President of the Lagos-based Pan African Vision for the Environment (PAVE), Anthony Akpan, at the instance of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) recently attended a three-day meeting of the Advisory Group for the UNEA-2 Marine Litter Study, of which he is a member representing the Gender and Water Alliance (GWA) in the Netherlands.
Mr Anthony Akpan (second right) with other participants at the meeting of the Advisory Group for the UNEA-2 Marine Litter Study in Nairobi, Kenya.. December 8, 2015
The meeting was held from 8 to 10 December 2015, and was hosted by UNEP at its headquarters in Nairobi, Kenya. The meeting was co-chaired by Nigeria (Dr Felicia Chinwe Mogo from the Nigeria Maritime Management and Safety Agency) and France (Ms. Marion Gust from the Ministry of Ecology, Sustainable Development and Energy).
The United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA) of UNEP is the highest level of governance of global environmental affairs in the UN system. UNEA-2 will be one of the first High-Level Intergovernmental Fora following the UN Sustainable Development Summit in New York (September 2015) and the UN Climate Change Conference ( COP 21 and CMP 11) that held recently in Paris, France.
UNEA-2 will be held under the overarching theme, “Delivering on the Environmental Dimension of the Post-2015 Development Agenda” and will take place from Monday, 23 to Friday, 27 May 2016 at the headquarters of UNEP, with the High-Level Segment taking place from 26 to 27 May 2016. UNEA 2 will be preceded by the Global Major Groups and Stakeholders Forum (GMGSF) to be held on 21 and 22 May 2016 in Nairobi, Kenya.
The UNEA 2 High-Level Segment will bring together ministers from all UN member states and will include a multi-stakeholder dialogue involving also heads of inter-governmental and non-governmental organisations including the private sector under the call of “Healthy Environment – Healthy People”.
According to Mr. Akpan, this thematic focus will allow all relevant actors to identify concrete tools available to take an integrated and universal approach to the implementation of the SDGs, including those related to critical areas such as air quality, healthy ecosystems, chemicals, waste and others that may emerge in the preparatory process as well as do develop strategic, multi-stakeholder partnerships to address ongoing and emerging environmental issues.
He said: “For UNEP, it is of utmost importance to ensure the participation of leaders of Civil Society organisations, alongside heads of United Nations sister organisations, programmes and treaty bodies. Only with their active involvement and participation can UNEA become the major platform for international environmental governance, as envisaged at the 2012 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD).”
He disclosed that Major Groups and Stakeholders (MGS) are invited to contribute to the development of Global Thematic Report on Healthy Planet and Healthy People through a planned E-discussion as well as during the multi-stakeholder and regional consultative meetings on the way to UNEA2. Of particular interest to MGS will be the planned adoption of the draft Stakeholder Engagement Policy during UNEA-2, Mr Akpan added.
Cross River State of Nigeria is among the almost 700 major regions, cities, companies and investors from around the globe who on Wednesday pledged their support for the Paris Agreement, which emerged on Saturday at the close of the UN climate change conference (COP21) in Paris, France.
Gov Ben Ayade of Cross River State at the COP
Last week at the COP, governments of the world under the UN united in action on climate change by adopting the Paris Agreement, the first universal, legally binding climate change deal. The agreement will spur a transformation of global growth and development and open the door to a low-carbon, stable, sustainable future, the French Presidency of COP21 said.
And in the spirit of the milestone development, regions and business on Wednesday promised to quickly and effectively help implement the Paris Agreement and accelerate the transformative changes needed to meet the climate change challenge.
L’Appel de Paris, or the Paris Pledge for Action, is a call to action in support of the Paris Agreement which brings together a multitude of voices on an unprecedented scale within a single, collective statement: “We welcome the adoption of a new, universal climate agreement at COP 21 in Paris, which is a critical step on the path to solving climate change. We pledge our support to ensuring that the level of ambition set by the agreement is met or exceeded.”
According to the UNFCCC, the landmark pledge is a clear signal that the message sent by the negotiations has been received loud and clear and that cities, regions, business, investors and other non-state actors are now ready and willing to stand shoulder to shoulder, alongside governments, to implement the terms of the agreement.
“This is our best opportunity to limit global temperature rise to well below 2 degrees Celsius – and pursue efforts to limit the increase to 1.5 degrees – and raise ambition even before the agreement takes effect in 2020,” the UN body declared in a statement.
Essentially, L’Appel de Paris is an inclusive initiative by the French Presidency of COP21 that invites all businesses, regions, cities, and investors to join and vow to act on the outcomes of the Paris UN Climate Change Agreement. It has already been signed by over 400 businesses, 150 cities and regions and 120 investors controlling $11 trillion in assets.
Initial signatories include businesses such as Acciona, Allianz, Mars, Kellogg’s, Tata Group, Unilever; investors like Lloyd’s and Aviva; megacities such as New York, Johannesburg, Quezon City, Hong Kong, Rio De Janeiro and Mexico City; and regions such as Cross River State (Nigeria), Scotland (UK), Chiapas (Mexico) and California (United States).
French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, President of COP 21, said: “Non-state actor leadership is key to the success of COP21 and to the effective transition to a low-emissions and climate-resilient future. The world needs you to step up and rise to the challenges of climate change and sustainable development. This is why I strongly encourage you to take bold actions and make ambitious commitments, both individually and collectively, register them on NAZCA, and sign on to the Paris Pledge for Action, to make sure the commitments made in Paris by governments are achieved or even exceeded.”
Christiana Figueres, Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), said: “COP21 was a landmark, and not just for the Paris Agreement by governments. The extraordinary momentum witnessed before and during the UN conference by cities, provinces, regions, companies and citizens was also a hallmark.
“The Paris Pledge for Action is about taking that momentum to the next level in support of nations as they work towards raising ambition up to 2020 and well beyond—it is about building ever more support by non-state actors who are aligning with government policy as never before.”
The pledge uniquely incorporates under one roof a diverse range of entities that are already committed to quickly mitigate emissions and adapt to the impacts of climate change. These non-state actors include members of the Under 2 MOU, the White House Act on Climate Pledge, the Montreal Carbon Pledge, the Principles for Sustainable Insurance (PSI) Initiative, the We Mean Business ‘Road to Paris’ initiatives, the Paris City Hall Declaration, ICLEI and many more. The pledge is open to more signatories and will spread around the world. All non-state actors are invited to join this call to action in support of the Paris Agreement.
Governor Ben Ayade of Cross River State at the COP said that the application of renewable energy solution as a measure to minimise climate change challenges is un-African.
Speaking at the Climate Change Conference in Paris, Governor Ayade said that applying renewable energy as a solution to mitigating the effect of climate change will mean that developing countries like Nigeria may have to stop the exploration of its hydro-carbon.
Ayade noted that the exploration of hydro-carbon is key to the development of the economies of a good number of African countries.
He said that there has been so much talk about measure against the challenges of climate changes but that the commitments to these agreements has been very weak. He was of the opinion that the major resources for African nations are the forests while for the Europeans, it is their technologies.
He explained that while Europeans are struggling to sell technologies to Africans, they (Europeans) are telling African to stop deforestation so that carbon can be conserved.
“Renewable energy is not the way for Africans at this point in time, renewable energy means put an end to the sale of your hydro carbon, it means Nigeria should stop exporting crude oil, but they are busy doing research, inventing technology using solar energy and wind power. When all of that happens, when the oil price goes down, when you stop producing oil, what are you going to use as an alternative?
“The in balancing of the livelihood that is the alternative to that renewable energy must follow with development, must follow with technology, Africa cannot be in a haste to adopt renewable technology. I would rather have you use fossil fuel with mitigate measures than to cap it and focus on renewable energy.
