Speech by the Minister of Environmental Affairs, Minister Edna Molewa, at the University of Johannesburg Public Lecture on Climate Change
Deputy Vice Chancellor: academic, Professor Angina Parekh,
Deans of various Faculties,
Lecturers,
Distinguished Guests,
Students,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Good Evening,
It is an honour for me to be addressing you this evening; at a time when the international community is negotiating a new legal climate change regime that is scheduled to be completed at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris, the 21st Conference of the Parties.
The agreement hoped to be concluded at the conference will be the culmination of a four year negotiation process that was initiated in Durban in 2011 at the 17th Conference of the Parties under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
This year in Paris, all Parties to the UN Climate Convention are expected to adopt a protocol, legal instrument or agreed outcome with legal force in order to conclude the Durban Mandate.
The agreement will be applicable to all Parties, and will come into effect from 2020.
On behalf of President Jacob Zuma and the South African government I would like to thank our hosts, the University of Johannesburg, for affording us this important public platform to outline our efforts in addressing one of the most critical issues of our time.
I have been invited here this evening to brief South Africans on our positioning and preparedness for the UN Climate Change talks in Paris.
More broadly, I have also been asked to outline the South African government’s progress in transitioning the country along a low-carbon, inclusive, climate resilient growth path.
This evening’s lecture is part of our wider public participation process as government of mobilising business, civil society, government agencies and citizens for climate action.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
It goes without saying that the devastating impacts of climate change are with us.
The Fifth Assessment Report of the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change confirms that each of the past 3 decades has been successively warmer than the preceding decades since 1850; even warmer than during the Industrial Revolution!
It also confirms that human influence on the climate system is absolutely clear, and that the more the climate system is disrupted, the more humanity risks severe, pervasive and irreversible impacts.
This tells us that despite global action to limit greenhouse emissions, they haven’t been enough.
We will continue to experience the impacts of climate change and that they are intensifying.
One need only observe the increasing frequency and intensity of extreme weather events around South Africa to conclude climate change has long become a measurable reality.
Some parts of the country are in the grip of severe drought, while others are having more rain, leading to flash floods.
Although we are ultimately all impacted by the effects of a changing climate, such effects are not being felt evenly around the world.
Along with other developing countries, South Africa and Africa is at greater risk because of low levels of development and that their climate change adaptation efforts aren’t on the scale of developed countries.
Climate change poses one of the most serious threats to Africa’s long-term sustainable development, economic growth and the quality of life of her people.
These impacts threaten to severely undermine the developmental gains made by our own young democracy in the past twenty-one years.
Climate change affects nearly every cog in the many wheels that keep this country running: from healthcare, to agriculture and forestry, to biodiversity and ecosystems, to infrastructure and human settlements, to defense, to water and sanitation
Allow me for a moment to paint a picture of what this means in real terms.
Extreme weather results in drought: which in turn leads to diminished agricultural production capacity and loss of food security, especially for people living in rural areas.
Irregular rainfall patterns can lead to an increase in human and animal disease, including cholera, malaria and diarrhoea; thereby putting immense strain on the public health system.
Flash flooding causes damage to crucial infrastructure like roads and telecommunications, resulting in social and economic losses.
Flooding of low-lying coastal areas as a result of sea-level rise results in the loss of life and human settlements, as well as destruction of mangroves and river deltas.
Groundwater can become contaminated, rendering areas uninhabitable for communities reliant on borehole water for drinking and crop irrigation, including subsistence crops.
South Africa and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
Effectively managing the impacts of climate change requires a response that builds and sustains South Africa’s social, economic and environmental resilience as well as our emergency response capacity.
This response is guided by principles set out in our Constitution and Bill of Rights.
The multilateral agreement that will be concluded at the Paris negotiations in December, must be ambitious, fair and effective, and must facilitate the transition to a low carbon and climate resilient future.
It is a future that facilitates global co-operation to address a global challenge, in a manner that also recognises common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities.
This is a principle contained in the UNFCCC which was the very first international treaty to address the global challenge of a changing climate.
