Outcomes from Copenhagen - No legally binding deal but a Copenhagen Accord of vague commitments

Climate change talks at Copenhagen ended last Friday, 18 December, without a legally binding protocol.

An agreement was brokered by the US and China, backing scientists' call to limit global warming to within 2 degrees centigrade against pre-industrial levels. But it contains no improved targets on greenhouse gas emissions from rich nations, does not commit anyone to a legally binding cuts and is not endorsed by the United Nations which needs a consensus from all countries to be enforced.

While it was endorsed by other big players such as the European Union, India and South Africa, the so-called Copenhagen Accord was rejected by smaller UN members such as Sudan, which during the conference acted as the chair of the G77 group of developing nations.

As part of the accord, rich nations agreed to quantify the amount of aid they were willing to give to poor nations to help them reduce their emissions and cope with the consequences of climate change.

Immediate, 'fast-start' aid was quantified at $30 billion over the next three years, with the EU and Japan pledging around $11 billion each, and the US offering $3.6 billion. Rich nations also set themselves the goal of 'mobilizing $100 billion a year by 2020 to address the needs of developing nations'.

One of the most controversial issues standing in the way of a legally binding deal between the US and China - which together account for about 40 percent of global emissions - hinged on the question of how much right third countries should have to inspect each other's greenhouse-gas emission claims.

While Obama had called for 'transparency' in the way emission targets should be monitored and reported, China strongly opposed any international exercise that would infringe on its national sovereignty.

The full significance of the deal will not be known until well into next year. Countries are supposed to fill in details of planned cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, left blank in the accord, by the end of next month. The UN is to follow with more talks towards a legally binding global treaty.

The show has begun after an unprecedented series of preparatory meetings and fading optimism, the 15th Conference of Parties to the Kyoto Protocol has kicked-off its two-week marathon to forge a future climate agreement. The stakes are high – scientists and climate change advocates give us only a few more years for decisive action to avoid catastrophic effects that could trigger mass migration and the loss of cures of some major diseases through the loss of biodiversity and its treasures, just to mention two of the myriad of possible consequences. And a few years is a very short period of time in the world of global agreements and their ratification.
Despite all its complexities, it is commonly agreed that a breakthrough will rest on four main pillars: (1) a binding mid-term commitment by developing countries to reduce the their emission dramatically, (2) appropriate domestic action beyond existing commitment by industrialised countries, (3) equitable and predictable finance for adaptation to climate change paired with the transfer of clean technology to developing countries and (4) revised governance structure that will allow increased participation of developing countries.
Accordingly, the focus in Copenhagen will be on the two main bodies established in 2007 under the Bali Roadmap, the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention (AWG-LCA) and the Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol (AWG-KP) with Annex I Parties being most mainly industrialised countries.
Recent pronouncements by world leaders given momentum. China announced to reduce its emission intensity by 40 to 45 percent by 2020 compared to 2005 and the US promised to cut emissions by a less ambitious but still progressive 17% by 2020 based on 2005 levels. The recent meeting of Commonwealth leaders made a possibly breakthrough on finance by announcing a Copenhagen Launch Fund that would start in 2010 and building to a level of resources of $10 billion annually by 2012. Last but not least, Obama’s decision to participate in the high-level segment next week instead of just stopping by after picking up the Nobel Peace Prize.
Africa probably has the most at stake as the continent predicted to be most affected by climate change. This has lead African leaders to push vocally for up to $64 billion in adaption finance for Africa alone, combined with decisive actions on emission reductions without binding commitments for African countries. But while Africa might have only contributed about 3% to global greenhouse emission that caused climate change, it can be more than a recipient of compensation for historic climate change by others; it can be part of the solution. The continent has the potential to exploit another important natural resource and become one of the biggest carbon sinks to mitigate climate changes through its forests and agriculture, which should form an essential part of any new agreement. South Africa has taken a first step in showing how African countries can contribute with its surprising announcement to “undertake mitigation actions which will result in a deviation below the current emissions baseline of around 34% by 2020 and by around 42% by 2025”. Let’s hope for many more productive steps like this one.

