Connect with us

News

Former CNN reporter Arwa Damon on the war in Ukraine one year later and the need for aid in Turkey and Syria | CNN

Published

on

Former CNN reporter Arwa Damon on the war in Ukraine one year later and the need for aid in Turkey and Syria | CNN



CNN
 — 

Arwa Damon is an award-winning journalist and CNN’s former Senior Worldwide Correspondent. After 18 years reporting from the world’s hotspots, she left the community final 12 months to concentrate on the non-profit she based: Worldwide Community for Support, Aid and Help (INARA). Her group helps folks affected by wars and disasters. Lately, Arwa spoke to CNN from the INARA workplace in Turkey because the group supplies assist in the aftermath of the devastating earthquake. She mentioned the issues she noticed whereas reporting on the conflict in Ukraine, the help that’s nonetheless wanted one 12 months later, why she based INARA and what she is presently seeing (and never seeing) within the world response to the earthquake in Turkey and Syria.

This dialog has been edited and condensed for readability.

The conflict in Ukraine is about to hit the one-year mark. Are you able to inform us about what you noticed and skilled whereas reporting there?

“I used to be on the Ukraine-Poland border. I believe what struck me most, I keep in mind standing there very distinctly, watching these Ukrainian households coming throughout the border. It was a scene that I’d seen so many occasions earlier than, exhausted moms dragging alongside kids who’re barely in a position to put one step in entrance of the opposite. The fixed click on, click on, click on of the wheel spinning round on the little suitcases that they’re carrying. Then these faces with these nearly clean expressions of simply shock and exhaustion. As I used to be watching this in actual time, my thoughts simply superimposed on high of all of it the opposite photographs I’d seen from different conflict zones, from Syria and from Iraq, and it was the identical actual picture. After which I used to be struck by the distinction although, as a result of when these Ukrainian households obtained throughout the border, there have been piles of garments ready for them. There have been heat cups of tea, there have been buses lined as much as take them someplace. There have been volunteers with indicators providing rides, and a part of me was so heartened and heat to see this outpouring of assist and a part of me was so devastated that very same outpouring of assist was not afforded to different populations.”

Advertisement

“The way in which folks responded to Ukraine is the way in which that we ought to be responding to folks in disaster. That ought to be our customary. That ought to be the norm.”

What sort of assist has INARA supplied to those that have been impacted by the conflict in Ukraine inside the final 12 months?

“We targeted so much on psychological well being. One of many first tasks that we did was type of recognizing that with all of those volunteers on the bottom, with all of those frontline people that existed on the market – there’s a little bit of sensitivity in terms of coping with those who have simply been via the trauma of conflict, particularly kids. There are specific fundamental do’s and don’ts that aren’t essentially apparent. We’ve a wealth of expertise coping with pediatric trauma sadly. So one of many first issues we did was tried to get info out to these frontline staff who have been providing coaching or distributing brochures in numerous languages simply to be sure that they have been conscious of the fundamentals wanted, by way of coping with kids which have been vastly traumatized. Additionally –and that is fairly vital– differentiating between what’s a traditional traumatic response and what are some key indicators that there’s going to be a probably deeper underlying longer lasting downside.”

“INARA’s major type of baseline for these kind of interventions is, ‘what are the gaps?’ We all know, from our personal expertise, that the primary hole we find yourself filling isn’t at the start of the disaster or the conflict. We all know that these gaps, that we find yourself filling, emerge when the media highlight strikes away when the funding has dried up and when the NGOs are usually not current on the bottom.”

“We’re constructing a secure house in partnership with a corporation from Mariupol. They particularly highlighted an issue the place quite a lot of these households which have fled from Mariupol, they have been female-led households. The lads had stayed behind; they have been both preventing or volunteering or had had been killed. And the moms wanted a secure place to have the ability to go away their kids in order that they may go discover work. What we’ve carried out, and what we’re nonetheless doing is constructing these secure areas that each act as areas the place the youngsters can get social assist, psychological well being assist, but additionally the place the mother and father can simply go away their youngsters for an extended period of time.”

Advertisement

Because the conflict closes in on the one-year mark, has INARA’s work elevated?

“The work itself has picked up, however once more, what we all know is that our work, particularly as INARA, goes to choose up much more down the road. We’re nonetheless going to be there when all people else leaves. That’s simply the way in which that we function. That’s who we’re. That’s our DNA. We keep. We’ll hold filling within the gaps.”