South Africa is one of 196 State parties to the UNFCCC, which was adopted in 1992 and came into force in 1994.
This framework Convention sets out obligations for all countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, adapt to the unavoidable adverse effects of climate change and report on national implementation. It also sets out obligations for developed countries to support the efforts of developing countries with finance, technology and capacity building.
Importantly, the Convention notes that the largest share of historical and, until recently, current emissions - originate in developed countries.
The Convention’s first basic principle is that developed countries should not only take the lead in reducing greenhouse gas emissions – but that they should also take the lead in supporting climate change activities in developing countries to take action on and adapt to the impacts of climate change.
In the Convention there is an implicit recognition of both the vulnerability of poorer countries to the effects of climate change, and the right of poorer nations to economic development.
From our perspective, we have repeatedly emphasized that our climate change response must balance making a fair contribution to the global effort to stabilise greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations - with consideration of the economic and social developmental needs of our country.
Allow me to offer some brief perspective on the guiding policy instruments as well as milestones achieved in the lead-up to the Paris climate talks.
The road to Cop 21
By 1995, the evidence outlined in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change clearly indicated that much more needed to be done to reduce emissions. Therefore a further subsidiary treaty – the Kyoto Protocol, was negotiated and concluded in 1997, and is ratified by 192 Parties.
Since at that time developed countries had the most responsibility for the cause of climate change as well as the most capability to address the crisis, the Kyoto Protocol placed legally binding commitments on developed countries to reduce their emissions in absolute terms and enabled them to meet some of their legal obligation through investment in low carbon sustainable development in developing countries. The first commitment period was from 2008 to 2012.
However the measures contained in Kyoto proved to be insufficient largely because firstly the US with some 25% of global emissions did not join Kyoto. Secondly, due to the dramatic economic growth and consequent increases in greenhouse gas emissions from developing countries, especially from “emerging economies” like China, India, Brazil, South Korea and South Africa.
This emboldened developed countries to challenge the legal obligations to cut emissions under Kyoto, charging that the current system was both unfair and ineffective.
They further contended that not only did they contribute less than 30% of global emissions, but that they were at a relative economic disadvantage because the US and major emerging developing country economies -particularly the BASIC countries – only had voluntary “non-legal” commitments.
Although not explicitly stated, it was clear the reasons underpinning developed countries’ reluctance to take on legally binding Kyoto commitments lay in international economic competiveness concerns, rather than any environmental or social impact concerns.
In fact due to these issues, by the beginning of the first commitment period in 2008, the Kyoto Protocol included less than 40% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions. And since the US did not join Kyoto, many other developing countries refused to join the Protocol’s second commitment period agreed to at COP17.
As a result, the second commitment period that started in 2013 and ends in 2020 now only covers less than 15% of world greenhouse gas emissions.
These shortcomings were clearly evident by the time the Kyoto Protocol came into force in 2005. At this Climate Change Conference it was agreed that solutions to these shortcomings would be explored in an international dialogue process, which was co-chaired by South Africa and Australia.
This became a two- track negotiation in 2007 under the Bali Road Map.
That two- year negotiating process concluded at COP 15 in Copenhagen in 2009, without a multilateral agreement.
This was largely due to differences between countries on the substantive and legal form of commitments by developed and developing countries - particularly related to the different understandings of the application of the principles of “equity”.
South Africa’s position has been that efforts to protect the atmosphere should be shared fairly among countries in accordance with their "Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities, and social and economic conditions".
This principle is perhaps the most important when considering South Africa’s position for the Paris climate talks and what we hope to achieve.
Copenhagen did however “note” a political accord reached by 30 Heads of State, which focused on this central and politically divisive principle.
