or negotiators who occupied a few seats of the plenary hall. The inclusion of youth at COP should not be through token speeches, yellow or overflow  badges. It should be through a pink badge, an actual party badge, a recognition of national delegate status.

Vital negotiations need a voice from the youth. These negotiations are for us. To make sure we have a world to live in. We need the negotiations to be “all ages, all access”. We need to bridge gaps between youth and established NGOs, youth and governments, youth and the system itself.

Malaysian Youth Delegation representatives voicing out on Youth participation and the post-Marrakech scenario

We as the MYD2016 were ever so lucky that we were given the opportunity to attend COP22, to be vocal about the issues we thought was important for us, to get the opportunity to hold our leaders accountable. But this opportunity should be given to every passionate youth out there, regardless of country, religion and social status. All of us need to be heard.

Over half of the world is under 30 years of age and our future is determined by a group of individuals twice our age. Who knows better of what we want for our future than ourselves? The time has come for us to voice out in unity, to fight for our rights and secure the future we deserve. Climate change is the biggest story of our time, let us be a part of it, not just narrators. Youth delegates are vital in making the story of climate change a better one. After attending the 12^th Conference of Youth (COY12) and two weeks of COP22, never have I been more motivated to make sure my voice is heard in the story of climate change.

Written by Dulanga Witharanage
Edited by Choy Moon Moon

C40: Climate Change Action Through Cities

by admin | Dec 5, 2016 | MYD2016

Source: https://www.greenpolicy360.net/w/C40_Cities_Climate_Leadership_Group

I attended a side-event on ‘Under 2 MOU: 2050 strategies towards 1.5°C with States, Regions and Cities’ organised by The Climate Group, C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group (C40), and Climate Analytics GmbH, because we were encouraged to do so by Meena Raman from the Third World Network.

I walked in after it had already begun, but I did gather the gist of what some of them were saying. In a nutshell, C40 is a network of more than 80 of the world’s ‘greatest’ cities (elitism in being inclusive – nice) around the world that are committed to addressing climate change. Acknowledging that each city has its own unique issues and progress in tackling climate change, it empowers cities to connect, collaborate and share knowledge to drive ‘meaningful, measurable and sustainable’ action on climate change.

The Swedish speaker explained that action at the national level plays an important role in the Swedish context such as on carbon pricing, and mentioned that the Carbon Tax 1991 was very effective. She also said that the ban on landfills in Sweden had spurred local and regional level to systematically and strategically promote innovation and a circular economy on waste management. However, what is most important from the government, is to make sure that climate policies and plans are integrated into sectors such as healthcare, jobs, etc. so that they are cheap but also effective measures.

She also highlighted the need for funding and co-funding on the regional and local level as an efficient way for cities to work to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, as well as create jobs and incentives for businesses to work on innovation. She mentioned there are two types of investments; first, carbon efficiency in cities for sustainable urban planning. The second is from corporations that have led a number of innovation programs on a local and regional level and through NGOs. She said that this could be part of an export strategy as a means of being in the forefront of social and business innovations globally.

Another speaker emphasised that what was not lacking at the moment, is the impetus to act. With the tremendous momentum from the signing of the Paris Agreement last year and the turbulence in the USA following the (unfortunate) elections the previous week, there was an even greater result. The 6th biennial C40 Mayors Summit that will be taking place from 30th November – 2nd December 2016 will be hosted by Mexico City, and the participating cities account for over 600 million people. He mentioned that every mayor provided an individual roadmap of cities and in collaboration with other parties that will deliver on the agenda on a regional and national level in the city.

He pointed out that only a quarter of the commitments made in the cities that are included in the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC), and there needs to be greater support for regulations such as to drive diesel-friendly vehicles altogether. He also raised the issue on finance, where of the USD 11,000 that was spent on climate actions, 75% were directly funded by the cities themselves, and although there is the USD 100 billion trajectory, city coffers are not big enough to deal with such an amount.

I have to admit, I did not understand everything about what they were saying as I did sit in halfway and was not familiar with the C40 before that. However, it was an interesting concept to decentralise climate policy and action to give more control to city mayors and councils, who might be best placed to understand the challenges and needs of their people. Connecting cities together to provide direct technical assistance, facilitate peer-to-peer exchange, research, knowledge management and communications seem to be a great way to turn political momentum on an international level to action on the ground.