“While that technology works for them, it is harmful for our economy and until we provide an alternative economy for now. We cannot cap it.”
He advised that Africa should shut its doors and reinvent itself.
According to Ayade, there has been a growing concern about the reality of climate change, adding that adaptation is not the way to go. He explained that adaptation is like accepting the situation and learning to live with it.
Ayade, who led the African Governors Forum to the forum, said that mitigation as against adaptation is the way to go.
He said: “My optimism has since been burnt to cold impotent ash because strong commitments are very weak and the applicability of all the discussions are not seen in the course of time, so essentially, there is this strong feeling that there is so much talk with little work.
“But far more importantly is the growing concern that climate change is real, as real as it is , African must continue to survive and feed.
Our key resource is our forest, for the developed country, their key resource is their technology. So while they struggle to send technology into Africa, we are told to stop deforestation and maintain our forest stock so we can conserve carbon.”
“As Africans, we must shut our doors and reinvent ourselves, adaptation is not the way to go because it is adjusting yourself.”
“In all of these, there is very little Africa is doing in terms of technology, in terms of even mechanical cultivation of young plants that have capacity for the assimilation of carbon dioxide.
“We have also been very inefficient. But I ask you as we come here for COP 21 what is Africa’s position, what have we brought to the negotiation table, we cannot continue to play the role of a victim,
“Africans own the largest tropical rainforest; we stand at the middle between the West and the East. It is that place that sinks all the carbon dioxide that comes even from the US, Canada, Asia, they all come into Africa.
Africa must have a stronger say and have their own pre COP conference before they come to COP. Africa’s negotiation must be single, firm, clear. Africa cannot come cap in hand always looking for alms.
“That is what I want to say that Africa must stop coming to the international community to seek funds, we must seek technology, seek equality and relevance, because indeed, it is one of the most blessed continent.
“And as a professor of Environmental Science and the leader of the African Governors Forum for Climate Change these are some of the articulations I made in some of the side events I attended.
“Today, our black colour is no longer a colour but an attitude, the black man signifies the man who comes and say we don’t have money, that has to end we don’t have the earthquakes that characterize their environment, so why is Africa always on the international scene seeking fund? Why don’t you seek partnership, why don’t you seek technology? Let’s put an end to that.”
The Nigerian Debt Management Office (DMO), touted as a model in Africa, has become a major destination for out-sourced debt management skills and services in nearly two decades of its existence.
Dr. Abraham Nwankwo, head of the DMO. Photo credit: newsexpressngr.com
The DMO under the leadership of Dr. Abraham Nwankwo has been galvanised to become a leading player in sub-Sahara Africa. And the achievements it has recorded so far has earned it many accolades from renowned global institutions, as it has become a one-stop-shop for effective public debt management.
It will be recalled that the DMO resuscitated the Domestic Bond Market in 2003 when it first issued FGN Bonds. This landmark achievement was intended to restructure the Government’s domestic borrowing which was predominantly short term and to develop the domestic bond market which had been moribund for about 20 years. To achieve these objectives, the DMO in collaboration with other stakeholders introduced several measures to deepen the market amongst which are: regular and transparent FGN Bond Auctions; the appointment of dedicated market makers known as Primary Dealer Market Makers to support the Bond Auctions and ensure an active Secondary Market; a Two-Way Quote based market; existence of Benchmark Bonds; a Sovereign Yield Curve Extending to 20 years and, a diversified domestic investor base.
In essence, a strong and well established domestic bond market had been developed through inherent local capacity without any foreign facilitation.
Based on the achievement of the DMO, the Nigerian Bond Market received international recognitions through the inclusion of FGN Bonds in Global Bond Indices. The inclusions were recognition that Nigeria was one of the few emerging market countries with a robust domestic bond market. Thus, FGN Bonds were included in J P Morgan’s GBI – EM (October, 2012) and Barclays Capital’s Emerging Markets – Local Currency Bond Index (March, 2013).
Since these awards came after the Nigerian Bond Market had been developed, it follows therefore, that they were recognitions for achievements already recorded rather than pre-requisites for the development of the market.
It is important to note that Nigeria became the only African country after South Africa to be included in the GBI – EM and also that there are several other emerging market countries such as Venezuela whose domestic Bonds are not included in any international Bond Index. Their non-inclusion has not limited their markets or economies.
Notwithstanding the benefits of the inclusion of FGN Bonds in the GBI – EM, the DMO continued to introduce measures to attract more domestic investors to the Bond market particularly, non-bank institutions and retail investors in order to enlarge and diversify the Nigerian economy.
Despite the delisting of FGN Bonds from J P Morgan, the Director General of the Debt Management Office, Dr. Abraham Nwankwo, insisted that the Nigerian economy remains on a growing path, arguing that the country is operating at near full unemployment of its resources. This, he said leaves the country with all the potentials for real growth.
He also said a country like Nigeria that is yet to tap into its huge solid mineral resources and a well fallowed agriculture sector, then the potential for growth is incalculable.
According to him Nigeria had its own Bond Market before JP Morgan ventured in, and that the Nigerian Bond market has been developing before they joined and that their exit mean little or nothing to the existence of the FGN Bond Market.
Nigeria’s economy has been described as one of the most attractive investment destinations in the emerging markets despite the headwind blowing across most oil producing nations since 2014, and according Nwankwo, the country’s economy will be attractive to investors all the time because Nigeria is still a virgin and a great place for both local and foreign investors.
Since its inception in 2000, the DMO which was primarily established to centrally coordinate the country’s debt has attracted the interest of a host of African countries including Uganda, Sudan, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Kenya and recently South Sudan, to learn Nigeria’s experience in public debt management.
Coming at a time when their country was battling with stifling foreign and local debt, it was inevitable that the attention of the world was glued to the DMO having saved Nigeria from its debt crises and for the unprecedented success of the FGN Bond Market, particularly in reducing debt stock and cost of public debt servicing in a manner that saves resources for investment in poverty reduction programmes.
Back in 2006, Uganda came on a study tour to Nigeria on two occasions, when a delegation came to learn from the DMO model as a basis for institutional arrangement.
In its desire to further developing of its bond market alongside building strategic alliances, the Bank of Uganda also sought to engage Nigeria’s Debt Management Office (DMO), in its capacity as a frontline regulator for all secondary market activities and a platform provider for the efficient listing, quoting and trading of bonds. Whilst acknowledging the impact of the DMO in the Nigerian financial market landscape, with emphasis on technology as a key enabler of its activities, the representatives noted that effective collaboration with other domestic and international financial market infrastructures such as DMO will serve to foster active market development in the Ugandan financial market and encourage cross-border capacity building.
Sudan also came on a study tour to Nigeria on two occasions. The first delegation came in December 12-16, 2005 to learn the workings of the DMO and its interface with stakeholders.
Similarly, another delegation from the External Debt Management Unit in the Central Bank of Sudan and Domestic Debt Unit in the Ministry of Finance of Sudan, visited the DMO for a month secondment programme from Monday, June 23 -Tuesday July 15, 2014 to learn from the Nigeria’s debt relief and restructuring phases as well as Nigeria’s debt management experiences prior to the establishment of the DMO.
Another instance, was a visit by: A delegation from the Ministry of Finance and National Planning of the Republic of Zambia, who undertook a one-week study tour of the Debt Management Office, Nigeria, from 20th – 24th September, 2009. The purpose of the study tour was to enable the Zambians learn how the Debt Management Office, Nigeria is structured, the functions of the Office and how it carries out its responsibilities of managing the country’s public debt and issuance of the FGN Bonds.