Among the outcomes of this delicate political balancing act were:
- Commitment to a global goal to limit temperature increase to below 2 degree Celsius and a review of the adequacy of this global goal in 2015
- Absolute “quantified economy-wide emission reduction targets” for developed countries
- Relative “Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions” (NAMA’s) for developing countries; with the extent of actions depending on the extent of support
- A “transparency and accountability framework” for both absolute targets and relative actions as well as the support provided for developing country action
- Equal priority for adaptation
- A commitment by developed countries to mobilise $100 billion per year by 2020; with a substantial portion of this to be delivered through a new Green Climate Fund
- A technology development and transfer mechanism and the building of capacity to implement both adaptation and mitigation actions in developing countries.
South Africa’s Copenhagen pledge was to take nationally appropriate mitigation action to enable a 34% deviation below its "business as usual" emissions growth trajectory by 2020, and a 42% deviation below the "business as usual" emissions growth trajectory by 2025.
This level of effort would enable South Africa’s emissions to peak between 2020 and 2025, plateau for approximately a decade, and decline in absolute terms thereafter.
We further clarified – as we have consistently done, that the extent to which this outcome can be achieved depends on the extent to which developed countries will meet their commitment to provide financial, capacity building and technology support to developing countries.
The political agreement of the Copenhagen Accord was formalised in the Cancun Agreement in 2010 and extends to 2020.
Post-Copenhagen, two competing paradigms for a future global regime emerged.
On the one hand, the “top-down model” of a comprehensive/inclusive, multilateral rule based, legally binding regime with levels of ambition informed by science.
On the other hand, a “bottom up, pledge and review model” of incremental domestically determined policies, measures and rules (that may or may not be domestically legal) with the levels of ambition being informed by national priorities and circumstances and which are “internationalised” through the UNFCCC reporting and review procedures.
The 2011 Durban Climate Change Conference marked a turning point in the negotiations and called for bolder actions by all governments.
Specifically Durban had to resolve a set of complex and inter-related issues, including:
- Implementing the Cancun Agreement up to 2020
- Closing the ambition gap between the Copenhagen/Cancun commitments and pledges, and what science requires, and
- The future of the international climate change regime beyond 2020
Among the vexing outstanding issues was how to give effect to the principle of equity in the allocation of the burden and costs between developed and developing countries - all the while recognising that a continued degree of differentiation is central to developing countries who still face challenges.
The Durban COP17 was a watershed in several respects.
Firstly, the financial and technology mechanisms to support the implementation of the Cancun Agreement were outlined.
Secondly, bolder actions by all governments were called for, in order to close the ambition gap between the Copenhagen/Cancun commitments and pledges, and what science requires. Thirdly, it was here in South Africa that governments clearly accepted the need to negotiate a fresh, universal, dynamic and evolving legal agreement to deal with the climate change crisis beyond 2020.
Durban set a new long-term pathway for the development of a fair, ambitious and legally binding future multi-lateral and rules-based global climate change system that balances climate and development imperatives.
Since Durban, countries have been negotiating a new legal climate change agreement that will come into force in 2020 and be applicable to all.
This will address six key issues, namely climate change mitigation, adaptation, and the finance, technology and capacity building support required for developing country implementation, as well as arrangements for transparency of action and support.
Subsequent advances have been made in COP 18 in Doha in 2012, COP 19 in Warsaw in 2013, and COP 20 in Lima in 2014.The Warsaw COP in particular made a call for all Parties to the UNFCCC to intensify their national efforts in dealing with climate change.
The road to INDC’s
To this end, Parties agreed to prepare and submit Intended Nationally Determined Contributions, or INDCs by October 2015 for a period beyond 2020, which would be captured in the Paris agreement. INDC’s will be crucial to the success of the UN climate deal, both in 2015 and beyond.
It is the first time all countries, rich or poor, have been obliged to come forward with commitments to manage their greenhouse gas emissions.
They are also an opportunity for countries to design policies that can make economic growth and climate objectives mutually reinforcing.
I am pleased to announce here this evening that South Africa is finalising its consultation processes and will be submitting its INDC before the 1 October deadline.
Over the past three months, we have been consulting countrywide through a series of provincial conferences, engagements and stakeholder workshops with business, labour and civil society.