“Positively our work goes to choose up in Ukraine.”

For tactics to supply humanitarian support to Ukraine, you possibly can contribute to Influence Your World’s marketing campaign right here.

What’s INARA’s general focus and mission?

Advertisement

“The entire idea and premise for INARA may be very a lot primarily based by myself private expertise reporting for CNN from the conflict zones for effectively over a decade and a half. Continuously coming throughout kids who wanted medical remedy, however they have been unable to entry it. That’s, usually talking, for one in every of two causes: One is that the mother and father don’t know that sure organizations are literally offering the remedy that their youngster wants. The opposite is as a result of no group is offering what the kid wants. INARA was particularly constructed to fill in these gaps and create that community for the households in order that we find yourself connecting the donors, whether or not it’s particular person or bigger donors, to the household – to the remedy. We do that via our caseworkers, and we do that via the entire program that we’ve constructed.”

Arwa and Youssif

“It began out with the story of this little boy named Youssif that I coated for CNN and again in 2006 and 2007. Gunmen poured gasoline on his head when he was standing outdoors of his home taking part in after which set him on fireplace. Up to now, nobody actually is aware of why. Youssif’s father had gone door to door, NGO to NGO, ministry to ministry looking for somebody who might deal with his little boy after which he, by probability, ended up at CNN’s doorstep. I keep in mind the primary time he introduced Youssif into our workplace. He was consuming rice. However his face was such a hardened masks of rivers of scar tissue that he couldn’t open his mouth and so he would eat by taking just a few grains of rice and simply pushing them via his lips. He was very indignant. He was very sullen. And we have been all very deeply impacted by this little youngster.”

“The story went out and CNN’s telephones started blowing up. My e mail was blowing up. I imply, the assist was coming in from around the globe. It transcended boundaries and nationality and faith and all the pieces. Lengthy story very brief, among the finest moments of my profession was once I was in a position to name Youssif’s household and say, ‘Your little boy’s going to get assist. You’re all going to America.’ His case was picked up by the Youngsters’s Burn Basis, after which CNN viewers have been donating to cowl the price of his medical remedy.”

Arwa on how INARA obtained began

Advertisement

“Quick ahead to 2012 and I’m protecting Syria and it’s very miserable and it feels as if it doesn’t matter what we do, irrespective of how many individuals die, we’re not likely shifting the needle in any respect by way of this horrendous trajectory. We are able to all see the nation happening. It simply grew to become this ‘I have to do extra, I have to do one thing.’ I used to be remembering all these different tales and I used to be remembering all these different occasions after we couldn’t at all times report the story of the kid that was injured, however we’d simply determine it out amongst ourselves. It grew to become, ‘Properly, why not create a charity?’ We’re simply going to determine it out for these households as a result of we are able to determine it out.”

“There’s completely no logical purpose in my thoughts why a toddler who has been injured by conflict or battle or something to do with that ought to not get the medical remedy that they deserve. And so INARA was born. Now we do medical remedy. We’ve this entire holistic remedy plan the place we even have in-house psychological well being professionals. So, the kid is available in, they get assessed for medical, they get assessed for psychological well being, we construct up their remedy plan concurrently. We even have household remedy periods.”

How has INARA been affected by the earthquake in Turkey and Syria?

“I’m speaking to you from Turkey proper now. INARA’s Turkey workplace is positioned in Gaziantep, which may be very near the epicenter of the earthquake. Our workers all dwell in Gaziantep. Our places of work and that entire space was impacted by the earthquake. That’s the place all of our beneficiaries dwell. That’s the place all the youngsters who we deal with dwell. That’s the place all their households dwell. We additionally had quite a few workers who’re over in Antakya, which was very badly hit. Fortunately, fortunately, the entire workers are bodily okay. However lots of them are deeply, deeply traumatized.”

Advertisement

“You even have to recollect and acknowledge that our workers in Turkey are all Syrian refugees themselves, barring one or two. So, it’s this very deep, intense, compound trauma.”

“In terms of our Speedy Response Program, we don’t simply concentrate on kids. It’s that very same idea of, ‘The place are the gaps? How do we discover them, and the way will we fill them?’ So particular to our response for Turkey and Syria, it’s actually trying and looking for the populations that different organizations are unable to achieve after which we’re doing very particular focused distributions of support. We don’t have the generic basket that goes out. It’s very a lot needs-based.”

