![Are youths unified on the principle of CBDR?]()
by admin | Nov 13, 2017 | #MYD, MYD2017, UNFCCC, YOUNGO
In collaboration with the Malaysia Pavilion, the Malaysian Youth Delegation organised a Youth Forum entitled ‘The Importance of Youth Involvement in Climate Change Negotiations’. The purpose of the forum was to provide a platform in exchanging ideas and experience between Global North and Global South countries on how climate actions are operated back in their respective homes. The event was a bit special because it was the first of such a youth-led initiative held at the Malaysia Pavilion (only the 2nd one we’ve had at COP) and that is a mighty fine statement reflecting that the Malaysian government is willing and open to engage with MYD, or youths, in general. What made the forum a little bit special too was the fact that it was organised in conjunction with Youth and Future Generations (YFG) Day, which was a day to celebrate youth power and participation in UN climate change conferences.
Moderator and panellist for the Youth forum. From left to right; Syaqil (Malaysia), Lhavanya (Malaysia), Saffran (Sri Lanka), Mona (Germany), Sara (Sweden), Lagi (Fiji)
From left to right: Syaqil (Moderator, Malaysia), Lhavanya (MYD, Malaysia), Saffran (EarthLanka, Sri Lanka), Mona (CliMates, Germany), Sara (PUSH, Sweden) and Lagi (Project Survival Pacific, Fiji)
To reiterate the whole spirit of ‘Talanoa’ or togetherness, our invited panellists hailed collectively from the Global South and Global North, in the form of Fiji, Germany, Sri Lanka and Sweden, besides Malaysia of course. The forum was such that panellists had to answer 3 questions, each on the following topic:
- Tell us how in your country youths are playing a role in climate action?
- What is your view on the principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities?
- How can youths support national climate change initiatives?
Given the privilege to moderate such a session, I had the opportunity to listen to views shared by our international youth panellists hence for this article, I shall add my perspective on addressing these questions on top of recalling the points delivered by the speakers:
-
How youths from your country are playing a role in climate action
First off, an annual competition called the Toyota Eco Youth Awards was held whereby secondary schools from all over Malaysia designed and presented on eco-friendly projects that would help making their community live more sustainably. The simple yet innovative projects range from constructing household items from recyclable materials, to awareness campaigns aimed at changing people’s behaviour so that, for instance, they don’t dispose their used cooking oil down the sink. University students take the lead in climate change initiatives too. For example, the University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus holds an annual Earth Hour celebration where all sorts of electrical appliances on campus are switched off for an hour, on top of having the commemorative candle walk around the University. As for Lagi of Fiji, he says that youths in Pacific islands in general are proactive in organizing grassroots activities as they are fully aware of the brunt they could be suffering as a result of climate change – losing their homes as a result of rising sea levels.
-
Your view on the Common but Differentiated Responsibility (CBDR)
My view on CBDR is that all youths’ view on this should be the same and it’s nice to know that two of the panellists from the Global North, Sara (Sweden) and Mona (Germany), think the same! Unfortunately, that’s not the case amongst the decision makers. Where developing countries are upholding the principle, developed countries tend to overlook it which inevitably leads to a clash in negotiations. According to Sara however, that is not the case amongst the Swedish decision-makers as they are upholding this principle when making their stance in negotiations as well as implementing this in their own national policy. Having said that, MYD’s very own Lhavanya made a good point in that the Global South should make it incumbent upon themselves to fulfil their own. CO2 emissions intensity cut regardless of obtaining enough technology transfer and financial assistance from the developed Global North nations. Mona says that the principle of CBDR shouldn’t even be an issue between developed and developing countries which just goes to show how unified youths are in having the same viewpoint to uphold this principle.
Full House in Malaysian Pavillion
-
How youths can support national climate change initiatives
For one, I believe it is a great sign of intent for governments to be inclusive when they open up official platforms and channels for discussion in order to make inclusive and participatory decisions, and in my opinion, this is reflected by the ‘Transformasi Nasional 2050’ initiative. Having attended one of the dialogues organized by TN50, I was impressed at how the session was designed to collect sentiments on how Malaysians, from all walks of life, want the country to be in around 30 years’ time. According to Saffran, there exists a Youth Council on the Environment back in his home country, Sri Lanka, for youths to input their views when it comes to policy and decision making. In Sweden, Sara says that youth are engaged in a lot of grassroots initiatives too where the government is aware and in support of.