Foresight 2010

What do you think South Africa needs to do in 2010? (Aside from winning the World Cup).

That was the question that Judge Dennis Davis put to the panel at the GIBS annual “Foresight 2010” forum. A quick survey of the members of his jury presented a variety of bullish and bearish responses – as well as one too many “Pass” cards, and talk of creating rather than predicting the future. The optimists got cross-examined for being unrealistic, while the pessimists were lambasted for being vague.

To be fair, the Judge was right. For all the talk of needing values, accountability, active citizenship, public-private dialogue – what does that actually mean? When push came to shove, to state some concrete action that the government should do in 2010 nobody wanted to put their neck on the line. Which was – ironically – stated as part of the problem and why business avoided engaging in debate with government, by Brian Bruce, CEO, Murray & Roberts among others.

What we might agree on is that there needs to be a vision for South Africa. What I don’t agree with is that business and government should share one same vision. By their very natures they will diverge completely – their interests lie in different corners. Yes, there needs to be co-operation, whereby government facilitates business to reach its goal, but the friction between the two – and the role that citizens play across both – is what drives change, and hopefully progress.

Michael Jordaan, CEO, First National Bank, was one of the panellists who came back to the human resources that South Africa has – training and keeping talent. Without going into the debate around school and university education that they embarked upon, it is also a key theme emerging in the survey that africapractice is conducting of African businesses, opportunities and challenges for the year ahead.

Chief Rabbi Warren Goldstein took it one step further, talking about the importance of the human spirit, the need to have faith in people and their ability to deliver. However, he was also the one who addressed my question of what South Africa needs to do to improve the perception of the country abroad and attract foreign investment with a very swift and succinct response: “Crime”. How much faith does he have in the people committing the crime to stop, or the people set to stop it succeeding?

Wendy Luhabe, chancellor of the University of Johannesburg, had been the only one to reference the outside world (aside from mention of that old Global Economic Crisis, of course). What must foreign investors think of the lack of discourse and progress being made by the Government and Business Community in South Africa?
When push came to shove, and Judge Dennis insisted they give him an answer to what single step was needed, Bonang Mohale, chairman and VP, sales and operations, Shell, SA, said leadership, and repeated the old adage, "People get the leadership they deserve". I didn’t know that South Africa spends more per capita on education and healthcare than most countries in the world, but the results still point to failed leadership. Without government representation present, the panel represents some of the best business leadership the country has. If they can’t step up and take account for engaging government and civil society in the debate they talk about, then who can?

A thought provoking discussion, but one that brought up more questions than answers. Who will start the discourse? I can’t help thinking it will fall back to the media once again....

African Innovation Comes to London

In the past month or so I have been spoilt for choice when it comes to Africa-focused events here in London. I am always pleasantly surprised by just how many Africa-enthusiasts are based on this little island – there are of course the 2 million-odd diasporans with family links to the continent and many others who have taken a keen interest in the continent for other reasons. I have found both types of people at Africa Gathering and BarCamp Africa UK recently and both events have been buzzing with ideas, entrepreneurialism and enthusiasm for positive change and innovation in Africa.

Africa Gathering in October brought together thinkers and do-ers ranging from philanthropist Bill Liao to the founder of FrontlineSMS, Ken Banks and the eccentric Kevin “Banana Man” Alan. The inspiring rapper Emmanuel Jal gave a moving account of his experience as a child soldier in Sudan and how he is only eating one meal a day until he has raised enough money for his charity Gua Africa to build a school in his hometown to educate young people affected by war.

I was at the first Africa BarCamp in the UK at the weekend along with a hundred or so other tech enthusiasts sharing some really exciting ideas. Miquel Hudin shared his website, Maneno (meaning ‘words’ in Kiswahili) which is a communication and blogging application built to serve the specific needs of Sub-Saharan Africa. Frederick Wamala from the LSE shared his thoughts on how we must secure Africa’s newly acquired fast internet from cyber crime in order for it to be an effective medium for Africa's development.

I’ve had some fascinating conversations at these events and have been really happy to see just how many people are as excited about opportunity in Africa as I am. Growth and opportunity have been key themes that have come out of both events as well as the African philosophy of Ubuntu (we are who we are because of others) which I see as fitting for the take-up in interactive and social media across the continent.