“We additionally want to speak about what’s occurring in Syria, or not occurring in Syria, as a result of primarily you see this outpouring of assist for Turkey and it’s unbelievable and all of those worldwide rescue groups are coming in and all of this support is coming in by land and sea and air. And simply throughout the border, just like the shortest distance away, folks died as a result of there weren’t sufficient diggers and if there weren’t diggers, there wasn’t sufficient gas to run the diggers and the help wasn’t coming in and the hospitals have been destroyed.”

“We’re partnering with organizations that work in Syria. The necessity there’s so large for all the pieces that we’re simply doing fundamental humanitarian help and partnership with organizations which are already there.”

INARA workers hand out aid in Turkey to earthquake survivors.

How completely different has it been for you going from reporting on wars and disasters full-time, to now, operating this basis and serving to full-time?

Advertisement

“It’s very, very completely different. Sure, I’m operating INARA proper now, but it surely’s nonetheless a pure volunteer factor. I’m nonetheless storytelling. I’m nonetheless doing journalism, simply otherwise. However sure, being right here as an support employee versus a journalist is a really completely different dynamic.”

“The one factor I do like about doing the help factor is that it offers me extra time to simply sit with folks. Once we’re right here as reporters, we’re on the market and sure, we’re being respectful to folks’s ache and sorrow, however finally, our job is to point out the world what that’s. So we wish to get in, we wish to get what we have to get and we wish to file it and get it on air. Being right here on the help aspect of issues permits me extra time to simply sit and discuss to folks.”

“Now my mind has this completely different degree of depth it’s attempting to cope with as a result of we’re not simply attempting to plan for tomorrow. We’re attempting to plan, ‘What are we going to do in six months? What’s our long-term sport plan right here?’ as a result of we’re right here to remain.”

“We’re just like the little NGO that simply will get it carried out. Give us an issue, we’re gonna determine learn how to resolve it. You need assistance, we’re gonna determine learn how to get it to you.”

You may make a distinction for the victims of the earthquake in Turkey and Syria via Influence Your World’s marketing campaign right here.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

News

Starbucks pares hedging programme despite coffee market surge

Published

on

Starbucks pares hedging programme despite coffee market surge

Starbucks has slashed its use of hedges against coffee price shocks even as the price of beans has soared, raising concerns that it may be unusually exposed to market swings. 

The world’s largest café chain held less than $200mn worth of fixed-price contracts for so-called green, or unroasted, coffee at the end of its fiscal year in September, according to its newly filed annual report, down from $1bn as recently as 2019. 

The decline has occurred at a time when roasters confront supply deficits after persistently poor crops in major exporters such as Brazil. Benchmark coffee futures rose above $3 a pound in New York on Friday to a 13-year high, following a more than 70 per cent gain in the past 12 months. 

Starbucks buys 3 per cent of the world’s coffee to supply its 40,000 cafés and retail businesses. A team based in Lausanne, Switzerland manages purchasing high-quality arabica beans under a subsidiary named the Starbucks Coffee Trading Company. The decline in the value of its fixed-price contracts has attracted attention on Wall Street. 

“They are substantially less hedged than they used to be. It makes the next 12 months of coffee prices more important than they’ve ever been,” said Gregory Francfort, a restaurant analyst at Guggenheim Securities.   

Advertisement

New Starbucks chief executive Brian Niccol is in the the early stages of a plan to revive flagging sales at cafés. One of his goals is to restore its appeal as a community coffee house. “At Starbucks, coffee comes first,” he said in video remarks last month. 

The company is not alone among roasters in letting price-cover slip during an explosive market rally. Data from the US commodity futures regulator shows commercial traders have sharply reduced their contracts to buy arabica.

A coffee trader familiar with Starbucks’ operations says the majority of its purchases are made with so-called “price-to-be-fixed” contracts, which establish a quantity, delivery month and the amount of price premium to New York’s futures market. The final purchase price is agreed later.

“When a market rallies significantly and quickly, as coffee has done, the roasting community in general tends to let coverage decline,” the trader said.