If that was not enough, A seven man team from the Zimbabwe Aid & Debt Management Office (ZADMO) in the Ministry of Finance of Zimbabwe visited the DMO for a week study tour from July 17 to 27, 2011 to understudy the processes of establishing and running an effective debt management office in its efforts to set up a centre of excellence in debt management in Zimbabwe.
The World Bank (WB) in August requested the DMO to host a delegation of Kenyan Officials from Kenya’s Central Bank, Capital Market Authority, and National Treasury & Debt Management Office on a Study Tour of the Nigerian Domestic Bond Market.
The main purpose of the Study Tour is for the delegation to gain insight into the developmental initiatives undertaken by the DMO which have led to the remarkable growth and development of Nigeria’s Domestic Bond Market, considering the fact that up until 2003, when the DMO floated the first Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN) Bonds, the FGN Bond Market which is the pivot for the domestic bond market was in comatose for about two decades.
The Kenyan delegation centered their interest on Formulation of Issuance Strategies for Securities, Policies for Benchmark Building, Primary Dealer Market Maker Programme, Communication Strategies with market stakeholders, Price formation and dissemination in the primary and secondary markets, types of secondary market, architecture, price discovery and transparency.
In accordance with the global recognition of the effectiveness of the DMO, on Tuesday, November 30th 2015, a seven-man team from the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning (MOFEP) of the Republic of South Sudan came on a five-day Study Tour of the Debt Management Office to understudy the DMO and gain insight into the developmental initiatives undertaken by the DMO which have led to the remarkable growth and development of Nigeria’s Debt Management Office, which has earned it, its global recognition.
Speaking on the objectives of their visit to the country, the Director-General, Directorate of Macroeconomic Planning, Philip Ajack Boldit, who led the delegation, said South Sudan was keen to learning the various strategic debt management plans that DMO Nigeria has, adding that they came with high expectations.
“We expect to get a lot of experience in skill transfer from Nigeria to South Sudan, especially on how to manage the debt, it is one thing to get it done, it is another thing to manage it.
“Nigeria got the experience, we will pick up a lot of experience which we can apply to our situation to be better and be able to manage our debt like Nigeria did.”
Also speaking was the Director-General, DMO, Dr. Abraham Nwankwo, who said the DMO appreciates the need to reach out to other African countries, and so in DMO strategic objective, we’ve a programme for us to share our ideas, knowledge and experience with other African countries and also to learn from other African countries.
“So today we have received a delegation from South Sudan which came to the DMO Nigeria on a five-day study tour so that they can share from our experience how we have developed public debt management in Nigeria, how we’ve developed the bond market and how we’ve managed Nigeria’s public debt.”
One industry expert, Chief Gabriel Nwonuma, noted that the DMO has been outstanding on debt management, calling for the sustainability in service delivery.
“Governance is a continuum; the DMO should sustain what it is doing considering the economic crisis in the country. I am happy that they have a very competent team that can sustain its service delivery framework. DMO staff are frequently invited as resource persons to various training programmes workshops, seminars and conferences by international organisations including the United Nations and World bank,” he said.
The DMO’s transformation of the Nigerian financial market, has deepened secondary market liquidity and transparency, thus further aligning it with international best practices.
The remarkable growth in Nigeria’s secondary market has contributed immensely to the growth in the overall domestic bond market.
The DMO is on a mission to ensure that other African governments subscribe to its principles of prudent and sustainable borrowing, and effective utilisation of resources by injecting breath of new life over management of internal and external debt through best practices in the way of improved policies, efficient administration, and the sweeping away of old abuses to foster transparency and sustainability.
Nonetheless, the success of Nigeria’s Debt Management Office, has not only being recognised by Nigerian’s alone, both home and abroad but has become a model in Africa.
By Ifeanyi Omokwe (Business Editor of The Whistler Newspapers. He wrote in through ifeanyi@thewhistler.ng)
As the world celebrates – and laments – the Paris Agreement, nations have been urged to immediately begin its implementation. According to the Climate & Development Knowledge Network (CDKN), the agreement is encouraging but if ambition does not continue to increase in future years, then the achievement of a 1.5- or even a 2-degree target – and many of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) – will be in danger.
CDKN Chief Executive Sam Bickersteth and Head of Negotiations Support Kiran Sura welcome delegates to the CDKN stand in Paris. Photo credit: Geoff Barnard, CDKN
Sam Bickersteth, CDKN’s Chief Executive, stresses that the agreement’s significance for future development pathways for the least developed and most climate vulnerable countries – as an element of the SDGs – cannot be underestimated.
“Critically, it will increase the flow of additional public and private finance for vulnerable countries for both low-carbon and climate-resilient investments. Ambition, including the pathway towards a possible 1.5-degree limit and five-yearly reviews, will be played out through the national climate plans (the INDCs),” he says.
The CDKN’s global, regional and country team leaders reflect on the opportunity and challenges ahead.
Kiran Sura, CDKN’s Head of Negotiations Support: “The Paris Agreement has delivered a universal and ambitious plan to halt dangerous climate change. This is an historic moment for the world and a life line to those climate-vulnerable countries and small island states on the front line of climate change. However, it is now up to us all to grab this life line and deliver the action needed to meet the challenging target of limiting warming to 1.5oC and provide the international support climate-vulnerable countries need to protect themselves against the impacts we have already locked in. The Presidency’s skilful handling and diplomacy has not only ensured a deal was delivered but also that all voices – especially those of the poorest and most vulnerable that are often not so loud – were heard. Merci, Paris.”
Geoff Barnard, CDKN’s Senior Knowledge Management Advisor: “The Paris Agreement is a much-needed shot in the arm for everyone who has been working to champion climate issues, ever since the disappointments of Copenhagen. From exhausted negotiators to passionate civil society activists, the relief coming out of Paris is palpable. The hugging and whooping in the Conference Hall spoke volumes for the emotional response of many around the world who have put their combined shoulders to this huge and heavy wheel, which at times has felt hopelessly mired in disagreements and wrangling. The wheel is finally moving, and the elation that so many of us feel is testament to the passion and commitment that has underpinned all the hard work up to now. There is a great deal more work to be done, starting today. But let’s celebrate this moment of jubilation in Paris, and cherish the inspiration it provides us for the long road ahead.”
Mairi Dupar, CDKN’s Global Public Affairs Coordinator: “Congratulations to the governments who rose above their differences in Paris and responded to climate experts’ warnings about the dangers of a 2-degree world. They have recognised that radical action on climate change is needed to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals and protect the lives and prospects of the world’s poorest people.
“Reining in dangerous levels of warming calls for astonishing reserves of human ingenuity – but this effort does not happen in a void. CDKN is among the many alliances that have already been trying and testing approaches to climate compatible development for several years: approaches to curbing emissions while achieving greater climate resilience and human development. CDKN doesn’t have all the answers, but we are committed to sharing best practices as well as beautiful failures; we do this in our new book ‘Mainstreaming Climate Compatible Development’, which summarises the first five years of CDKN’s experience. We hope others will join us in this spirit of expanding and strengthening knowledge networks, to empower everyone for the opportunities and challenges ahead.”
Carl Wesselink, CDKN’s Regional Director for Africa: “The Paris Agreement is both a big step forward and a frustrating shortcoming. Its success will depend on the implementation of voluntary INDC targets. For African countries implementation will require more refined strategies and innovative finance. Realising low (avoided future) emission development strategies will be a priority across the continent, and the sooner the better. Countries with heavy fossil-fuel use will need to grapple with the implications for their economies. The increased climate finance pledges, and particularly adaptation aid, is a victory but will fall short of the need. The financial implications of the loss and damage clause are still to be determined, and Africa will participate keenly in that process.”