I’m told that UJ was represented, by the Department of Anthropology and Development Studies, and that there was representation from a number of other academic institutions in the different provincial conferences.
The draft INDC discussion document has been widely circulated and published ahead of the stakeholder consultations.
South Africa’s INDC includes three distinct components on mitigation, adaptation and the means of implementation.
It builds on our 2009 emission reduction pledge, and presents an emission reduction trajectory range for 2025 and 2030.
It further sets a number of national adaptation goals, including the development of a National Adaptation Strategy and plan, the strengthening of institutional capacity for addressing adaptation at all levels, and developing a national early warning system.
This contribution to the global effort to address climate change is based on our National Climate Change Response Policy.
Our policy is guided by the overarching principle of sustainable development, which is the cornerstone of Vision 2030 contained in South Africa’s National Development Plan (NDP).
As I said earlier, South Africa’s approach to addressing climate change balances our contribution as a responsible global citizen to the international effort to curb emissions, with the need to adress economic growth, job creation, and poverty alleviation.
South Africa Climate Change Response
South Africa has been stepping up efforts to reduce this country’s vulnerability to the impacts of climate change. I will list but a few of the many initiatives and policy instruments we have in place:
- To ensure that our country’s food, water, energy security and infrastructure are not negatively impacted by climate change we have developed Long Term Adaptation Scenarios, and climate change vulnerability assessments, to assess sectoral, cross-sectoral and geographic impacts and adaptation options.
- These processes have a specific focus on communities most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, particularly the indigent, rural dwellers, and women,
- South Africa has finalised the ratification process of the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol that was agreed to in Durban
- Work has been done with business and industry and other stakeholders to analyse the emission reduction potential in key economic sectors, to establish a Desired Emission Reduction system, and to understand the potential social and economic opportunities and impacts of South Africa’s transition to a lower carbon economy and society.
- Our Green and Blue Economy Strategies provide the strategic directive to attract investment in the green and blue sectors, create jobs, improve the country’s competitiveness and overall promote equitable, inclusive, sustainable and environmentally-sound economic growth,
- Three years ago a Green Transport Strategy was still at the drawing board. Today our national green transport flagship include ground-breaking urban public transport initiatives, renewable energy fuel alternatives and the shift of freight from road to rail,
- Through the national Green Fund, we have adopted an innovative approach to catalysing investment in green programmes,
- South Africa sits on the boards of key international climate finance mechanisms, where we have championed the course of direct access as an innovative way of developing domestic national institutional capacity,
- We are in the process of ensuring international accreditation for national Implementing agencies for the Green Climate Fund
- SANBI is the accredited National Implementing Entity for the Adaptation Fund which so far has approved two South African projects. The first, in the uMgungundlovu District Municipality in KwaZulu-Natal aims to increase resilience of vulnerable communities through interventions such as early warning systems, climate smart agriculture and climate proofing settlements. The second will deliver direct adaptation benefits in the Namakwa and Mopani Districts in Northern Cape and Limpopo Provinces respectively. These projects will provide an opportunity for South Africa to learn how to develop and implement high impact climate change adaptation projects that make a real difference in people’s lives,
- The Ministry of Public Works is leading a programme to unlock the so far largely untapped potential for energy savings in public buildings at national, provincial and local level,
- Three years ago, renewable energy projects were small and lacking investment. Today there is rapid uptake of large-scale renewable energy technologies through the Renewable Energy Independent Power Purchase Programme (REIPPP). So far under the REIPPP programme, 6 105 MW have already been allocated, of which 3 725 MW must be commissioned by November 2016. Already, 1 965 MWs is in full operation,
- This shift towards renewable and cleaner energy sources is outlined in the Integrated Resource Plan, or IRP. Importantly however, the IRP is a sustainable energy mix that includes coal, renewables, alternative energy, natural gas and nuclear power. By 2030 we aim to have decreased fossil energy demand significantly, creating alternative renewables through new technological innovation, good behavioural practices and a public commitment to more efficient, sustainable and equitable energy use.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
As you have just heard, South Africa is not resting on its laurels waiting for the outcome of the Paris negotiations.