Looking forward, what I hope to gain from our Youth Forum as a result of a synthesis of ideas is for MYD to maintain the relationships built during the session. To me, it was pivotal and invaluable to have had the opportunity to learn from international youth NGOs on how they operate, the struggles they face back at home with regards to climate change as well as on an operational basis, and how they’re engaging with their government. With the lessons learnt, the Malaysian Youth Delegation can look back upon ourselves and further improve upon the gaps and shortcomings that we still possess.
Group picture with the Deputy Secretary General of Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment
Written by Syaqil
Edited by Varun
![Your Opinion Counts!]()
by admin | Nov 12, 2017 | #MYD, MYD2017, UNFCCC
Because of the separation of the two conference zones, I don’t often find myself attending side events. However, I managed to head over to Bonn Zone for an interesting side event this afternoon, namely “Comparing and Contrasting Public Opinion about Climate Change in China and the United States”. The event was held jointly by the China Center for Climate Change Communications and the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, featuring the release of the research done by Dr. Binbin Wang from Peking University and Dr. Anthony Leiserowitz from Yale University. This session was the first time a result of the research is released to the public, and the official paper will only be available starting next week. Coincidentally, I sat by the side of someone from my university and got to know that Dr. Wang is from our university’s School of International Relations (PKUers everywhere).
A Full House!
The session started with a welcoming speech by Jing Hui from the Energy Foundation China, who highlighted the critical role of both China and the United States played in the climate change scene and posed the question of “what is the key narrative to drive stakeholder engagement?” “The Paris Agreement is no longer a chain that can be broken by the weakest link”, as stated by Nick Nuttall from the UNFCCC secretariat in his opening remarks.
In her presentation, Dr. Wang explained that the reason she is conducting the survey was to find out the opinion of the Chinese public on climate change because all we know of is that the Chinese government is very committed to meeting its commitment in the Paris Agreement. That is why she wanted to collect this data to help the government in delivering the action plan. She highlighted that the substantial Chinese public awareness on climate change was provoked by the fact that many of the day-to-day population face the bizarre effects of climate change. Based on her findings that millennials are more willing to pay for climate-friendly products, she mentioned that this data could be used to engage the business community in the fight against climate change.
Dr. Wang from Peking University
Before commencing his presentation, Dr. Leiserowitz explained that his researching had been going on for years and they have been consistently surveying with the same questions to ease the comparison of public opinion on climate change over time. He highlighted that the public opinion in the United States is highly influenced by the politics of the time, for example, there had been an increase in climate change deniers after Obama was elected president because of the campaign run by the Republican party. One of his central messages was that to the average Americans, the issue of climate change is psychological distant because of its distance in space and time.
Dr. Leiserowitz from Yale University
Amongst the panelist, Tom Brookes from the European Climate Foundation mentioned that Anglo-liberalism has an effect on the perception of climate change, whereby people see addressing climate change resulting in some group losing out in the economy. He relates this to the budding climate change denying movement in Southeast Asia, claiming that when people search for precedence in dealing with the sense of being threatened and the only example they have is being defensive, they are going to pick up on it.
Information on public opinion is essential to the fight in climate change as it acts as an input for the government to plan out its action plan. I hope that their survey can actually be used as a starting point to change people’s mind. It is necessary for us to find a narrative to break the psychological distance of climate change from our daily lives.
Written by Xiandi
Edited by Varun
![The President’s Open Dialogue]()
by admin | Nov 12, 2017 | #MYD, MYD2017, UNFCCC
8th Nov 2017 marks the first time in the history of UNFCCC that a dialogue between parties (countries) and non-Party stakeholders were held during COP. Paving for this achievement, the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI) extensively discussed on the ways to include non-Party stakeholders, of which CSOs are a part of, back in its forty-sixth session in May 2017. According to the session, they want to seek “opportunities to further enhance the effective engagement of non-Party stakeholders with a view to strengthening the implementation of the provisions of decision 1/CP.21”
In accordance with this emphasis, it is not surprising that the Fijian presidency agreed to have an Open Dialogue on 8th November 2017 with parties and non-Party stakeholders on one substantive issue – NDC Enhancement and Implementation, and one procedural issue – Enhancing observer access to and participation in formal meetings. Everyone (especially the UNFCCC Constituencies) were extremely excited about this because this is the first time the constituencies get to sit at a round-table with parties and convey the discussion. The room was almost filled at 9.45am although the starting time of the event was at 10 am.
