Marthinus van Schalkwyk, on the occasion of the opening of the final lead
authors meeting of Working Group 2 of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC)'s Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), Lord Charles Hotel, Somerset
West
11 September 2006
Climate change: Impacts on Africa
Dr Osvaldo Canziani and Prof. Martin Parry, co-chairs of the IPCC's Working
Group 2, other IPCC representatives, esteemed lead authors of Working Group 2,
and valued members of the Technical Support Unit, I wish you a hearty welcome
to South Africa and to Cape Town. I trust that you will find your surroundings
conducive to a most productive series of discussions and deliberations as you
finalise your work on the critical AR4 of the IPCC.
Ladies and gentleman, public perception on climate change has crossed a
threshold, here in South Africa, and indeed around the world. The reason is
two-fold: firstly the scientific case for 'action now' has been widely
accepted, and secondly, an increasing number of government leaders around the
world are willing to play an active leadership role in influencing public
opinion, rather than being led by public opinion.
However, it remains one of our most urgent priorities as the global
community of nations to convince all countries, especially the largest
industrialised nations to join and support the multilateral effort to reduce
the emission of greenhouse gasses. Climate change is a global scourge and
requires a multilateral response.
The work of the IPCC, and in particular the groundbreaking Third Assessment
Report, has been one of the key influences lending a far greater sense of
urgency to our global response. If the chief aim of the IPCC is to be policy
relevant, it is hard to imagine another effort that has achieved its aim so
well at a global level. The Third Assessment Report raised the bar of effective
translation of science into the public policy domain. It is indeed a tough act
to follow.
It has become abundantly clear over the past decade, based on evolving
science and work of the IPCC, that the potential impacts of climate change may
hold far greater risk than previously believed. As you would know, roughly 2ºC
is the lower range of predicted global mean temperature increase, while 3°C
seems increasingly likely for a doubling of pre-industrial CO2. We look forward
to the report from Working Group 2, to give us further evidence on how close we
may be to key physical tipping points thresholds beyond which policy options
will become very limited indeed and damage irreversible.
As we approach the twelfth Conference of the Parties (COP12) to the United
Nations (UN) Framework Convention on Climate Change and the second session of
the Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the
Kyoto Protocol (COP /MOP2), in Nairobi in November, it is an opportune moment
to reflect on Africa's vulnerabilities and what all role-players could do to
strengthen our capacity to minimise the threats posed by human-induced climate
change.
In Africa, as in many parts of the world, we now appreciate that impacts
could include greater and more rapid sea level rise than previously projected;
increased incidence of extreme weather events; substantial reductions in
surface water resources; accelerated desertification in sensitive arid zones;
and greater threats to health, biodiversity and agricultural production. We as
policy-makers need to be informed by your work on impacts, not only in
biophysical terms but also in human terms.
African marine and fresh water fisheries already count among the world's
most vulnerable and in the face of declining or migrating fish stocks as a
result of climate change, West and Central Africa show particularly high
exposure and dependency, and low adaptive capacity.
In Africa, 40% of international borders are demarcated by river channels and
basin watersheds, and most major rivers traverse national boundaries. These are
sensitive to even moderate reductions in rainfall as projected for much of
Western and Southern Africa and could lead to an increase in inter-communal and
inter-state conflicts over scarce water resources. It could also undermine the
access of millions of people to hydro-electric power and water supply.
In southern Africa, we are concerned about projections that we heard at our
national climate change conference last year, of significant reductions of
perennial surface water by the end of the century. This could threaten key
ecological and livelihood resources such as the Okavango Delta in Botswana, and
large urban centres such as greater Cape Town, where we find ourselves
today.
Overall, the projected impacts of unmitigated climate change in Africa will
greatly affect human livelihoods. The cost will be counted not only by
environmentalists, but also by economists, doctors, subsistence farmers and
fisher folk. The cost will be measured not only in United State (US) dollars
and species loss, but in human mortality and morbidity, in millions of African
lives at risk.
Informed by these risks, we must at the very least ensure that the COP and
COP /MOP in Nairobi address the following three priorities.
Firstly, we need real action on adaptation, which is a top priority for
Africa at the upcoming Nairobi meetings. We need to move the negotiations from
assessment and planning to implementation. Specifically, we need to activate
the Adaptation Fund, firm up the modalities of the five-year programme and
learn from an adaptation pilot programme. We hope that the next assessment by
Working Group 2 will give us more practical guidance on adaptation.
Secondly, Nairobi must kick-start the process of redressing the inequitable
and limited geographical distribution of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM).
The 17 CDM projects in the pipeline in Sub-Sahara Africa account for only 1,7%
of the total of 990 projects worldwide. To build faith in the carbon market and
to ensure that everyone shares in its benefits, we must address the obstacles
that African countries face.
Thirdly, we need to maintain the political momentum and creative space to
strengthen the climate regime. We will need to find ways both to broaden
participation and to bring about deeper emission reductions under a Kyoto Plus
regime. For developed countries this requires agreement on substantially
stricter emission reduction targets under the Kyoto track - informed by the
best available science and the precautionary approach. The first step for
developing countries is to find a way under the Convention track to incentivise
the synergies between sustainable development and climate change
mitigation.
Chairperson, it is with great pleasure that I welcome this distinguished
group of international experts here today. Your important task is to provide a
balanced and unbiased assessment of a complex, yet fundamental environmental
risk. I thank you for your efforts, and I wish you well in matching and
exceeding the standard of the Third Assessment Report. I assure you that your
work will not only be closely studied, but that it will directly inform
policy-making as we continue to work towards a range of local and multilateral
solutions to this monumental environmental challenge.
Enquires:
Riaan Aucamp
Cell: 083 778 9923
Issued by: Ministry of Environmental Affairs and Tourism
11 September 2006