Things you might not know about Africa

The africapractice team had emails flying round in response to the question: What do people not know about Africa?

There are plenty of preconceptions and misconceptions about the continent, but here are a few of the facts and figures that came up last week:

• Seven countries in Africa account for more than fifty per cent of the population (Nigeria, Ethiopia, DRC, SA, Tanzania, Kenya, Sudan)
• Africa holds about 10% of the world's proven oil reserves
• There are up to 100 million members of the African Diaspora
• The longest cable car in the world is in Nigeria
• South Africa sold $1.8 billion worth of cars to the US last year, putting us ahead of Sweden and Italy as suppliers to the US market
• Africa is most affected by climate change but only produces 3% of global emissions
• Approximately half the population of Africa is under the age of 18
• Kenya is one of only five countries in the world that generates more than 15% of their electricity from geothermal sources
• Africa is the fastest growing telecoms market in the world
• Nigeria has a population the sum of the thirty one smallest countries in Africa
• Only 4% of Africa's hydropower potential is utilised currently
• Rwanda is ranked first by the Inter-Parliamentary Union in terms of the percentage of female politicians in its lower chamber, with 56.3 percent.
• The largest cement plant in the world is being built in Nigeria
• South Africa is the first, and to date only, country to build nuclear weapons and then voluntarily dismantle its entire nuclear weapons programme
• Almost 50% of all African immigrants in the United States hold a college diploma
• In the mid 1990s, there were more phones in New York City than the whole of Africa. But if the growth curve in mobile devices in Africa continues, it is likely to surpass the United States in number of mobile consumers
• The city of Pretoria, in South Africa, has the second largest number of embassies in the world after Washington, D.C.

A list of facts won't change people's image of Africa in one go, but it's all part of a far richer picture then a lot of people realise exists.

Silicon Sahara

Silicon Valley, Silicon Fen – where to next for the hot bed of technology development?

In South Africa you can debate Cape Town vs Johannesburg vs Durban. Not much to debate this week, however, as the Silicon Cape Initiative kicks off. One sign of the interest in this is the fact that #siliconcape wa trending in second place on Twitter (globally), which is quite substantial attention.

But there are still hurdles, which events like this will hopefully address. And looking outside of South Africa is one of them. 10,768 patents were registered in South Africa in 2008, with over 7,000 registered by foreigners. Driving home grown talent and innovation is going to be the challenge, and the opportunity, open to innovation hubs, VCs, universities, corporate and entrepreneurs.

Focusing on domestic investment in technology should not be at the expense of international investment, however. As Duncan MacLeod points out in this week’s Financial Mail the country needs to open up to investors, not scare them away. If the collapse of the talks between MTN and India’s Bharti Airtel points to protectionism by the government, we have reason to worry. Regulatory, commercial and operational hurdles will need to be addressed to invite more international investment.

Beyond South Africa, there are definitely contenders for Silicon Safari winners. Rwanda seems to be making huge strides, in a large part because of President Kagame’s appetite and agenda.

One example is the ICT Bus Project that launched last week as part of the Rwanda Development Board’s eRwanda Project. Two large buses, equipped with a server, 20 laptops, printers, photocopiers, scanners and other multi-media facilities – a kind of mobile Internet cafe - takes access to previously denied p especially in rural areas. Delivering training for children and teachers, providing access to ICT for SMEs, farmers and entrepreneurs, is where we will see the digital divide start to narrow.

While the private sector is a major driver for advancements of this kind and socio-economic development, when it comes to communications, the government needs to be behind the industry – facilitating competition, new entrants, fair regulation etc. Where South Africa has entrepreneurs, investors, business and technology minds, they need to meet in the middle.

But a last word from Cyril Ramaphosa, executive chairman of investment company Shanduka Group, who yesterday put the onus back on businesses to help SA to produce the skilled people it needed to grow economically. “The South African corporate sector often says that the skills shortage bedevils them, but to my mind that is a lazy excuse. It is a failure to grasp the nettle, take bold moves and embark on sharp and pointed (strategies) to produce skilled people in any discipline.”