Places being filled up quickly
The session started with the welcoming speech of the COP23 President, Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama. He specified the importance of this dialogue in accordance with the Talanoa spirit and mentioned that the dialogue should be open and honest in order to recognize what can work and what cannot work. The Executive Secretary for COP23, Patricia Espinosa, in her welcoming message, also highlighted that this is the first time non-party actors are included in the agenda-setting process.
As the dialogue follows the Chatham House Rule, I was unable to identify the speakers. Beginning with the first agenda item on NDC Enhancement and Implementation, different parties highlighted the projects they have back home that contributed to the NDCs. Some mentioned how they co-designed and co-delivered policies along with the non-party stakeholders back home. One party highlighted the importance of private finance and mentioned how they work with the business sector to operationalize the NDCs. Amongst all the description of how-great-we-are-in-engaging-non-party-stakeholders, one party stood out by giving out a rather ambitious comment, stating that the inputs of the non-party stakeholders should be included in the ministerial meeting and that the outcome of the discussion should be communicated to the high-level segments and distributed through press releases.
In between the discussion, the various constituencies also presented their inputs. One of them highlighted the convenience of non-party stakeholders, as they are borderless, implying the power of cross-border collaboration. They threw a subtle burn on the parties by noting NDCs could be better achieved if parties would collaborate instead of working on their own in achieving their NDCs. Others highlighted the knowledge non-party stakeholders could potentially bring to the table and urged more collaboration with non-party stakeholders.
Although the dialogue included the non-party stakeholders, the overall atmosphere of the dialogue gives a vibe of parties saying how great they were, and the non-party stakeholders reiterating what they have always been mentioning. The dialogue may be significant in terms of its existence, however, I doubt it brought any actual changes to the current situation. Parties who are including non-party stakeholders in the process will continue to do so and parties who don’t, do not seem to be interested to change either.
Written by Xiandi
Edited by Varun
![Global Stocktake – So, APA Cerita?]()
by admin | Nov 12, 2017 | #MYD, MYD2017, UNFCCC
It’s moving, but slowly
Parties need to take stock of progress towards the temperature goal of 1.5°C or 2°C – they need to do this in a regular time interval, beginning 2023 and they need the stocktake to inform them on how to improve their efforts in a nationally determined manner.
Of course, this is an oversimplified version of Article 14 of the Paris Agreement. In the past 5 days of the APA 1-4 session here in Bonn, Parties have continuously stated that the Global Stocktake needs to have an outcome that only informs countries and allows for each nation to act in a nationally determined manner. Honestly, I think repeating something that has already reached consensus in the Paris Agreement is counterproductive. The mandate is clear. The APA 1-4 session needs to be about bringing the GST to the next phase of operationalization and the design around it.
The Plenary Chamber- an awesome and humbling space during an informal consultation on APA agenda item 6, The Global Stocktake
We have just concluded the 5th day at COP23 and there have been 3 informal consultations on GST so far. 6 hours of consultation have been allocated for this session of APA, 4 of which have already been spent mostly speaking about items finalized in the Paris Agreement. Tomorrow, 11 November, the Parties will meet again for the final informal consultation, this time for 2 hours, to discuss equity and how they see it in the context of the GST. Considering how equity is a contentious topic, on top of how discussions have gone this week, I don’t see how the co-facilitators of the informal consultations, Richard Muyungi of Tanzania and Outi Honkatukia of Finland, will be able to come to a conclusion before next week’s round of negotiations.
Equity
I say equity is a contentious issue, but it really shouldn’t be. The concept is simple. Based on historical and present contribution to greenhouse gas emissions and current capabilities, countries have differing levels of responsibility to act on climate change. For instance, Malaysia’s contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions in 2011 was 0.06%1 , while the United States’ share of emissions in 2010 was 14%2. The basis for the concept is sound; we just need to get past the incredible greed and lack of political will from developed nations.
In the most recent G77 and China coordination meeting, the consensus is clear – equity has to be a part of the GST. What’s still unclear is exactly how. Is equity considered in the process of the GST, or after the process – in the outcomes, or both? As Parties meet again for the last informal consultation tomorrow, I speculate there will be a substantial amount of politicking or pushback from the developed countries, as developing countries throw their support behind equity in the GST.
