Dec 14, 20217 min read

COP26 Explained

From 31 October to 13 November, the COP 26 summit took place in Glasgow. The conference was marked by high expectations, a few key outcomes, disappointments, and large public engagement and was in the spotlight for some time during the past month. But, what is it all about?

What is a COP?

First of all, it is important to know what COPs are, their purpose, and how they work. Its first iteration happened almost three decades ago in Berlin and occurs every year unless the participants decide otherwise. That was the case for COP26, which was supposed to take place in 2020 but was delayed a year due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The initials stand for Conference Of the Parties. “Parties” here, referring to all of the 197 States that are parties to the UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change), an environmental treaty initially signed by 154 states at the “Earth Summit” in 1992. According to the agreement, its main objective is to “(...) achieve stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.” A particularity to be remembered is that the treaty also recognizes the differences between developing and developed nations, in that way, taking into account the specific difficulties of often-overlooked countries and territories, and explicitly stating the importance of assisting poorer countries.

Moreover, in its 7th article, the UNFCC establishes the decision-making body now known as COP, as well as its attributions. To achieve the goals established in the document, it was determined that the Conference must monitor and ensure the effective implementation of the Convention and any other instruments the body adopts. In simpler words, the group meets periodically to look at the progress made by the participants, understand the global demands, and produce a global response to the climate crisis, looking for ways to reduce greenhouse gases emissions fairly and coherently for all parties.

Over the years, the summits had some important outcomes, some more successful than others, as well as disappointments and frustrations. Either way, it is undeniable that the establishment of the body is a milestone in the history of international affairs and environmentalism, as the only climate-related body in which all countries’ concerns have, in theory, equal weight.

Why was the COP26 important?

Every iteration is important, but some particularities of this year’s summit should be noted.

Firstly, the 26th conference should also mark five years (six actually, as a result of the postponement of the meeting) since the signature of the Paris Agreement. Back in 2015, 196 parties adopted the treaty at the COP21 in Paris. Its main goal was to limit global warming to below 2 Celsius degrees compared to pre-industrial levels (although 1.5 Celsius degrees was set as an ideal goal) and is probably the most ambitious multilateral environmental treaty set to this day. It symbolized a global understanding that serious action must be taken to avoid a catastrophe.

Fearing that the Paris Agreement would become just another treaty with no real impact, a clause was added to it, deciding that every five years parties should meet again to evaluate progress made, and most importantly, present updated NDCs. NDCs are Nationally Determined Contributions, in which countries should express their particular goals, and plans to reduce carbon emissions. Therefore, global leaders were urged to review their national objectives and tactics to be presented at the meeting in Glasgow. In short, this year’s COP not only will test the mechanism of the Paris Agreement but also outline the next steps to be taken in the prevention of global warming.

Secondly, this was the United States’ first climate conference under a new administration. Consequently, it represents the return of the North American country to the Paris Agreement, after staying out of it for almost four years. The United States, as one of the countries that produce the highest levels of carbon emissions, has a particularly relevant role in climate talks. Also, being one of the richest nations in the world, the United States was expected to strongly cooperate financially with developing countries to help them cut their emissions and adapt to damages caused by climate change.

Furthermore, on the topic of climate finance, developing nations were promised to receive 100bn dollars a year by 2020, to be spent on issues related to climate change. However, rich nations failed to keep that promise and were expected to address it in Glasgow.

Thirdly, many experts view this as the last chance to keep global warming below the 1.5 Celsius degrees mentioned in the Paris Agreement. The latest report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), released in August, pointed out that unless new drastic and immediate measures were taken, the goal set in Paris would be unreachable, showing that the conference could be a turning point in the world’s battle against climate change. This data increases the already growing pressure on leaders to make quick, smart, and efficient decisions.

What happened at the Conference?

During the two weeks, world leaders and delegations met to present their NDCs, negotiated several bilateral and multilateral deals, and worked together to write a new climate pact.

