The Bonn Summit closes, the meeting that prepares the ground for the next Climate Conference (COP31) in Türkiye. In an international context marked by confrontations, the crisis of multilateralism and doubts about the effectiveness of the Climate Summits, Sergio Bonati, from the WWF Spain team, talks about whether there are reasons to be optimistic, if there is real progress or the same issues continue to run aground again and again or if a certain media and social boredom towards climate change is perceived.
What do you think of the results at the close of Bonn?
The conference closes with an uneven balance. There have been signs that the climate agenda is moving from promises to action, although slowly and fragilely. Progress has been limited on issues such as mitigation, adaptation financing and just transition.
How is the international community portrayed after the lack of consensus in the last meetings?
The international community increasingly shares the diagnosis of the need to act against climate change; COP28 marked a turning point by recognizing the need to move towards the progressive abandonment of fossil fuels. However, the great challenge now is to translate that political commitment into concrete implementation measures. The tensions reflect the complexity of climate negotiations and that we are in a decisive phase of the global energy transition. The challenge is to agree on the speed and tools necessary to solve it.
Don’t these meetings always get stuck at the same points?
Not always. There are some points that are more delicate and usually require several negotiation cycles; The interests of many countries and many blocks are at stake and therefore it makes sense that they are slow processes. The Paris agreement in 2015 is a great milestone; All countries in the world agree to fight against a global and common challenge that is climate change. Another milestone in recent years is the explicit mention of fossil fuels as the cause of climate change, the creation of a Loss and Damage Fund aimed at supporting the most vulnerable countries, the launch of the Just Transition Program, or the first Global Balance Sheet (GST) that established the objective of tripling the world’s renewable energy capacity and doubling the world’s energy efficiency rate. However, in many cases, agreements are not advancing at the pace required by the climate emergency. The progressive abandonment of fossil fuels continues to be the most urgent and priority measure and, despite this, there is still no clear consensus on how to translate this commitment into concrete measures within the national plans of each country.
Do these types of summits still make sense?
I think the overall balance is that these processes are positive and should continue to exist. Although multilateralism and negotiations often take time and do not always advance at the pace required by the climate emergency, they remain fundamental tools to address a global challenge of this magnitude. Furthermore, in the current complex geopolitical context, these negotiation spaces acquire even greater relevance, since they contribute to maintaining cooperation between countries. We continue to observe differences in positioning, something that has been a constant in climate negotiations; differences that usually respond to economic circumstances, levels of development, historical responsibilities for emissions or different perceptions about how the transition to a low-carbon economy should be approached, but that complexity is also a strength. The agreements reached are the result of consensus between practically all countries in the world, which gives them unique legitimacy and relevance.
Do you perceive a disconnection between social and media concern and what is discussed in these quotes?
We do not believe there is a disconnect in the diagnosis of the problem. The issues debated in these forums are complex and have very profound implications for the energy, economic and social models of countries. For this reason, a large part of the negotiations focus on high-level agreements that, although they may seem distant to citizens, are essential to guide global climate action. Where we do observe an important gap is between the recognition of the problem and the speed of political response. In many cases, agreements are not translated quickly enough into concrete measures and, once adopted, their implementation remains insufficient. The distance is not so much between social concern and international negotiations, but between the urgency set by science and the pace at which governments are acting.
What message do you think this summit sends? Some have said that it is “a silent death of the fight against climate change…”
We do not share the idea that we are witnessing a “silent death of the fight against climate change.” It is true that many times the pace of international negotiations is not up to the urgency set by science and that progress may be insufficient in the face of the challenge. However, that doesn’t mean climate action has stopped. The Bonn conference has a more technical and less media profile than a COP, but it plays a fundamental role within international negotiations. It is the space where many of the agreements that will subsequently be debated and adopted at climate summits are prepared, where points of consensus and disagreement are identified and where the foundations are built that allow progress in multilateral processes. The message this summit sends is that the international community continues to work to find common solutions to an extraordinarily complex global problem. We continue to insist that it is urgent to move towards the progressive abandonment of fossil fuels and accelerate the transition towards sustainable energy models. Now, it is also essential that this transformation occurs fairly. For decades, our economies and societies have developed around fossils and millions of people, workers and territories still depend on these sectors. The transition must create new opportunities, protect the most vulnerable communities and ensure that no one is left behind. Likewise, countries with greater historical responsibilities and greater economic capabilities, such as the EU, must play a leading role. The fight against climate change will only be effective if it is also a fight for climate justice.