The building blocks
While the issue of equity is paramount, the informal consultations have mainly revolved around the so-called building blocks of the GST. These building blocks are in the form of a table, drafted by the co-facilitators with inputs coming by way of Parties’ submissions and interventions. The Parties have been mostly agreeable to using the building blocks as a framework to advance the discussion on the modalities and phases of the GST, with just a few Parties requiring reassurances that this building blocks document is by no means set in stone or will be the final text.
The task facing the co-facilitators is not a small one. They will have to find a way to keep the discussions going on the building blocks as well as navigate through the discussion on how to operationalize equity in the GST. I don’t know what tomorrow’s informal consultation will bring, but I foresee developed nations acting in their conventional manner of stalling the conversation on equity. Despite that, developing countries will continue to push for equity in the GST process, encompassing mitigation, adaptation, finance, capacity building, technology transfer, and even loss and damage.
I’m no expert but the compromise may lie somewhere in the concept of the GST outcome being taken in a nationally determined manner, instead of being prescriptive. But will that lead to increased ambition? I’m skeptical. As the negotiator from the Solomon Islands so passionately stated in his intervention, the GST has to lead to increased ambition, both equitably and directly translated in each Parties NDCs. Only then will we see progress.
References:
- Malaysia’s Nationally Determined Contributions
- Global greenhouse gas emissions, New Zealand’s Environmental Reporting Series
Written by Mike
Edited by Varun
![Asian Youth Coalition Network World Café – in the spirit of Talanoa]()
by admin | Nov 12, 2017 | #MYD, MYD2017, YOUNGO
The Asian Youth Coalition Network (AYCN) World Café was a very eye-opening experience for me because it was testimonial to what I believe the United Nations climate change conference should be – just, open, constructive and in good spirit. The World Café kept true to its word as participants hailed from Malaysia, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Germany, Denmark and France.
Group photo taken at the end of AYCN World Cafe
Unorthodox in its design, the World Café provided a platform for passionate discussion amongst participants who divided into working groups, unlike the usual lecture-audience setting where speakers could drag on for what may seem like an eternity.
The aforementioned working groups discussed on topics from 1) meaning of youth delegation and why we need it; 2) youth and climate change; 3) the future is for youth; and 4) renewable energy status and challenges. For my first article, I find it appropriate to share with all of you on my beliefs and opinion on these four topics.
-
Meaning of youth delegation and why we need it
In my opinion, a good organization is representative and inclusive, so it goes without saying that some sort of youth representation is called for. Hence, I believe the meaning of youth delegation is a group of young people set out to perform specific tasks. In our case, we as the Malaysian Youth Delegation, are a group of young people attending COP to track climate change negotiations pertaining to different tracks such as mitigation, adaptation, global stocktake, so on and so forth. I believe a youth delegation is necessary in tracking negotiations at COP so that we can offer fresh perspectives on how we can overcome the issue and most importantly, to ensure continuity so that one day perhaps we may become climate change negotiators or champions of some sort to continue the struggle against climate change.
My thoughts are as such when it comes to this connection: a) that the most severe effects of climate change thus far will be heavily borne by the current generation of youth; b) hence we need to take ownership of the issue because if left by the older generation, we would not have a place to call home once they step down. Also, when I think about the relationship about youth and climate change, my thoughts go back to the need for youth delegations all over the world to make our voices heard, if not have a say in the actual negotiations. If it’s not possible for youths to have an actual influence on the negotiations, we shall resort to climate action if that’s what it takes to bring the issue to light.
In this segment, I recall reading an article from a member of last year’s MYD, Dulanga, where she talks about the fact that the people leading the climate change negotiations aren’t even probably going to be around to feel the worse effects of climate change. Remembering her article reminds me of the pain at how unjust the notion is. Imagine having your car fixed by someone else (but they don’t do a very good job about it) and he/she doesn’t even check if it runs afterwards because they’re not even going to use it. Granted, it is a cynical and pessimistic view of those leading the negotiations, which brings me to my next point – that there are many good people out there who want to make a positive difference and that whatever decision they’re making, it is in full consideration and for the betterment of young and future generations. Also, it goes for the current generation of youths whereby once it comes to the time for us to lead the struggle against climate change, our decision-making should be based on the needs and consideration of the coming generations after us.