Indeed, as one of the speakers elucidated, cities are often prime movers of economic development if one studies the history of cities. Cities cannot, of course, change in the short run. However, cities will make it easier to ride the turbulence that comes with climate change, particularly in more vulnerable cities, so they must be made more ‘livable’ and this includes employment, health and education.

The moderator asked the speakers that if they each had the chance to pick one area of collaboration with the most benefits between the regional, local and national level, what it would be. Most agreed that transportation and buildings would be that area because of their carbon-intensity. The speaker from Canada quipped that Quebec was dealing with this through the zero emission vehicle law that obliges car-sellers to offer their customers with a minimum number of hybrid, electric or rechargeable models.

The Swedish speaker said that in Sweden, they have more or less managed the energy sector, but in regards to transportation, more work needs to be done but that cannot be done solely on a national level. She said that there are tools available but there is a need for collaboration in order to create a truly fossil-free system. However, that would require active city planning for it to be feasible.

The effort and need, to make zero or positive energy buildings are important, particularly in the growing infrastructure in cities of developing countries. This resonates with me, as I believe that developing countries should not sacrifice the environment for their economic development as developed countries have done, but they could be more conscious about how they erect the numerous buildings and industries in their cities. This, however, requires access to climate funding and support from developed countries, a hot issue at COP22.

It is interesting that none of the Malaysian cities is involved in the C40 and I am curious as to why this is so, although I do not think it is because we do not have any of the ‘world’s greatest cities’.

Written by Nachatira Thuraichamy
Edited by Choy Moon Moon

You can read more about why cities are important in combating climate change here; C40 and the work they do here.

马来西亚核准《巴黎协定》

by admin | Dec 5, 2016 | MYD2016

(马拉喀什, 16日讯) 马来西亚自然资源与环境部部长拿督斯礼万祖奈迪医生今日于 《联合国气候变化框架公约》 (UNFCCC) 在马拉喀什举行的第二十二届缔约方会议 (the 22^nd Conference of the Parties) 中的高阶层会议 (High Level Segment) 宣布马来西亚继今年4月22日在联合国总部签署 《巴黎协定》 后, 日前已经呈递相关文件, 预料将在数日内确认核准 《巴黎协定》。《巴黎协定》 乃 《公约》 下继 《京都议定书》 后第二份有法律约束力的气候协议，为2020年后全球应对气候变化部署行动, 将全球平均气温升幅控制在工业化前平均气温之上2摄氏度, 竭力控制气温上升幅度的目标则设定为1.5摄氏度。全球一共193个国家签署了这一协定。根据该条约，只要55个 《公约》 缔约方（其温室气体排放量占全球总排放量至少约55%）交存其批准、接受、核准或加入文书之日后第30天起将生效。目前共110缔约方核准了该条约，包括欧盟国家，加拿大，日本，中国等强国，该全球气候协议已经于11月4日正式生效。拿督斯礼万祖奈迪医生在致词中表明马来西亚对执行 《巴黎协定》 的决心，全力减少碳排放量。他也重申马来西亚对《公约》以及 《巴黎协定》 中共同但有区别的责任原则 (Common but Differentiated Responsibilities) 的信心，期望发展中国家就气候变化减缓和适应以及行动获得先进国家支持。此外，马来西亚也将配合联合国定下的可持续发展目标计划 (Sustainable Development Goals)，朝消除贫困，保护地球和确保繁荣前进。就森林管理而言，目前马来西亚的森林覆盖为54.5%，马登红树林自1905年开始就执行可持续管理个案就是个引以为傲的持续性森林管理例子。与此同时，拿督斯礼万祖奈迪医生表示马来西亚致力保护森林的决心，全力推动减少毁林和森林退化所致排放量方案 (REDD+)。对于正在马拉喀什出席该会议的全体国家代表团，以及马来西亚青年代表团和其他非政府非盈利环保或气候变化组织来说，该消息确实振奋人心。马来西亚青年代表团成员嘉斯敏 (Jasmin Irisha Jim Ilham)，张翔隆 (Kelvin Diong Siong Loong)，娜察娣拉 (Nachatira Thuraichamy)，蔡满满 (Choy Moon Moon) 以及都琅雅 (Dulanga Withanarage) 有幸在大会现场见证拿督斯礼万祖奈迪医生致词，当面向部长表示雀跃之心。参加第二十二届缔约方会议 (the 22^nd Conference of the Parties) 的马来西亚青年代表团在为期两周的大会中不仅代表马来西亚青年与来自全世界的青年就气候变化课题交流, 更积极跟进大会会议, 如《巴黎协议》特设工作组 (APA) 会议, 缔约方会议 (COP) , 《京都协议》 缔方会议 (CMP), 以及第一届《巴黎协议》缔方会议 (CMA1)，了解气候谈判过程并孜孜不倦地向马来西亚谈判团团员以及各气候社团如 Third World Network，Youth NGO (YOUNGO), Climate Justice Network 等理解历年案例和先进国与发展中国家针对气候议题的周旋与微妙关系并学习谈判技巧。各国于大会中商讨的议题包括减缓和适应气候变化，共同但有区别的责任原则 (Common but Differentiated Responsibilities)，气候变化带来的损失和损坏 (Loss and Damage), 气候资金 (Climate Finance)，技术开发和转让 (Technology Development and Transfer)，行动和支持的透明度 (Transparency on Action and Support), 全球总结 (Global Stocktake) 等已列入 《巴黎协议》 的项目，为2020年后的气候变化应对部署行动。

