DCJ/CAN – ENGO Intervention June 24

Thank you co-chairs. I am speaking on behalf of the Demand Climate Justice and Climate Action Network, the two ENGO constituencies. We are missing the flexibility expressed in the first week and we are concerned about the way forward. We would like to stress the great urgency for this work programme to deliver both, strong principles deriving from the dialogues AND actionable outcomes for people on the ground. The adoption of a solid just transition text stands in sharp contrast to the current global climate riddled with violent conflict. 

We thank the Co-Chairs for developing a draft text that includes some of the proposals observer constituencies and civil society had forwarded. 

On Para 11, we welcome that the key messages from the dialogues are being developed into guiding principles on just transition. We consider that the next dialogues should provide a space to further develop these principles and address certain dimensions of just transition that have not been sufficiently addressed here yet: such as the role of international cooperation and the importance of applying just transition in critical minerals, renewable energy phase-in, food and agriculture systems, and others.

We see para 24-27 as fundamental to address the need for support and international cooperation for just transition pathways

On Para 27 on the role of non-market approaches, we call on all parties to keep this in the decision text.

On Para 28, we strongly urge parties to establish a global mechanism, the Belem Action Mechanism for JT,  that ensures action on just transition that benefits workers, affected communities, and all rightsholders on the ground. We find promise in the strong signals sent by observer constituencies in their alignment on establishing this mechanism. We stand in solidarity with rightsholders in their pursuit of a just transition.

We urge greater specificity in the description of each of the institutional arrangements forwarded by parties, especially listing down the functions that these arrangements will have. Any new institutional arrangement must have a knowledge-sharing arm, an implementation arm for technical assistance, and a coordination body that enables the formal representation of groups affected and rightsholders that must be involved in the decision-making of the principles, practices, and processes of the just transition.

Lastly, we reiterate our call for parties to concretize their sentiments on inclusivity and participation of rightsholders in just transition. This can be done through a decision text that maintains explicit references to human rights in Paras 11b, 11h, and 18 and by Calling on countries to establish national institutions for peoples’ participation that can ensure the involvement of all rights holders in planning and implementing just transition measures and policies at the national and local levels. We are open to engaging all parties in developing language that can address these demands and enable progress on the road to Belem.

My name is Lorraine, speaking on behalf of rights-based constituencies – YOUNGO, Women and Gender Constituency, and both ENGOS – Climate Action Network and the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

We stand in solidarity with those suffering from the wars across the world and strongly condemn that public funds go to funding militarism instead of climate finance. We call for an end to the wars.

We value the immense work done so far on the Global Goal on Adaptation, but it is time that we ensure that people and ecosystems are actually protected from devastating climate impacts, and for that, adaptation finance is an absolute prerequisite. Any further delay in the provision of finance for adaptation will translate into loss of life and permanent displacement across the Global South. We need to start both the technical phase and the political phase now. 

We are all aware that Article 9.1 creates a hard obligation for developed country Parties to provide finance for developing country Parties. Thus, the inclusion of MOI indicators in the GGA is crucial to track this financial provision from developed to developing countries. We really cannot leave Bonn without agreeing on a way forward on the MOI indicators. Such indicators need to assess the provision of finance based on the principle of Justice and Equity, based on CBDR – and thus we cannot accept any indicators on ODA and national budgets. Closing the adaptation gap requires scaled-up grant-based public funding that is accessible, predictable, and in alignment with local priorities. So we also demand a follow-up to the Glasgow commitment. 

Let us be clear – adaptation is a right to survival, especially of the most vulnerable. We urge you to center them in cross-cutting considerations. No framework of indicators will be complete without consideration for the specific circumstances of gender, local and Indigenous communities, age, disability, racial and ethnic minorities, migrants, and workers. 

To close our intervention, we recognize that global solidarity is at a crossroads today. We want to believe in multilateralism, which we have all put our faith in. So, for communities across the world to really believe in your “commitment to progress,” we need immediate action for our collective survival, we need the provision of adaptation finance, and MOI indicators to track this, and we need it NOW.

My name is Catherine from World Animal Protection. I am speaking on behalf of the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice, one of the ENGOs.

We congratulate the room on the conduct of the first workshop. We were pleased to hear agroecology and just transition mentioned in several party presentations, and we left the day full of hope. 

As the only formal space within the UNFCCC that is mandated to guide global climate action on food and agriculture, it is your responsibility to address the ongoing climate crisis in the sector. That said, we are noting our deep disappointment that this Joint Work is in the state that it is.

However, we are still meaningfully engaging with the matter at hand. We appreciate the annexes proposed for the next workshop on means of implementation, which covers substantive issues, including clarifying the state of financing of climate action in agriculture and what vulnerable groups need in order to access these funds. We also appreciate its inclusion in para 7 of the text.