-
Renewable energy status and challenges
Last but not least (I love the topic of renewable energy), my thoughts surrounding this. When I think about renewable energy, I think about clean energy, be it solar, wind, geothermal. I think about the phasing out of fossil fuels, I think about technology transfer and capacity building. This whole idea goes back to addressing the needs of future generations because if we go about with business as usual, in keeping up with aggressively extracting and depleting natural resources to power our world, there isn’t going to be any left for our children. As for the challenges, in my opinion it’s a matter of political will, as well as incorporating social and environmental values to economic motives, because in the end there is no profit nor development if it is to the detriment of society, health and the environment in which we live in.
The AYCN World Café was straightforward in that youths from across the Global South and Global North were in consensus regarding what is needed to keep global temperatures from increasing above 2oC – it was just, open, constructive and in good spirit. Across the 2 weeks I’ll be spending here in COP to track negotiations, I hope that the decision makers could follow suit and adopt the spirit of ‘Talanoa’ in resolving climate change – for it to be inclusive, participatory and transparent.
Written by Syaqil
Edited by Varun
![Young and Future Generations Day – Youth and Climate Change Forum by MYD]()
by admin | Nov 11, 2017 | #MYD, MYD2017, UNFCCC
Young and Future Generations Day (YoFuGe Day) is a BIG thing for the YOUNGO youth constituency at the Conference of Parties, UNFCCC. It is a day dedicated specifically for the youth and we celebrate it throughout the whole day with activities organised by different organisations. For the first time ever, the Malaysian Youth Delegation organised an official UNFCCC event at the YoFuGe Day at COP23!
The event took place at the Malaysia Pavilion at 10am, right after the Opening Ceremony of the YoFuGe Day that was launched by UNFCCC and the German Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ). The Opening Ceremony launched the YoFuGe Day by introducing a series of youth-related events, followed by a sharing session of climate stories from YOUNGO members on stage.
MYD’s Youth and Climate Change forum was the first event of the day, after the Opening Ceremony. The objective of the forum is to provide a common platform for youth to exchange ideas and have an intellectual dialogues in the lines of role of youth in climate change, incorporating discussion regarding perspectives on youth from Global North and Global South. The forum engaged a range of esteemed speakers from youth globally.
The lineup of speakers were:
Moderator and panellist for the Youth forum. From left to right; Syaqil (Malaysia), Lhavanya (Malaysia), Saffran (Sri Lanka), Mona (Germany), Sara (Sweden), Lagi (Fiji)
The forum was set up in a relax setting, allowing speakers and participants to engage freely with one another. It was eye opening and mind widening to be able to hear the different scenarios faced by different countries and different regions in regards to climate change. Mona from Germany pointed out that Germany have managed to ban nuclear power, however there is still little progress on coal. She also mentioned about the veganism culture in Germany, and how it is not quite as receptive as many would think. “Youth should step up and take the lead,” she said.
Lagi Seru from Fiji echoed her sentiments on leadership. He stated, “Youth are not leaders of the future. Leadership begins now.”
When it came to a question on equity, or more commonly known as the Common but Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR), that is one of the primary principle being discussed in the negotiations and significantly highlighted in the Paris Agreement, captured in Article 2.2, whereby it states that “This Agreement will be implemented to reflect equity and the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, in the light of different national circumstances,” Lhavanya from Malaysia passionately voiced out her opinion on the subject matter.
“Malaysia’s Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) states 35% GHG emission intensity reduction of GDP by 2030 with a 2005 baseline, and a further conditional 10% with support of climate finance, capacity building and technology transfer from the developed countries. Malaysia have already achieved 33% of their 35% unconditional target, but I believe that we can do more. CBDR is an important principle but should not be a crutch,” said Lhavanya.
The panel discussion was followed by a Q&A session. It was great to see the participants being so engaged with the session, and asking many questions. Another Fijian youth even left a powerful message:
“As youth, we need to push the climate change agenda forward. Even if we don’t have space, make one and keep pushing.”
Indeed, youth play an important role in pushing the climate change agenda forward. United, our voices are loud – and we need to be succinct on what we want. We must move forward together collectively for a climate-just future.
At the end of the session, the Deputy Secretary General of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, Dato’ Dr. Azimuddin, thanked and greeted the youth at the Malaysia Pavilion, and handed out token of appreciation to the panel of speakers. He congratulated MYD on the successful event and encouraged us to hold more invigorating discourse like this in the future.
Mandatory post event group picture with the Climate Sign
To know more on the detailed discussion of the forum, view live video here.
Written by Jasmin
Edited by Varun