With the support of our local and international partners, we have evidenced the political will, means and commitment to address the impacts of climate change with real, tangible benefits for those most vulnerable.
Our efforts will ultimately contribute to the attainment of our national priorities and those of the soon to be Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
What we hope to get from Paris
From our perspective, success in Paris must be guided by four necessary conditions:
Firstly, a recognition that climate change is a global problem, requiring a global solution, which can only be effectively addressed multilaterally, under the broad based legitimacy of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.
Secondly, a recognition that the multilateral solution is only relevant as long as it is responsive to the scientific evidence. And only if its rules-base provides for the consistent setting and implementation of commitments that in turn require verifiable tracking of progress towards what the science requires.
The Paris outcome must therefore ensure that regular reviews of implementation against both commitments made and what the science requires - are undertaken.
If we do not recognise the mutually dependent roles of science and rules for the success of the Paris agreement, we will miss this historic opportunity.
Thirdly, a recognition that we live in an unequal world. An ambitious response in line with science is only possible if Paris agreement is fair and equitable for all.
Developed countries maintain that the world has changed since 1992 and wish the Paris legal agreement to reflect current global realities, particularly with respect to developing countries who are now major economic competitors.
As the current chair of the Group of 77 plus China, we emphasise that the principles of the Convention must apply, in particular the principle of Common But Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR).
South Africa as a responsible global citizen has played an instrumental role in these negotiations – fully aligning with the common African position.
Together with our alliances in BASIC (Brazil, South Africa, India, China) we continue to coordinate a strong developing country voice. In this regard we are rallying other BASIC countries to support the African position and further strengthen South South coordination and cooperation.
Financing Post-2020
International finance and investment is a crucial element of the Paris agreement – to be provided to those countries that are not only vulnerable to climate change, but also least responsible and without the means to transition to low carbon economies.
Considering that the Paris agreement is expecting more commitment from developing countries despite their ongoing developmental challenges, it is worrying that there are currently no indications of the scale support to be provided from developing countries for post-2020 action.
This inequitable balance has the potential to undermine confidence in the Paris process.
While we welcome recent commitments to the capitalization of the Green Climate Fund to fill the existing finance gap we urge donor countries to fully implement their pledges as well as to replenish other climate funds such as the Adaptation Fund, the Least Developed Country Fund, and the Special Climate Change Fund.
On the matter of post-2020 scale of support, we believe that as a minimum, developed countries should communicate their support undertakings for the period 2020 to 2030, even if only at indicative levels at this stage.
Provision can then be made in the Paris agreement for a process to communicate more concrete support provisions in line with donor country budget appropriation processes.
Fourthly, a recognition that less mitigation means more adaptation. In this context, adaptation is a global responsibility that must be treated with the same priority as mitigation.
This is the basis of the Africa Group’s proposal for the Paris agreement to outline a Global Adaptation Goal, which is reciprocally linked to the mitigation goal of 2 degrees Celsius.
Conclusion
Ladies and Gentlemen,
President Jacob Zuma in his address at the opening of the Department of Environmental Affairs’ new green building last October said: “together we can build the biggest mitigation buffer against climate change… We can save our country and the world for future generations. Our economy will become resilient to the possible effects of climate change only when we take bold steps.”
It is indeed bold steps that are required if we are to achieve an equitable regime that reinforces multilateralism - and offers hope to those most vulnerable.
In her 2004 lecture on the occasion of receipt of the Nobel Peace Prize, the late Kenyan environmentalist and social justice activist Dr Wangari Maathai called for a global state of restlessness: “Those of us who witness the degraded state of the environment and the suffering that comes with,” she wrote: “cannot afford to be complacent,”
“We continue to be restless… If we really carry the burden, we are driven to action. We cannot tire or give up. We owe it to the present and future generations of all species to rise up and walk!"
At Paris we have within our grasp the means to build an ambitious, fair and binding agreement that strengthens the global approach to addressing one of the greatest challenges facing humanity and its survival.
I thank you!
