Paris, 30th November-12 December 2015
By: Ade Indriani Zuchri, General Secretary Indonesia Green Union
COP 21 has just ended; there will be no more long debate, serious situation, disappointed gimmick, and high tense atmosphere. What can we pick from the biggest event, which was participated by 195 countries in Paris? A legal agreement in which all of participated countries should keep the global emission below 2 degrees. It became a long debate among civil organizations around the world. Some of them stated that it was a difficult action to be achieved due to escalated earth temperature with 0,85 Celsius since 1880, according to the meeting on climate change in 2014. Therefore, significant reduced emission is needed, especially from the biggest emission producing countries, such as the USA and China.
The aim of COP 21 was very clear, all of the countries should adopt the legal agreement to reduce the global carbon emission and keep the heating under the limit of 2 Celsius. However, according to environmental activists in Paris, the climate change in recent year is very unpredictable. By the average 7-8 Celsius, some people from sub-tropic countries considered that the weather is still too cold. Hence, the agreement on the heating within below 2 Celsius was highlighted from the participants of COP 21.
Realizing that the climate change possesses a threat and a bad potency towards society and earth, international cooperation is very needed to respond to and to accelerate the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. Countries also need to promote an awareness related to climate has become a threat to sustainability of local community, migrant workers, children, and disabled people as well as the development rights for gender equality, women empowerment, justice for every generation.
This writing will not merely discuss about what have contained in the Adaption of the Group Agreement, but also on how the countries see the society in the scheme of climate change. There are several points, which I want to highlight. Firstly, the use of big banners for sponsors of COP 21. Some of big companies clearly did unfair free trade, harmed human dignity, devastated the living source of local society and did not take side on women and children. The gratitude greeting from France government also had wounded the COP 21 journey. As a result, it weakened all of my trusts given to private sectors, including international NGO that had gave supports towards the climate grant.
Moreover, the inclusion of loss and damage caused by climate change in this event. The final draft on the Paris Agreement included the mechanism to tackle the finance loss experienced by some susceptible countries to the impact of climate change. Indeed, the big countries (such as, USA) requested the elimination of compensation on the impact of climate change because it can open an opportunity for a lot big companies to be sued.
In several panels, Indonesia merely discussed about the success story on the impact and scheme of climate change grants; such as how grants shall be compensated, and some of the big companies have been responsible to save the village area by their grant. The Climate Fund is considered to fulfill important requirements in the means of saving environment however its failure is due to the encumbering influence of big plantations and extractive industries. In a panel on integrated benefit sharing mechanism at village level in Indonesian pavilion, I also said that the mistakes of big plantations and extractive industry in Indonesia was not only destroying natural resources, but also abolishing the community’s living space, culture, and local community’s ability.
Through the new scheme, namely Green Projects, is there any benefits received by susceptible groups to climate change impacts?
Green Projects make a new protection and have the potential to threaten the sovereignty of local community on forest, water, farm, etc., which are belonged to them since decades ago. They have an advanced traditional ability to handle the natural change. According to Budiman Sujatmiko, Village Law has become core to interpreting the village budget also can empower the local community’s solidarity. Also, it can collaborate the anticipation and participation to empower local community to adapt with the climate change. On the other hand, the concept of Climate Fund is not included in living space rebuilding as the response to the mismanagement. It has confirmed by Sarekat Hijau Indonesia (Indonesia Green Union) in its main program, Green Village Development.
The false view of the State in comprehending those responsible for the local economic sovereignty has shown that the State takes aside on private sector. There are no countries which have solemnly shown the worst situation on forest, land, and other conflicts between big companies with local community. There was no voice about criminalization towards palm plantation companies, which have impacted the worst quality of society. Also, how the Europe countries and USA have declined their consumption on energy and tissue.
The commitment of COP21 countries’ participants should always be tested. The Paris Agreement is not a perfect product in accommodating all interests. However, this agreement has accommodated the needs of employment in the border regions of the countries provided with every consequence on climate change. It includes the interest of women, children, local community, and refugees. There were a lot of panel discussion, which were organized by the civil society organization highlighted on the impact of climate change towards women and other susceptible groups. In addition, State’s support is also needed to be one of the prominent things without giving the tolerance to private sector.
As a civil society, the State needs to be reminded whether they have violated humanity values towards susceptible groups. This event was ended with the collaborated action between civil society and several political parties involved in COP21.
See you all in COP 22 in Marocco 2016.
12/15/2015 – 04:54