翔隆 (Kelvin Diong) 现场报导

Quantitative Scientific Evidence for Loss and Damage

by admin | Dec 5, 2016 | MYD2016

Source: https://www.newsecuritybeat.org/2016/09/loss-damage-liability-compensation-whats-difference-matter/

Date    : 14th Nov 2016
Time    : 3:00pm – 4:30pm
Venue  : Mediterranean room

Speakers:
Dr Jan S Fuglestvedt, Research Director CICERO, Norway;
Prof Lavanya Rajamani, International Environmental Law, New Delhi;
Dr Saleemul Huq, Director ICCAD, Bangladesh; and,
Dr Friederike E L Otto, Senior Researcher, ECI, University of Oxford; High level representative Govt of Bangladesh

The talk highlighted recent advances and remaining challenges by relating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to both slow-onset events and changing probabilities of extreme events. The implications for Loss and Damage (L&D) between national policy responses and international law were also discussed among experts and audiences.

It started with a presentation on emission supply chain, giving an idea of the starting year effect of emissions. In discussing whether historical contribution could potentially result in L&D, it has been suggested that there is no single answer directly linked to responsibility. However, assessment of anthropogenic activities which induced climate change impacts was extensively studied to identify correlations between the activities and resulting impacts. The climateprediction.net is currently running the largest climate modeling experiment which looks into factors contributes to climate change.

As there isn’t any concrete evidence to prove the direct linkage between anthropogenic activities and climate change aftermaths, it is, therefore, impossible to say that an event is entirely affected by human influences, but may also involve other external factors. The speakers also indicated that it is difficult to quantify contributions from the EU, the US or perhaps China at this point, which brings us to the next question which is the likelihood of an event to occur when individual countries are removed from the climate predicting model.

While most of the presentations centred around principles of contributions and responsibilities, Dr Otto elaborated on assigning contributions based on global mean surface air temperature (GMT) change via a fitted distribution method or derivative method by interpreting a number of plotted graphs to explain the correlation between probable root cause and impacts. Nevertheless, the research is deemed lacking strong evidence to conclude the relationship between anthropogenic contributions to climate change consequences, although the method on event attribution was used to identify and quantify increased risk through climate change.

It was also mentioned that the quantification of factors leading to climate change is not primarily scientific, but more of a moral and political choice, where historical responsibility lies in recognising harm rather than assign liability. On a national level, determining the contribution of impacts is tricky as there is a lack of integration between required information.

As the last speaker of the talk, Dr Saleemul shared a rather straightforward case reference on Bangladesh. The country itself runs a lot of adaptation plan, more than any other countries combined. He added that Bangladesh allocated 200 million dollars for disaster management, in particular, the “victim plan before the disaster”, which is now untouched. He then mentioned how science can unlock the conundrum on L&D and stressed that climate change impacts are happening which is why COP22 is essential to iron out the mechanism and can no longer be delayed to COP24, COP25 or the 7th IPCC report for more evidence. The debate on how to rightly define L&D is indeed complicated as natural disasters like cyclone and drought might be caused by temporal or localised factor.

In summary, there is no single correct answer to L&D due to many factors which are beyond science, as quoted by Dr Jan. Profesor Lavanya explained that at the moment, it is difficult to determine the solidarity of legal liability and scientific evidence in respect to L&D. Dr Otto called for consideration of non-scientific factors and comprehensive understanding of anthropogenic climate change impacts, and Dr Saleemul reiterated by stating that proactive adaptation plan could potentially reduce the impacts of L&D.

Written by Kelvin Diong
Edited by Choy Moon Moon