Starbucks’ 56 “tier one” suppliers range from global commodities trading houses such as Louis Dreyfus and Olam to farmer co-operatives. The company in 2021 said it bought 800mn lbs of coffee annually — an amount that would cost $2.4bn at current benchmark prices. 

Advertisement

Starbucks had $1.1bn in green coffee purchase obligations on its books as of September, according to its annual report.

The company buys green coffee using two types of contracts: fixed-price and price-to-be-fixed, according to its annual report. For the latter, the company also uses derivatives contracts to insure against market gyrations. 

Line chart of $mn showing Starbucks cuts value of 'fixed-price' coffee purchases

“Like others, right now we’re remaining agile in a very dynamic market,” Starbucks said in response to questions. “An example of that agility is that our current priced coverage is slightly lower than our typical range of 9-18 months.”  

Starbucks executives rarely discuss coffee hedging with Wall Street, but in 2021 — another period of furious price rises — then-CEO Kevin Johnson told analysts the company purchased 12 to 18 months in advance, and at the time had locked in prices for the next 14 months.

“We may be the only large buyer of green coffee that uses this approach, and that will serve us well as it gives us a significant advantage relative to our competitors who, if they don’t buy this far in advance, will certainly not have that cost structure that we put in place,” he said.

The value of Starbucks’ price-to-be-fixed contracts has fluctuated, ending the fiscal year in September at $929mn, according to the annual report.

Advertisement

That sum was more than a year ago, but well below levels of 2021 and 2022. Coffee derivatives contracts held by Starbucks were worth $154mn, the lowest September value since 2020. 

Starbucks’ coffee trading operation is headed by Andres Berron, an eight-year employee of the company, according to his LinkedIn page. The company declined to make him available for comment. 

Starbucks said its approach to purchasing coffee hasn’t changed. The company pointed out that its current stocks of physical coffee are a cushion against volatility in the spot market.

Inventories of unroasted and roasted beans combined were worth about $920mn as of September, according to the annual report, the lowest fiscal year-end figure since 2021. 

“We keep a healthy and ample green coffee inventory that outpaces other roasters,” Starbucks said. 

Advertisement

Global coffee production has been rocked by poor weather. The US Department of Agriculture last week cut its production forecast for Brazil, the top supplier, citing irregular rainfall and high temperatures that could depress its next harvest. 

“The global coffee market just can’t seem to catch a break,” said Kona Haque, a commodities analyst at ED&F Man in London. “Just when you think maybe this year we’re going to get a big crop and finally get back to a surplus and rebuild our stocks, you get another adverse-weather event in either Brazil or Vietnam, and things get tight again.” 

“Because markets now are tighter than usual, there is upward pressure on prices,” she added. “In a rising price environment, clearly you want to be hedged. You do not want to be exposed to rising spot prices.” 

Continue Reading

News

With talks teetering, climate negotiators struck a controversial $300 billion deal

Published

on

With talks teetering, climate negotiators struck a controversial 0 billion deal

Activists demanding that rich countries pay up for climate finance for developing countries at the COP29 climate conference in Baku, Azerbaijan.

Sean Gallup/Getty Images/Getty Images Europe


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Sean Gallup/Getty Images/Getty Images Europe

Negotiators at a global climate conference in Baku, Azerbaijan, struck a last-minute deal for wealthy countries to help their poorer neighbors deal with global warming, saving the annual meeting as it verged on collapse.

From the outset, the focus of the United Nations’ COP29 climate conference was raising money to help developing nations cut their climate pollution and prepare for threats they face from extreme weather. Developing nations have contributed far less of the pollution heating the planet, but suffer the harms of extreme weather disproportionately.

Those countries had pushed for climate funding of $1.3 trillion a year. But the final agreement set a goal of $300 billion annually. Some representatives of developing countries were furious at the outcome, saying $300 billion a year from industrialized countries is far short of what vulnerable nations need.

Advertisement

“It’s a paltry sum,” said Chandni Raina, a member of India’s delegation, during the conference’s closing meeting. “It is not something that will enable conducive climate action that is necessary for the survival of our country and for the growth of our people, their livelihoods.”

Announced more than a day after the talks were scheduled to end, the funding deal was brokered after world leaders and climate activists leveled sharp criticism at industrialized nations, as well as the Azerbaijani officials who hosted the two-week meeting.

Raina criticized the meeting’s president, Mukhtar Babayev, for passing the financing agreement before he gave countries a chance to comment.