The newly presented NDCs were seen as disappointing. A Synthesis Report made by the UN showed that taking into account the new NDCs, an increase of 13.7% in global GHG emissions is expected until 2030 (compared to 2010 levels). Also, the IPCC report mentioned previously concluded that CO2 emissions should be cut by at least 25% by 2030. Hence, leaders agreed to present new and more ambitious goals for next year’s conference.

Other important deals were also discussed and signed in Glasgow, besides the Conference’s final pact. For instance, a surprising China-US agreement was announced, promising bilateral cooperation to cut greenhouse gases emissions throughout the 2020s. Additionally, to address issues related to deforestation, more than a hundred countries pledged to end deforestation by 2030 by signing the Forest Deal. It includes almost 20bn dollars to help countries to protect their forests against wildfires, restore damaged land, and support indigenous communities. Regarding methane emissions, the United States and the EU presented a scheme to cut emissions of the gas by 30% by 2030, which was adopted by more than a hundred countries.

Outside the conference halls, some events also took place. Around 100,000 people marched in the streets of Glasgow calling for more action of the leaders at the summit. It was the city’s biggest demonstration ever recorded. The event gathered indigenous leaders, activists, students, and other members of the civil society and received a lot of attention from the media. Besides, notable figures like youth leaders Greta Thunberg and Vanessa Nakate were present at the marches. It was a unique moment for overlooked and marginalized groups to have their opinions and ideas heard.

The final climate pact

Signed on November 13th, the Glasgow climate pact, although not legally binding, had some key points on how countries should act in the next few years to reach the goal set on the Paris Agreement. It includes 71 clauses divided into eight main topics: Science and Urgency, Adaptation, Adaptation finance, Mitigation, Technology transfer and capacity-building for mitigation and adaptation, Loss and damage, Implementation, and Collaboration. Here are some of the main decisions.

In order to cut carbon emissions, countries came to some conclusions, although vague in some cases. Leaders agreed that the transition to clean energy must be accelerated, by rapidly cutting subsidies directed to coal power and fossil fuel, however, no firm date was set. Besides that, as mentioned earlier, it was also agreed that the parties must review their NDCs and present them again at next year’s conference, as they were insufficient.

For the first time, coal was also at the center of discussions, treated as a major contributor to CO2 emissions. While a reasonable amount of countries advocated for the gradual removal of coal plants over the next few years, India and China called for a less drastic process. Late negotiations and a last-minute alteration on the text replaced the wording “phase-out” for “phase-down” of coal power. In that way, a promising and optimistic decision turned into a big disappointment for many countries.

Clauses regarding climate finance were also included in the final document. After the failure to keep the previous pledge, developed nations committed to strongly increasing financial resources to help poor countries adapt to climate change and leave fossil fuel behind. To be specific, the pact asked developed signatories to fully deliver the promised 100bn dollars per year by 2025. Yet, the number is far below the value of 1.3 tln dollars, initially requested by a group of African countries and other developing nations, which ended up being denied by the United States and the European Union. Thus, compromises were made, and developing countries and were once again left with ambiguous and unfulfilling promises that put their citizens at risk.

As for the “Loss and damage” section, little progress was made. Nations affected by climate-related phenomena expected the creation of a fund to specifically deal with these issues. Still, their proposals were blocked and they were left with the impression that richer countries will only delay this discussion, which is likely to reappear at the next conferences.

Conclusions

In the end, the Glasgow climate pact had its controversies. On one hand, some considered it insufficient and frustrating, for the lack of ambition and clear goals with set dates. Not to mention the compromises made by developing nations that favor richer ones that make the document very fragile and unreliable. On the other hand, there have been some optimistic views about it, mainly claiming that the pact does, in fact, bring us closer to the objectives set in the Paris Agreement. After all, this is the first time where leaders have come to a consensus about the need to phase out fossil fuels. Regardless of the different analyses, it is certain that now it’s time for leaders worldwide to reflect on all the decisions made in Glasgow and step forward on the race against global warming.

Finally, there are a lot of ways to look at the conclusions of the pact, but to summarize, in the words of Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, “It's an important step, but it's not enough. It's time to go into emergency mode.”