Sounds like a challenge to me.

Climate change: a long time coming?

No one needs to be told that climate change is topical at the moment. It's in the papers and the twitter feeds every day and if it's not an item on Nigeria being urged to declare Yobe State a desert area, then it's the Maldivian Cabinet planning to meet underwater to demonstrate the risk to its country from the expected global warming induced rising water levels The plain truth is that we are writing ecological cheques we just can't cash and if we are prioritising, it's this debt we should worry about, not the financial debt that has caused our ongoing global recession.

“The financial crisis is a result of our living beyond our financial means. The climate crisis is a result of our living beyond our planet’s means.” Yvo de Boer, Executive Secretary of the United Nations Climate Convention.

We have to stop living beyond our planet's means if we want to go on living at all. It's our long-term survival that climate change is impacting. And this is not news. In fact if you look at the climate change timeline in WWF's pocket guide to 'The New Climate Deal', the first time there was awareness that a crisis might be looming was 1896! What have we been doing with our heads buried in the sand for over a century? Below, with thanks to WWF, is the timeline:

• 1865: John Tyndall postulated that gases such as water vapour and CO2 in the “atmospheric envelope” retain the heat.
• 1896: Svante Arrhenius predicted that increases of atmospheric CO2 from burning fossil fuels would lead to global warming; a doubling of atmospheric CO2 could cause global average temperature to rise by 5ºC. The predictions of this Nobel Prize laureate (1903) went unnoticed for more than half a century.
• 1958: First continuous monitoring reveals rapidly rising CO2 levels in the atmosphere.
• 1970s: Beginning of period of atmospheric warming known as “global warming”.
• 1988: UN establishes the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to assess the science of climate change.
• 1990: IPCC’s First Assessment is published. The year is subsequently established as the baseline year for future emissions targets.
• 1992: Earth Summit meets in Rio de Janeiro. Governments agree on the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which commits them to preventing “dangerous climate change”.
• 1995: After a fierce debate, in particular with OPEC nations, the IPCC Second Assessment establishes the strong link between human-induced greenhouse gases and climate change, saying that “the balance of evidence suggests….” that global warming is caused by mankind.
• 1997: Kyoto Protocol is agreed under UNFCCC. It includes the first emissions reduction targets for industrialized countries, covering 2008-2012; all major nations sign up.
• 1998: Warmest year in warmest decade in warmest century for at least a thousand years.
• 2001: Nations agree on methodological and other details of the Kyoto Protocol in Marrakech. The USA and Australia refuse to ratify the protocol.
• 2003: European heat wave, which kills more than 30,000 people. Scientists later conclude it is the first extreme weather event definitely attributable to human-induced climate change. Scientists report a third of the world afflicted by droughts, double the figure for the 1970s.
• 2005: Drought temporarily turns Amazon rainforest from a carbon sink to a carbon source.
• 2007: Massive summer ice loss in the Arctic brings fears of an ice-free north; IPCC Fourth Assessment warns of faster and irreversible climate change; Bali Climate Conference lays out timetable for agreeing successor to Kyoto Protocol.
• 2008: Poznan Climate Conference in Poland; slow progress on negotiations as many wait for the new Obama administration in the USA to declare its hand.
• 2009: Make or break year for the climate, with negotiations continuing for a Copenhagen Protocol set to conclude in December.

What's also interesting is that while countries and governments acknowledge that we have to get started, they are reluctant to be held to account. Right here in South Africa, our government recently released a statement stating, "While South Africa acknowledges that it is a contributor to the overall global green house gases largely due to its reliance on coal powered electricity, we are committed to taking responsible action to reduce our emissions but we are not ready to agree to any targets that would undermine our growth trajectory. Like other developing nations-, we still face the major challenge of growing our economy to enable us to meet the Millennium Development Goals."

Reading between the lines: yes we are part of the problem and we promise to get around to fixing it, just not right now and we won't say when either. And while there may be mitigating circumstances, if one of the most sophisticated players on the African continent won't commit how can others be held to account? And all the while time keeps marching irrefutably on.....