“Trust is the basis for all action, and this incident is indicative of a lack of trust, a lack of collaboration on an issue which is a global challenge, which is faced by all of us, and most of all by the developing countries that are not responsible for it,” Raina said. “But, we’ve seen what you have done.”

Mohamed Adow, director of the Kenyan think tank Power Shift Africa, said at a press conference on Friday that this was “the worst COP in recent memory.”

Advertisement

Taking aim at wealthy countries that built their economies over centuries using fossil fuels, Adow added, “You can’t have a negotiation if only one side is actually engaging in good faith and putting forward proposals that [respond] to the needs on the ground.”

The climate talks were held at the end of what will almost certainly be the hottest year on record. Global temperatures are rising mainly because of heat-trapping pollution that’s created when people burn fossil fuels like coal and oil. Global emissions rose to a new record in 2023, and the world is nowhere close to meeting a goal countries set to limit warming in order to reduce the risks of worsening disasters from extreme weather like floods and heat waves.

The leaders of some developing countries briefly walked out of negotiations on Saturday. Cedric Schuster, Samoa’s minister of natural resources and environment, said in a statement that developing countries were treated with “contempt.”

“What is happening here is highlighting what a different boat our vulnerable countries are in, compared to the developed countries,” said Schuster, who chairs the Alliance of Small Island States, which represents dozens of low-lying nations from the Caribbean to the South China Sea. “After this COP29 ends, we cannot just sail off into the sunset. We are literally sinking.”

President Biden said in a statement that the COP29 climate-funding agreement was “ambitious.” “It will help mobilize the level of finance – from all sources – that developing countries need to accelerate the transition to clean, sustainable economies, while opening up new markets for American-made electric vehicles, batteries, and other products,” Biden said.

Advertisement

However, the recent U.S. presidential election hung over the conference. Voters’ decision to send Donald Trump back to the White House raises questions about whether the country will continue working on global climate initiatives. Trump, who has promised to pursue policies in his second term to support the country’s oil and gas industry, is expected to again pull the U.S. out of the landmark 2015 Paris climate agreement.

Here’s what else did — and didn’t — happen at COP29.

A sign displays an unofficial temperature as jets taxi at Sky Harbor International Airport at dusk, July 12, 2023, in Phoenix.

A sign displays an unofficial temperature as jets taxi at Sky Harbor International Airport at dusk, July 12, 2023, in Phoenix.

Matt York/AP


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Matt York/AP

Deal calls for at least $300 billion annually for developing countries

Negotiators agreed that wealthy countries will provide developing nations at least $300 billion a year in climate funding by 2035.

That’s triple what poorer nations were promised under a previous commitment, but it’s a fraction of what researchers say is required. A report released during the conference shows developing nations other than China — which boasts the world’s second-largest economy and is the second-biggest contributor of climate pollution historically — will need about $1.3 trillion in climate funding annually.

Advertisement

The final COP29 agreement includes a vague goal for “all actors to work together” to provide $1.3 trillion to developing nations by 2035.

“The poorest and most vulnerable nations are rightfully disappointed that wealthier countries didn’t put more money on the table when billions of people’s lives are at stake,” Ani Dasgupta, chief executive of the World Resources Institute, said in a statement.

The debate over climate funding traces back more than a decade. In 2009, industrialized countries set a goal to give developing nations $100 billion a year by 2020 to help them deal with climate change. In 2015, countries extended the pledge to 2025. They also said they’d set a new goal that reflects the “needs and priorities of developing countries” before the old one expires. That’s what negotiators fought over in Azerbaijan.

Heading into this year’s meeting, it was clear developing countries are in a bind. They need help, but whatever money wealthy nations pledged was certain to be just a portion of what’s required to cope with climate change. And industrialized countries were slow to deliver on their original commitment, so poorer nations are relying on unreliable neighbors.

The dollar figure wasn’t the only point of contention. Leaders of vulnerable states say they need a lot more assistance to come in the form of grants — not loans — in order to avoid increasing the debt burden on poorer countries.

Advertisement

The final agreement doesn’t guarantee poorer countries the grant funding they say they need. The document says the $300 billion annually from wealthy countries can come from “a wide variety of sources,” including private investors.