Revocatus Twinomuhangi, CDKN’s Senior Strategic Advisor for Uganda: “The new global climate agreement adopted in Paris represents important progress towards addressing the climate change that is currently threatening human survival on this planet. For the least developed countries are that a highly vulnerable, the Paris Agreement brings hope for accessing climate finance to invest in adaptation that will build climate resilient economies, communities and ecosystems. In particular, the establishment of a technical and knowledge platform under the Nairobi work programme on impacts, vulnerability and adaptation to climate change is crucial for capacity building. By supporting country-owned and country-driven adaptation actions, the implementation of the Agreement will contribute to poverty reduction, which is crucial to building climate resilience and ensuring sustainable development. It is time to build on this momentum to work for the achievement of the global SDGs.”
Connie Espinosa, CDKN’s Regional Director for Latin America and the Caribbean: “For the Latin American and Caribbean Region, the Paris Agreement rises above the different views of sub-regional groups towards a common objective for a low carbon and resilient future. We celebrate this historic moment and acknowledge the trust our governmental leaders have put in an organised and cooperative international context that will facilitate climate finance to our region. We are proud of the three Latino figureheads who paved the road towards the Paris Agreement: the Peruvian Minister of Environment, Manuel Pulgar Vidal, responsible for the 20th COP Presidency and who worked for achieving consensus among Parties. The Argentinian Pope Francisco with the presentation of the encyclical “Laudato Si” on climate and environment and by directly talking with Presidents and mayors for their support to achieve an Agreement; and finally, Christina Figueres from Costa Rica, as Executive Director of the UNFCCC, who orchestrated all the support needed for negotiations to happen.”
Claudia Martinez, CDKN’s Senior Strategic Advisor for Colombia: “After the excitement of the signature of the Paris Agreement, Ban Ki Moon stated that “we shall all stay united and bring the same spirit to the crucial test of implementation”. The Paris Agreement sets for the first time a long term goal for every country that has committed to achieve its INDC. In the case of Latin America and the Caribbean, our overall emissions account for 11% of the world’s emissions, mostly related to deforestation and land use change followed by energy including transport. But in this emerging region, the trend is to shift to more carbon–intensive economies looking similar to the current developed economies. In a business as usual scenario, countries could increase the use of energy and transport increasing their emissions share by 50 % according to the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB). After Paris the challenge is to grow and decarbonise our economies at the same time.”
Ali Sheikh, CDKN’s Regional Director for Asia: “At the heart of Paris Agreement is the process and mechanism to increase the ambition as part of periodic reviews. The nations will meet every five years to revise their national action plans or what is generally known as the INDC. CDKN can have a genuine pride in having catalysed and fostered the INDC process in many, many ways – ranging from helping some countries develop their distinct contributions by adapting unique methodologies and internal processes, by supporting research and investments in methodologies, by developing toolkits for least developed countries and by supporting their participation in a wide range of capacity building and training exercises. CDKN has also galvanised support for INDC implementation, which we hope will serve as an important building block for the implementation of the historic Paris Agreement.”
Munjurul Khan, CDKN’s Senior Strategic Advisor for Bangladesh: “Adoption of the Paris Agreement is a historic landmark achievement of the global community. This Agreement created an opportunity to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels by taking into account of the objective of the Convention, and being guided by its principles, including the principle of equity and Common But Differentiated Responsibility (CBDR) and Respective Capabilities (RC), in the light of different national circumstances. Inclusion of human rights and climate justice in the Agreement shall provide scope for stronger argument for demanding climate action for vulnerable. However, the non-punitive nature of compliance measure may be a serious limiting factor for implementation of the Agreement.”
Ari Huhtala, CDKN’s Deputy CEO and Climate Finance Lead: “The Paris Agreement sets a target for financial commitments from developed countries, but it is important to remember that what is needed for the required transformational change is trillions, not billions. The floor of $100 billion per annum should be used as a catalyst to accelerate the shift of all resource flows towards climate compatible options. Meeting this commitment is doable, fossil fuel subsidies alone amount to significantly more and carbon pollution can and should be priced. Instead of only tracking flows from developed to developing countries, we should focus on ensuring the effectiveness of the committed funds, and support developing countries in that endeavour.”
Jebi Rahman, CDKN’s Partnerships and Networks Programme Manager: “The Paris Agreement resonates with CDKN’s strong partnership work to date, and the task ahead to continue forging knowledge networks at the subnational, country, regional, and global levels. Partnerships will be needed at all these levels to create the disruptive change required for enhanced pre-2020 action by developing country Parties. Much work needs to be done to innovate, share lessons learned, and support capacity development, before reviewing and ratcheting up ambition in the next five years. The road ahead is long, and I look forward to continuing with colleagues and partners, old and new, on this journey.”
Five policemen and soldiers were on Monday convicted for their role in a vicious attack against community members protesting against an industrial logging company in a Congolese village in 2011.
Kumi Naidoo. head of Greenpeace
The men were found guilty by a court in Kinshasa and sentenced to between two and three years in prison charges including torture. They were among 60 policemen and military personnel who entered the small village of Bosanga, located in Yalisika, in the Equateur province in May 2011 to quell protests against the company SIFORCO.
Serious human rights violations were subsequently committed, including rape, physical aggression, torture and destruction of property.
In a reaction on Wednesday, Greenpeace Africa insists that many involved, such as SIFORCO, are still to be held accountable.
“Greenpeace welcomes the condemnation of the perpetrators of the attack; however, we are very surprised by the sentences that do not reflect the gravity of the violence and crimes suffered by the community” said Victorine Sirri Che Thöner, the head of Greenpeace Africa’s Congo Forest campaign.
“We are also concerned that some individuals involved in the attack and identified during the investigations have not been brought to trial and SIFORCO was not held responsible for its implication,” said Victorine, adding: “Unfortunately the only current route for appeal is to redress the issues of reparations for victims.”
The Court did not convict SIFORCO or assign any liability despite acknowledging that torture was committed by the military in the company’s vehicle. The convictions come after many lengthy judicial delays over a period of years. To date only 14 of the 45 victims have been granted the right to seek reparations.
The villagers were protesting against the company, claiming it had not deliver on promises made in 2005 and revised in 2009, to provide infrastructure and services to the community in exchange for logging their forests. Faced with community opposition, SIFORCO called in the help of local authorities and security.
“This trial sends out a signal that industrial logging in the Democratic Republic of Congo does not contribute to local development but instead generates multiple recurring conflicts with local communities,” said Che Thöner.
Yalisika is in the Bumba region in the Congo Basin – home to the world’s second largest tropical forest after the Amazon, which is increasingly under threat from industrial logging companies – the majority foreign-owned – who plunder the DRC’s rich resources with impunity.
Dr. Godwin Uyi Ojo, Executive Director of the Environmental Rights Action/Friends of the Earth Nigeria (ERA/FoEN), while speaking on Monday (December 13, 2015) on the outcome of UNFCCC Climate Change Conference (COP21), frowned at Nigeria’s new deadline date to halt gas flaring, saying that the idea is tainted with insincerity
Akinbode Oluwafemi (left) and Godwin Ojo who were both of the ERA/FoEN, at a Media Debriefing Session in Monday in Lagos
After more than 20 years of intense Earth Summit negotiations by the Conference of Parties (COP) of the United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change (UNFCCC), Parties finally adopted a Treaty on how to conduct mitigation and adaptation measures to combat climate change. While mitigation is on how to cut back emissions preferably at source, adaptation is on how to cope with the impacts of climate change. To the Environmental Rights Action/Friends of the Earth and our allies, the question begging for answer is this: ‘Does this Treaty mark a significant shift toward curbing climate change?’ The answer is capital NO. The Treaty is disappointingly a non-binding one because it favours voluntary mechanism rather than a legally binding mechanism. It is no more than kicking the Can down the road.