Seeing the dire state of this Joint Work – unable to agree on a text, unsure whether the synthesis report can be completed, the portal improved, or if the next workshop can be held – we are once again confronted by your complete disregard for the suffering of millions of people as we speak. Let’s bring back substantive discussions on agriculture in this agriculture negotiation room – and not be bogged down by procedural issues. As movements representing frontline communities experiencing the brunt of the food and climate crises, we urge you to ring all the alarms to ensure that this JW completes what it has been mandated to do – the implementation of climate action for a food-secured world where small producers and vulnerable communities thrive.

DCJ/CAN – ENGO Intervention June 21

Tobias Holle

Thank you for giving us the floor. I’m speaking on behalf of ENGO-CAN and ENGO-DCJ

We align with the intervention of the other rights-based constituencies and explicitly echo the intervention by the WGC to call on Parties to propose the creation of a formal Disability Constituency to represent their interests directly – they need to sit at this very table.

In the last years we have seen a continued assault on civic space, in and outside of the venue with regrettable complicity of the UNFCCC. Freedom of speech and of peaceful assembly are human rights and key for effective climate action at all levels, local, regional, and international, and must be protected in order to ensure meaningful observer engagement in the process which will lead to stronger outcomes. We urge parties to require the Secretariat to protect freedom of expression and peaceful assembly in the Blue Zone and to facilitate advocacy actions that do not unduly restrict the ability of observers to creatively and powerfully communicate their messages.

The crucial tasks of observers can only be fulfilled if they are in negotiation rooms – assuming they received a visa as already stated in our intervention yesterday. Those rooms have to be open, accessible and interpretation needs to be guaranteed. The ticketing system is inadequate and chaotic; there should be space for at least 2 people per constituency in each negotiation. We welcome the promise by the COP30 presidency to include all rights-based observer constituencies in the pre-COP events and look forward to a meaningful engagement.

We thank the parties proposed constituencies to hold their interventions in plenary sessions after the regional groups which is a lasting proposal from constituencies.

At the same time, the intransparency of the badge allocation processes including the allocation of Party Overflow badges is an ongoing issue and limits us in our coordination throughout the year as well as proposing concrete steps in more meaningful engagement regarding the increased number of observer organisations.

We also must recognize that observers representing polluting interests are beholden to advance an agenda that is in direct contravention with the mandate of the UNFCCC. We call on Parties to finally take steps to protect the UNFCCC from the undue and vested interests of the fossil fuel and other emissions intensive industries. This should involve adopting rigorous measures to guide engagement with representatives from non-governmental organizations. These measures should prevent entities with private, polluting interests from unduly influencing or undermining UNFCCC activities and processes through their engagement as representatives of non-governmental organizations; strengthen the process for admission and accreditation of observers within the UNFCCC and its convenings; and draw on established international precedents, including from other UN bodies.

Thank you!

Thank you co-chairs. My name is Caroline Brouillette and I am speaking on behalf of the Climate Action Network and Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice, the two ENGO constituencies.

Civil Society has been asking for operational decisions on Just Transition since the beginning of the work programme, and would like to make a case for five operational decisions: 

• Our version of an institutional arrangement for JT, A Global Just Transition Mechanism
• Principles on Just Transition that would underpin this mechanism
• Guidance for national participatory institutions on Just Transition.
• A call for the Financial mechanism to expand provision of and access to funding for JT
• Explicitly reference  to dimensions of the transition that must be covered by the work programme to ensure those happen in a just way, such as but not limited to:

• fossil fuel phase-out
• food systems transformation
• ecosystem protection and restoration, 
• renewable energy deployment
• Fair supply chains in transition minerals, 
• Adaptation and climate resilience
• and industry and /transport alignment with climate goals

We welcome the support by many parties already for the launch of a Global Just Transition mechanism. From our perspective, the mechanism would accelerate progress and cooperation through 3 key functions, (very well explained by South Africa):  coordination,  knowledge sharing  and implementation.

We are hearing Parties signaling the risk of an institutional arrangement such as our call for Belem Action Mechanism for JT, adding to fragmentation or duplication.  Outside of this space, Just Transition is being  disconnected from the goals of the Paris agreement, and  many voices are absent  in steering Just Transition work moving forward. If Parties want all efforts on just transition to be directed towards achieving the objectives of the PA, in a way that secures justice for workers, communities and countries, it belongs to the UNFCCC to facilitate, accelerate and contribute to the coordination of efforts through the Global Mechanism. 

The idea that political messages alone will satisfy workers and communities,  is disappointing.  We do expect Parties that reflect on how their own communities will feel, in the moment in which we are living now, with inequalities and climate impacts rising and serious concerns on climate policies impacts on working people, that the only thing this process can do is send a message for others to follow.

We will submit a more detailed version of this statement in full to the Secretariat for distribution to parties. Thank you very much.