Developing countries have also pushed for compensation for the damages from climate-related disasters, like more intense storms and droughts. Last year, richer countries agreed to create a “loss and damage” fund to fill that need, housed at the World Bank. So far, more than $720 million has been pledged and at COP29, countries officially opened the fund for donations.

A small number of countries have received payments already, part of pilot projects organized by Scotland.

A call to phase out fossil fuels faces pushback

At last year’s meeting in Dubai, negotiators for the first time agreed countries should transition away from fossil fuels. This time, calls to reiterate that agreement faced pushback.

The world’s largest oil exporter, Saudi Arabia, was identified as a primary force behind that effort.

Advertisement

“Their blatant obstruction has ensured there’s no clear commitment to phase out fossil fuels — an outrageous betrayal of humanity and the urgent fight against climate catastrophe,” Maria Ron Balsera, executive director of the Center for Economic and Social Rights said in a statement.

The host country for COP29 also came in for criticism.

Oil and gas dominate Azerbaijan’s economy, representing 90% of the country’s exports and finance about 60% of the government’s budget. An official with the COP29 host country, Azerbaijan, was recorded by the human rights group Global Witness arranging a meeting to discuss potential fossil fuel deals.

At COP29, Azerbaijan’s president, Ilham Aliyev, said natural resources like oil and gas are a “gift of the god.”

“And countries should not be blamed for having them, and should not be blamed for bringing these resources to the market,” Aliyev said. “Because the market needs them. The people need them.”

Advertisement
A portion of Amazon rainforest deforested by illegal fire in Brazil this August.

A portion of Amazon rainforest deforested by illegal fire in Brazil this August. 

Evaristo Sa/AFP via Getty


hide caption

toggle caption

Evaristo Sa/AFP via Getty

Advertisement

Some countries unveiled new climate targets

As part of the Paris climate treaty, countries have to announce plans to make deeper cuts to their own climate pollution by 2035. The hope is that all the pollution cuts combined will limit the world’s warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit, compared to temperatures from the 1800s.

Targets are due in February, and with a looming deadline, some countries announced their targets in Baku.

United Kingdom Prime Minister Keir Starmer made a speech early in the summit, announcing the country would slash emissions 81% by 2035, compared with 1990 levels. “It’s very important to establish ambition, and that’s exactly what the UK [target] did,” says Ani Dasgupta, president of the World Resources Institute.

Brazil, whose climate emissions come mostly from rampant deforestation in the Amazon, also announced its target. It plans to cut climate pollution by as much as two-thirds by 2035 compared to 2005 levels. While Brazil says its cuts align with the 1.5 degree goal, climate policy experts say that’s still unclear.

Advertisement

Deal over carbon markets draws criticism

One of the goals at this year’s summit was to finally agree on rules for a global system for trading carbon offsets, or carbon credits.

Carbon credits are basically a promise. A promise that when a country or business purchases a credit, that money is going toward an action that reduces or removes planet-heating pollution.

At the summit, negotiators concluded negotiations over parts of “Article 6”, a part of the Paris Agreement that allows countries to cooperate to reach their climate targets, including by trading carbon credits.

A leading company in the carbon credit sector, Verra, called it “a historic step.”

But many carbon market researchers voiced concerns. Research has repeatedly shown that many carbon credits don’t reduce emissions. In fact, a new research paper looking at thousands of carbon credit projects found less than 16% of the carbon credits are actually reducing climate pollution.

Advertisement

The new rules “could end up undermining our efforts to rein in emissions rather than advancing them,” said the nonprofit Carbon Market Watch in a statement.

Funding for health initiatives falls short

At last year’s COP28 in Dubai, advocacy organizations made the case that future climate negotiations should include a new priority: protecting human health. Climate change, they said, is now one of the biggest threats to health worldwide. It is amplifying health risks from extreme weather, such as dangerous heat waves like those in Europe or India that killed tens of thousands of people in recent years. It also spurs the spread of infectious disease, worsens air quality, and stresses people’s mental well-being.

“Climate change itself is an overarching issue that influences health,” said Florence Ngala, chief environmental officer at the Ministry of Health in Zambia, at the meeting this year.

In her country this year, a climate-worsened flood lasted for two months and led to thousands of cases of cholera and 800 deaths. But the impacts didn’t end when the flood receded: the disruption to health services lasted for months, and some health facilities postponed upgrades that might have helped them become more resilient.