First, a key area of unfair treatment meted by developed countries to developing countries is in the weak ambition in curbing climate change. Although the agreement recognizes limiting temperature rise to under I.5 degrees, a position informed by science and pushed by global civil society groups but it has been subordinated within a 2-degree development pathway. Clearly equity and fair shares on the global carbon bank that should hold developed countries accountable has not been used to generate solutions.
Second, although national governments commit to public disclosure of emission reduction in reporting, monitoring and evaluation in relation to the uploaded intended nationally determined contribution (INDC) targets, yet there is no ambition to cut back emissions at source. Clearly, INDCs aggregate so far is on a 3-degree trajectory making it hard if not impossible to realise 2 degrees within the pledged commitments. For Africa, where the mean temperature rise is higher than the global mean, many of its countries will be roasted.
Thirdly, in terms of adaptation, although the treaty acknowledges historical responsibility by developed countries responsible for the release of carbon emissions into the atmosphere yet the finance that is required for developing countries to adapt is based only on voluntary mechanism of $100 billion from 2020 rather than legally binding. Also, what happens between now and 2020 remains unclear.
Fourthly, the loss and damage by catastrophic climate change from excessive floods, persistent droughts and storms often lead to serious harm to mother earth, destruction of livelihoods, and loss of lives. A legally binding mechanism for compensation from climate impact on loss and damage has been precluded from the agreement and this has let the developed countries off the hook. It has placed the burden of addressing climate change on the door steps of the developing countries rather than the developed countries.
Fifthly, the term de-carbonisation has been eliminated and substituted with a weak and vague term, carbon neutrality. The Treaty seeks to vigorously promote false solutions such as carbon markets, agro-fuels which competes with farmlands and food crops for fuel, reducing emissions from degradation and deforestation (REDD+), and carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies that are yet to be proven and thereby poses serious risks.
Clearly, the voice of the peoples, farmers, fishermen and communities the world over have been compromised and the rights to food and water have not been guaranteed. The governments have reflected more the interests of the corporations rather than the citizens they represent.
Way Forward
Since real solutions lies in the people, civil society groups will continue to mobilise and build people power to alter the power imbalance currently in favour of corporations.
We recommend that:
there is need to kick big time polluters out of the COP process in entirety so that dirty energy companies involved in huge emissions are not part of the decision-making process.
since the Treaty has a limited and vague vision of reducing emissions we propose the urgent de-carbonisation of the economy and the energy sector by recognising and promoting an energy transition from oil, gas, coal and other fossil fuels by 2030. Governments should divest public finance, subsidies and loans for oil, gas and coal and these should be invested in renewable energy development.
the Nigerian government should immediately embark on a post petroleum economy and diversify the energy mix to renewable sources of energy. To this end, we hereby launch the Annex 0 group in contrast to Annex 1, and Non-Annex 1, and Annex II Groups. Annex 0 is an initiative to recognize the efforts of peoples, communities, nationalities, undertaken against the impacts of oil, gas, coal, and other fossil fuel extraction and to halt its expansion, protect the environment, and lives on planet earth. A Register of Annex 0 membership is hereby opened for practical uses by 2016.
To conclude, two issues emanate from the Nigerian government response to environmental issues which lends credence that it is conducting environmental protection as “business as usual” rather than within the populist change agenda. For example, as was the case in Copenhagen, the Nigerian government pledged to end gas flaring but did not put in place any mechanism to address this.
In Paris, 2015, the World Bank and Nigeria government’s hatched another crooked plan to end gas flaring by 2030. We consider this as hypocritical, deceptive and World Bank’s interference on national sovereignty in a country where gas flaring has been declared illegal since 1984. We call on the government to end gas flaring now and not to wait till 2030 when it will be too late.
Let me once more draw attention to another related issue within the government profess change agenda which has to do with the non-implementation of the August 2011 UNEP report assessment and recommendations. While political will to clean up Ogoni is important, the federal government should commence immediate action by putting their money where their mouth is. They should ensure Shell Oil Company lives up to its responsibility. So far, the Ogonis remain short-changed and their livelihoods destroyed.
The Ogun State Forest Landscape Restoration Project was presented on 7th December 2015 to the international community at the UN Climate Change Climate Conference (COP21) that held recently in Paris, following the memorandum of understanding signed in September 2015 by the Ogun State Government (Ogun State), the Nigeria Sovereign Investment Authority (NSIA) and Lafarge Africa Plc.
Gov Ibikunle Amosun of Ogun State
The PPP project will transform 108,000 hectares of degraded land in Ogun State into an arable green area through a Forest Landscape Restoration project aimed at launching public and private agroforestry projects with strong environmental, social and economic impact. It is a pioneering initiative demonstrating how proactive public entities can join forces with a private group to launch sustainable projects that will position Nigeria as a leader in Africa on sustainable Climate Change PPP projects.
With the theme “Regional public/private partnership initiative against climate”, a two-day side event held at the green climate generations’ areas of the COP 21 venue to showcase the public/private partnership concept as a tool for development, and to present the planned project to potential investors, development agencies, as well as Green and Climate Change funds.
The Ogun State Forest Landscape Restoration project partners led by the Governor of Ogun State, Senator Ibikunle Amosun, was also hosted at an event, which is dedicated to local and regional government, raising ambition, awareness and visibility of real and potential local climate action. Membership of the Senator Schwarzenegger “Regions of Climate Action” (R20) Organisation was conferred on Ogun State at the occasion.
Other dignitaries from the partnering institutions at the 2015 Paris Climate Conference include Mr. Peter Hoddinott, Area Manager South & West Africa LafargeHolcim; Mrs. Adepeju Adebajo, CEO Cement, Lafarge Africa Plc; Richard Eckrich, Head, Infrastructure Fund, Nigeria Sovereign Investment Authority; and Dr. Henry Neufeldt, Head, Climatic Change Unit of the World Agroforestry Centre.
Commenting on the Ogun State’s participation at the Climate Conference, Governor Amosun said: “The Forest Landscape Restoration project is a well thought initiative, in partnership with two responsible institutions, NSIA and Lafarge Africa.”
He noted that almost 70% of Ogun State is arable land. There is therefore a significant potential for improving lives and livelihoods. Governor Amosun described the agroforestry project as a win-win opportunity for companies and citizens, offering a range of benefits: it will reduce CO2 emissions by increasing vegetation and eliminating the current negative slash-and-burn practices; it will create employment for young graduates and will help to diversify Nigeria’s economy. Governor Amosun insisted on the absolute importance to address simultaneously, the short-term job creation necessity while preparing the climate change mitigation long-term challenge.
Commenting on its commitment to the realisation of the project, Mr. Peter Hoddinott, who is also the Group Managing Director/CEO Lafarge Africa Plc, said: “As a responsible organisation, we are working to minimise the impact of our activity on the climate. Lafarge Africa plans to replace 30% of its fuel use from fossil to biomass by 2020. We need to put in place a solid structure to move into renewable energy, which is clearly what this partnership offers.”
Speaking at the event on behalf of Mr. Uche Orji, MD/CEO of NSIA, Richard Eckrich, said: “The NSIA recognises the importance of agriculture to the economy; a sector which employs around 70% of Nigeria’s population. We are therefore committed to supporting this initiative by helping to raise funds and leveraging our expertise in public-private-partnerships, in particular in terms of establishing a “best in class” project governance to enhance the scheme”.
Eckrich further stated that NSIA’s intervention is consistent with its strategy and echoed Hoddinott’s hope that the project could be replicated if successful.
After much anticipation for a new global climate agreement, COP21 is being widely hailed as a success, with 195 countries from diverse positions signing the Paris Agreement. But the day after the dust settles, numerous civil society organisations are evaluating the stark contrasts between what is possible in the political process and what is scientifically necessary to avoid climate chaos.
Martin Vilela, Bolivian Platform on Climate Change. Photo credit: coalitionclimat21.org
Many walked away pleased that the Paris Agreement called for limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius within the purpose of the agreement. However, the reference is aspirational, and the agreement lacks mechanisms to achieve it. Based on the current pledges for change and the state of pollution rates, by the time countries formally take stock in 2023, we will have already polluted to such a degree that we will have locked in the climate chaos we came here to prevent.
“The biggest misconception around 1.5 is that mentioning it means that they will actually meet that goal. This agreement did not actually design a pathway for how to achieve 1.5. We came to Paris needing a way to achieve tangible results, instead we came out with more empty promises and false solutions,” said Martin Vilela from the Bolivian Platform on Climate Change.
This lack of specificity in dealing with pollution has been described as “between dangerous and deadly” by leading climate scientists. Similarly, South Africa also noted that the Paris Agreement came at the expense of immediate action, and called for energies to now be channelled into pre-2020 efforts.
While many heralded France’s achievements of facilitating a fair process to reach the Agreement, this was marred in the last moments as France buckled to US pressure and changed the language of the nearly finalised text to say that developed countries should rather than shall take on reducing pollution across all sectors of the economy, indicating a lower level of legal obligation.
Many developing countries’ support for the Agreement was contingent on “shall” rather than “should”, but a process was not provided to respond to this major change made in the last moments of adopting the agreement and characterised a “technical correction”. In many ways, the agreement’s new rules are substantially weaker for wealthy countries than the current ones.
Another major concern came, again under US insistence, in the language on “loss and damage,” where an “exclusion clause” was inserted in order to prevent the poor and particularly vulnerable countries (the same ones calling for the 1.5C goal) from claiming any future liability or compensation claims being made under the agreement against the big historic polluters.
The great paradox is the Paris outcome paid lip service 1.5C without the means to achieve it, while, at the same time, excluding the rights of the poorest countries to compensation for warming above these levels.
A critical component of the Agreement was always that finance for developing countries would be ramped up. In concluding the talks, President Hollande spoke proudly about the $100 billion “floor” in finance, but observers have pointed out that the reality doesn’t match the rhetoric.
“The 100 billion per year by 2020 is now extended to 2025 and a new goal is to be set after that. So developed countries have obtained another five years to deliver what they agreed to do. It is regrettable that this has happened as it delays action in developing countries who are in need,” said Meena Raman, Legal Advisor, Third World Network.
Although tired after a long road to Paris, and with many concerns over the outcome, civil society groups nevertheless determined to press on and use the Agreement and the pledges made to it as tools to push for stronger national actions. They are already looking to a “facilitative dialogue”, agreed for 2019, to increase ambition and look to initiatives like the African Renewable Energy Initiative to deliver real results on the ground.
“As both a Kenyan and a climate policy expert, I have never been more proud. The significance of of the Africa Renewable Energy Initiative is not to be understated: it is an exceptional moment in Africa’s history and a game-changer for the continent. And our leadership has inspired other countries to show their support,” Mohamed Adow, Senior Climate Change Advisor, Christian Aid explained.
“While disappointed by the outcome of the climate talks, we see that there were many success’. The climate justice movements mobilized despite the state of emergency and we showed the world that we are an unstoppable force that will continue to do the real work of developing tangible solutions to our world’s problems, and not wait for politicians to do what is necessary,” said Lidy Nacpil, Asian Peoples’ Movement on Debt and Development.
The 21st Session of the Conference of the Parties (COP21) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) should be an eye opener and trigger inner reflections and new actions by the Nigeria political class. Irrespective of what the agreements contain, and whether or not they are implemented, one simple thing stands out clear. The simple thing is that the serious countries of the world have resolved to end the era of energy dependence on especially petroleum, a resource which empowers countries which in the perspective of the G8 and the OECD are in parts of the world with heavy geopolitical risks. To this extent, the serious push for ending or in the least minimising use of fossils is beyond the need to reduce carbon emissions and mitigate climate change.
Professor Chinedum Uzoma Nwajiuba. Photo credit: diamondeducationmagazine.com
What gives my country, Nigeria, visibility at the global stage is neither her size nor huge and rapidly growing population, but that we are a major petroleum exporting country. Our huge and growing population of course presents an attractive market for those intending to export all manner of products, including China (that is also setting up new Coal plants). The attraction is enhanced by the purchasing power of the country which sources over 80% of its foreign exchange earnings from petroleum exports. Regardless of the commercial attraction, Nigeria remains one of the countries regarded as being of huge geopolitical risk. Perhaps even more of a risk than Nigeria as source of hydrocarbon supply is the Middle East.
How seriously the United States, for instance, views the risk emanating from the principal export commodity of countries like Nigeria is seen in President Obama’s open declaration early in his presidency that by the end of his tenure, the United States would scarcely be in a position to be held hostage ever again by the international Oil market. Today, that vision of Obama for the United States has considerably been realised. We are likely to see Europe following suit in minimising their own dependence, just as Japan announced within the period of the COP21 that she is commencing the building of new coal plants with better efficiency and less carbon emissions. This trajectory has grave implications for Nigeria and it is critical that the political class in Nigeria follow, listen and plan with these developments in mind.
They mean it when they say it
In case there are Nigerians who may think it is a joke, I will cite a few examples of challenges faced by the G8 and OECD at least since the 1970s and how they were decisively addressed. These include:
What will Europe do with ageing vehicles? I believe this was a front page cover of Time or Newsweek Magazine sometime in the 1970s. With economic prosperity that followed the end of the Second World War, and the rapid expansion in personal vehicles, ageing cars became a problem. Then recycling was not much in the social and economic consciousness. One solution that emerged was that following the Structural Adjustment Era of the mid-1980s, many young men from Africa found themselves in Europe, doing mostly jobs the Europeans would rather not do. Most of their earnings were used to buy ageing vehicles (Tokunbo) which were exported to Africa. In the same period cases of infertility, asthma, cancers, etc. increased rapidly in our part of the world. Medical records in hospitals, import records in Ports and borders across Nigeria tend to support this scenario. Europe dealt with her ageing vehicles, and today has developed substantial capacities for recycling.
We have seen the huge ICT transformation, especially the internet since President Clinton announced what he called the information super highway. This in addition to the GSM has created a new world unknown a few years ago.
After the financial crisis in 2008, one obvious shift was to fuel efficient vehicles. Germany for instance commenced a programme of trade-in of less efficient vehicles for more efficient vehicles. Today that programme has significantly succeeded. In the same period it has become very fashionable for Nigerians and also other Africans to acquire energy-guzzling SUVs of all types. From our politicians, businessmen/women, clergy, to even lecturers, people are having more than one second-hand SUV imported, sometimes preferably from the United States (American Spec!). How can a people advance without a thinking elite?
In the last half a decade, Germany, the economic power house of Europe has advanced rapidly on renewables. Today, Germany has re-engineered household energy consumption, reaching close to 50% on renewables, especially solar, while Norway has achieved similar levels on wind energy. In some cases some houses generate solar energy that is sold to other consumers. We can expect Southern European countries with more solar radiation in a few years to become very important in this. Note also the significant investments in solar capacities in Morocco (on the African continent but with European temperament).
The long-term consequence of these for Nigeria is decline in relevance. Changing relevance of different parts of the world and organisations is something we need to reflect on.
Three Key meetings happened simultaneously – Relevance?
As the COP 21 was going on in Paris two other important meetings were holding. One was the OPEC ministers meeting, December 4 in Vienna, and the other was the Chinese meeting with African Presidents in Johannesburg. Of these three, by all estimates the least important was the OPEC ministers meeting.
There are persons who ordinarily should know, but did not know that OPEC Ministers were meeting. Rewind to 20 years before now, or even 10 years ago. An OPEC Ministers meeting was an important world event. This time it meant little. Just as the meeting ended Brent crude price fell to less than $40 per barrel, the lowest in seven years (the year Obama came to office). With that attitude to the OPEC meeting, is there little doubt that the Organisation does not hold the relevance and clout of the past? In fact, some persons are saying that the G8/OECD may be wanting oil prices to go down to $20 per Barrel. If that happens, what is the implication for Nigeria? Nigeria’s political class should be aware that the drum beats have changed, and so must the dance steps change. The ‘culture‘ of monthly Federation Account meeting in Abuja to share whatever SHELL and the others bring, in order to pay Civil servants, teachers, pensioners, and do other things is gradually becoming a matter for the history books. Governors asking for bailout should know that it is not sustainable. Nigeria requires more decisive decisions and actions that acknowledge that the party is over. We shall come to required decisive actions.
The other meeting of African presidents in Johannesburg had nearly all African Presidents physically present. That perhaps was a better attendance record than an African Union (AU) meeting. What was at stake? Simply, Chinese money. China is the new big man in town. China has the cash. China is the number two in size, but a major creditor to the number one (the United States). Note that just before the COP21, the World Bank/IMF announced that the Chinese Yuan has become one of the currencies for international exchange. The financial buoyancy of the Chinese is a key unsaid factor in the G8/OECD insisting in renegotiating the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities at the COP21. Their argument is that China and some of the BRICS may claim to be undeveloped, but they are also currently major polluters and most importantly have the cash to bring to the table. At the Johannesburg meeting, the Chinese did it the way a Nigerian big man will do it. They announced the huge figures to support African counties and an elated President Mugabe could not hide his excitement when he said, that is what we have been expecting our former colonisers to do for Africa. Now, what did China do to move up the ladder? That is what we should learn from and not just expect Chinese cash. We should produce/manufacture, consume what we produce/manufacture, and export.
My People, the party is over
My greatest wish is that the political class in Nigeria be equipped to interpret and understand the new/emerging (emerged) world and ensure that Nigeria is positively relevant. But we first need to understand that the party is over. The Owambe is over.
With about 170 million persons to feed, most of whom have no skills relevant to the contemporary world we are a major geopolitical risk. I like the way Our President Buhari put it to the US and Europe – bring the $14 billion to reflate Lake Chad so we can revive livelihood in that area and stop them matching to Europe. I believe it is the kind of thing Europe will understand. Note also that if Europe stops the migrants from the Middle East and the migrants chose to march southwards into the savanna of West Africa, no person, government or organisation has the capacity to stop them. We have been unable to stop an illegitimate Boko Haram. Please may God not let this thought get into the heads of the migrants heading to Europe.
Truth be told, Nigeria already has enough challenges for one country. The way things are, with significant amounts shared monthly, the extant insecurity and projected insecurity for Nigeria is serious. Yet there are more worries to come. A few of them include:
The high rate of population growth. It is projected that at current growth rates, by 2050 (35 years from now) we shall be more populated than the United States (over 400 million persons). Should we not start even using moral suasion and re-orientation/attitude change to discourage people having too many children?
Huge youth population where every young man wants to be a millionaire and every young girl wants to dress/look like a model/beauty queen. Where else on earth do we have this kind of national aspiration and goal? This is neither a worthy nor attainable goal. We have to embark on creative reorientation and attitudinal change.
A Nigerian asked me at the COP21 that if Morocco is hosting COP22 next year after haven hosted the COP in the past, and Durban hosted COP17, why not Nigeria. Another Nigerian asked if we saw security men at the airports saying to us on arrival “anything for the boys?” or “Oga your boys are here sir”. And, come to think of it, if the event had held in Nigeria, I can imagine how aggressively female undergraduates of our tertiary institutions would have invaded the meeting venue and adjoining facilities. For COP18 in Doha, we saw lots of young East Africans who were in Doha to do part-time job during the COP. Some of them were engaged as ushers, guides etc. Would they have tried asking for Nigerian students? Please don’t lynch me in the name of patriotism, but we have to acknowledge the way things are. Where is even the venue to host the COP in Nigeria, and where are the airports, transport facilities, security and others. After years of oil boom, our infrastructure is too far behind. It is time for the Nigeria elites and political class to take our country serious and we also need to embark on massive cultural re-orientation of our people.
The skills gap is widening between us and even countries in Africa. We need new paradigms of how to return quality education and skills development in Nigeria. A huge population with the current and projected difficult public finance scenario (projections show that global oil demand will remain low at current parameters through 2016) may require what other countries who passed through similar situations did – export manpower. Except for a small proportion of young persons who find their way out of the country for postgraduate studies, most other young persons are being prepared for life in the 2020s with life tools of the 1970s, minus acceptable values. This spells trouble for the future. We have many persons with degrees whose skills capabilities limit them to Okada riders and phone recharge card sellers. They have no clue what else to do and of course have little opportunities. Many of them even as private school teachers at primary school level are a wonder to behold. We need to declare a national emergency in education in Nigeria, and perhaps fundamentally re-orientate and redesign the entire sector. We need to agree we do not have enough teachers as most of what we have now as teachers are not it. No school system can rise above the capacity of the teaching stock.
We need to consume what we produce. Even when due to membership of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) we cannot ban Imports, we need to mobilise the NGOs/CSOs to help reorient Nigerians through massive campaigns, and leadership by example etc., to consume Nigerian products. This is one real way to address our financial challenges, and generate employment, reduce poverty, and insecurity. This is of urgent national importance. We need a massive campaign to convince our people to farm and produce and not idle away in the name of looking for jobs in cities. We need to replace an ageing farming population, and we need to have a massive youth farm programme supported financially and technically.
We need to re-order the structure and conduct of transportation in Nigeria. Reviving the railways should be a major priority. Johannesburg (South Africa), Rabat and Marrakesh (Morocco), and now Addis Ababa (Ethiopia) have trams in the cities. Why is Nigeria, the largest economy in Africa left behind? We need, as a matter of urgent National action, working trains linking the major routes with the heaviest volume of transport of people and goods in Nigeria. See the regular tanker menace in Apapa in Lagos. Must we move all that fuel from the Wharf through congested Lagos by tankers? Why not Rails? Why are we even importing fuels?
Can we have a massive programme on renewables in Nigeria and at least develop solar efficient “bush lamps” for rural households? The technology exists and we can do with this what Coca-Cola or even MTN has done in a short period. Let each villager have a small lamp that is solar powered. With economy of scale, the unit price falls.
Some Decisive Actions for Public Sector Finance
With the financial challenges confronting the central and state governments in Nigeria, some persons suggest we focus on taxation. That is right if we can find creative ways of taxing the rich more and close the gap as is the case in the Nordic countries. However, in one state I know the Local Governments have been mandated to seize goats, fowls and palm oil from villagers as a way to raise IGR. Good luck. Now consider these:
Would it make sense for the central and state governments to agree that current financial structures are not sustainable and restructure the country entirely returning to manageable structures requiring less bureaucracy? The answer is no. No privileged group willingly gives up privileges. Pharaoh did not. Another prayer from me: may what happened to Pharaoh not happen to the privileged class/groups in Nigeria,
Can we declare a national emergency and convene a meeting of the public and private sectors and decide to make a national sacrifice to say, for instance, all wages, emoluments, earnings etc. for both the private and public sectors be reduced by half? The answer will be No. There will be losers, and better economists than me who will rather we reflate by putting more money into circulation, as a stimulus, or because of the traditional argument that capital will be advantaged over labour. Those ones may lynch me.
Can we agree with former CBN Governor Sanusi to devalue the Naira. Perhaps lets agree that oil prices have fallen by a third and so let us devalue by 100% (for instance), getting the Dollar to N300? No. Nigerians are already saying No. We saw that in the 1980s and we have nothing else to export except the Oil which is internationally priced, and so devaluation has no real benefit, but will bring high cost of imported industrial goods and inflation.
But Nigeria is a clever country! One of my friends will say this. We have not said we are devaluing the Naira, but depreciating the Naira, and so since early this year we have officially moved from about N160 to the Dollar to N197. In the unofficial market, it is over N250 as I write. Is there still round-tripping going on, or is the Naira simply showing its true colour? I don’t know.
What about this option?
It seems to me the situation is getting to what it was before the oil boom commenced in the early 1970s. What therefore should the central and state governments do? I focus on the states. I suggest the state governments look at how the regions were financed. How did the Eastern, Midwestern, Western and Northern regions seek funds in that era? What commodities did they produce and export to earn foreign exchange – given the configuration of demand and supply in the world at the time? Oil palm, Rubber, Cocoa, Groundnuts etc., Marketing Boards, exports, etc.!
Many of our states are bigger than some African Countries that have no oil and are still functioning. Hence, states and clusters of states need to delve into modern Nigerian history and attempt the question, “what is the oil palm of the 2010s and 2020s? what will represent the cocoa, cotton, groundnuts, etc of the 1950s in the 2020s – and how do we go about increasing production and expropriation for public good?”
The best time to plant a tree, they say, is 10 years ago; and the next best time to plant the same tree is today. The train of reduced hydrocarbon dependence by erstwhile major buyers of Nigerian crude oil has since left the station. We cannot afford to pretend that things will remain the same. It is already late in the day. There is an urgent need to begin planting those trees of economic restructuring that were not planted decades ago today. Fortunately, we have some history to learn from. It is time to dust up Okparanomics, Osadebenomics, Akintolanomics, and Bellonomics textbooks and manuals. Feeding bottle federalism is not sustainable. Welcome to a new Nigeria.
ByProfessor Chinedum Uzoma Nwajiuba(Nigerian negotiator at COP 21; Professor of Agricultural Economics, Imo State University Owerri, Nigeria, and Executive Director (Part-Time), Nigerian Environmental Study Action Team (NEST), Ibadan.. E-mail: chnwajiuba@yahoo.de; Phone: +234(0)8033273871)
COP21 has come and gone and, like most others before it, the response has been varied. Some have applauded the Paris Agreement as a giant step for humankind. Some are claiming a big win. Others take a holistic look at the future scenario the agreement presents and are aghast that after two decades of climate negotiations greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise and the Paris Agreement does not indicate any urgency in tackling this fundamental problem even though it does indeed recognise the urgency of the crisis.
Nnimmo Bassey
The Agreement speaks of a desirability to work towards a temperature increase of 1.5o C while immediately aiming at a target “well below 2o C.” We wonder how the COP quantifies the difference between 1.5 and “well below” 2 degrees. And which may be greater in this language of diplomats? The Agreement recognizes everything that needs to be recognized, including the need for finance and technology transfer, human rights, gender and intergenerational equity, etc., but provides no scope for the operationalising these in a manner that signifies this acknowledgment. Although it is generally agreed that fossils must be kept in the ground if we are to stand a chance of keeping temperature increase below 2 degrees above pre-industrial levels, the COP, perhaps encouraged by its oil company partners, ignored this and locked the planet on the path of peril.
The scaffold on which the entire COP21 hung was the infamous intended nationally determined contributions (INDCs). While the COP Itself notes that the figures submitted by countries do not on the aggregate point a way to cooling the planet, it nevertheless stayed the cause of this clearly wrong path. The INDCs if implemented will lead to a temperature increase of over 3 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels wiping out communities of people and sparking unpredictable repercussions. The Agreement recognises that INDCs will also be achieved through removals of GHGs – through sinks and offsets, etc. Thus, the path of the INDCs taken by the COP is an irredeemable self-inflicted injury that subverts real efforts to tackle the climate menace.
Applauding the COP for being a success because for the first time all nations have indicated commitment to tackle climate change on the basis of the INDCs indicates a total disregard of climate science and equity as epitomised by this pathway.
Head in the Oven, Feet in the refrigerator (or that Sinking Feeling)
We note that the Agreement speaks repeatedly of “sinks and reservoirs of greenhouse gases.” These are wedges to keep the door open for all sorts of carbon offset schemes including REDD and all its variants, yet-to-be-proven carbon capture and storage, geoengineering and such like. We can thus expect intense externalising of climate action on climate victims as well as carbon colonialism – which may include what is referred to in the Agreement as “internationally transferred mitigation” (Article 6) rather than direct in-country carbon emissions reduction.
At the launching of a publication of the No REDD in Africa Network (NRAN) at the Climate Forum during the COP, Firoze Manji, the pan Africanist, described carbon offsetting as putting your feet in a refrigerator when your head is in the oven and hoping to achieve a median temperature for your body. Very apt indeed.
The agreement ties non-market climate solutions to the enhancement of “public and private sector participation in the implementation of nationally determined contributions.” This hints at the privatisation of carbon or pollution, which arguably is already happening through carbon trading.
Climate financeremains grossly insufficient with targets of $10 billion yearly up to 2020 when this would shift to $100 billion yearly. That these amounts are insufficient can be seen from the fact that the US spent about $68bn to handle the aftermath of just one hurricane, Hurricane Sandy. Considering that rich countries spend up to $2 trillion annually in needless wars releases equally underscore that what we see are specious power play and climate apartheid. And, by the way, who accounts for the millions of tonnes of greenhouse gases released in warfare besides destruction of lives and wreaking of havoc on nations and territories, especially those that are fossil resources rich. It is clear that the paucity of the Green Climate Fund is not a lack of funds but a determination by rich countries to avoid historical and current climate debt.
Transition?
The Agreement makes a passing mention of “just transition” with reference to “workforce” and the creation of decent work. Again we see that the COP is so enamoured with dirty energy or fossil driven energy forms that it could not dare name fossils or a call for just transition towards renewable energy. In fact, “renewable energy” is mentioned only once in the preamble to the Agreement and in the context of developing countries. Where did analysts get the idea that the Agreement has declared the obituary for fossil fuels?
With 2020 as the pivot year for the voluntary emissions reduction, it is clear that between now and then the remaining atmospheric carbon budget may already have been taken up. Whether that happens or not, delayed actions until 2020 presents the planet and all beings on it a very dire future that many will not survive. That also breeches the right of Mother Earth to exist, her right to maintain her cycles and speaks poorly of our understanding of intergenerational equity.
In sum, COP21 betrayed the poor, the vulnerable and all those already suffering the impacts of climate change.
Nnimmo Bassey heads the Health of Mother Earth Foundation (HOMEF)