Advocates hoped at COP29, developed countries would commit to increasing the amount of money flowing to threatened countries like Zambia. Those would be critical to shoring up health services that protect people from climate-worsened risks and to developing climate-resilient health facilities. But the final commitments fall short of what many developing countries were demanding—and what organizations like the World Bank have suggested is needed.

Advertisement

“It is deeply discouraging to yet again see governments of wealthy countries that claim to be leaders kick the can on climate down the road, at the cost of the lives and health of their populations, and of everyone around the world” says Jeni Miller, executive director of the Global Climate and Health Alliance.

Continue Reading

News

Kick-start for carbon credit market after loose rules agreed at COP29

Published

on

Kick-start for carbon credit market after loose rules agreed at COP29

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Countries at the United Nations climate summit in Baku struck a final deal on the broad rules to launch carbon trading markets, almost a decade after being first proposed.

The agreement passed at the UN COP29 climate summit late on Saturday night will allow countries and companies to trade credits for cuts in carbon emissions to offset their carbon footprints.

The carbon trading mechanism had first been formally sketched out in the 2015 Paris agreement on limiting climate change, as a way for polluters to pay for other countries to cut emissions on their behalf. 

Advertisement

But it has proved controversial over fears it will not result in the promised removal of carbon from the atmosphere.

The head of delegation for a group of heavily forested countries, including Bolivia and the Democratic Republic of Congo, Kevin Conrad, said “properly regulated, markets can become a force for good, and start to reverse the market failures causing environmental and atmospheric destruction”.

The birth of the market prompted cheers and standing ovations by UN negotiators in the first session of the final plenary, in a rare breakthrough at the summit that was otherwise on the verge of collapse.

States and companies will be able to trade credits meant to represent one tonne of carbon dioxide saved or removed from the atmosphere, under mechanisms subject to loose oversight by the UN and designed to avoid double-counting of emissions cuts.

The final agreement overcame a quarrel about a proposed UN registry for tracking the flow in emission claims, with the US forced to compromise on how much power this registry should have.

Advertisement

Host country Azerbaijan made the issue of carbon emissions trading a priority, pushing successfully on the first day of the two-week summit for countries to adopt an initial element of the global market.

In subsequent negotiations to settle the rules, it drove the participants to overcome their disagreements. This included on a series of trade-offs between requiring more rigorous accounting and easing the pathway to get the market off the ground, with a rule book on principles for how credits should be traded, counted and checked.

Countries and companies took advantage of the prospective launch of the market by signing preliminary deals in recent weeks. Commodity trader Trafigura announced a “pilot” carbon project to help Mozambique develop carbon restoration projects.

Some experts warned however that the new market could face many of the same greenwashing allegations that have plagued the existing unregulated trade in credits between companies.

These have caused the voluntary credit markets to shrink from $1.4bn in 2022 to $1.1bn last year, based on MSCI Carbon Markets estimates.

Advertisement

“The deal leaves a lot of trust in the hands of [countries] which is a problem because the rules themselves are not yet net zero [emissions] aligned,” said Injy Johnstone, a research fellow at the University of Oxford.

The concerns were echoed by Isa Mulder of Carbon Market Watch, who said the “dangerously loose and opaque” deal enshrined a “free-for-all” approach.

Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.

UN carbon market experts will continue to discuss which types of credits countries can buy. For example, some countries would like to sell credits linked to hypothetical CO₂ that is not emitted, for example from protecting a forest, closing a coal mine or cooking on a stove using gas rather than wood as fuel, to cancel out real greenhouse gas emissions.

These types of credits could ultimately lead to more CO₂ entering the atmosphere, some experts say, in part because it could lessen the incentive for polluters to make plans to cut their underlying emissions.

Advertisement

One negotiator described discussions as “very, very tough” before ultimately settling on a “buyer beware” approach which will rely mainly on transparency to shame countries which fall into bad practice.

The money raised by carbon deals could help contribute to the climate finance needs of poorer countries, which economists estimated at $1.3tn a year.

But others expressed caution about the solutions provided by carbon emissions trading. Brazil’s environment minister Marina Silva said it was not a “panacea” for boosting finance to developing countries.

Climate Capital

Where climate change meets business, markets and politics. Explore the FT’s coverage here.

Are you curious about the FT’s environmental sustainability commitments? Find out more about our science-based targets here

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending