Upload
others
View
6
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Salā George Carter
Department of Pacific Affairs
Coral Bell School of Asian and Pacific Affairs, CAP
The Australian National University
From Sinking to Syncing:
Negotiating a climate
consensus, and regional
coalition behaviour of Pacific
Island states
“In 2015, the Pacific Island Countries, being the frontline
states in the fight against climate change, were
instrumental in concluding one of the toughest ever
global negotiations for the Paris Agreement.
Collectively, the Pacific Leaders and their
delegations doggedly pursued our region’s priorities
until we were able to make the world see climate change
through our eyes, as the most vulnerable communities to
climate change impacts.”
Tuilaepa Aiono Dr. Sailele Malielegaoi
Prime Minister of Samoa
VUW Pacific Climate Change Conference
February 21, 2018
2
3
“there has been a failure of traditional diplomacy at the UN ...
we need a new brand of diplomacy ... one voice diplomacy”
Foreign Minister Tony de Brum,
Marshall Islands
“we need to establish alliances that are
non-traditional, that serve our best interest”
President Anote Tong,
Kiribati
“ Pacific negotiators need to be in sync at the UNFCCC”
Prime Minister Enele Sopoaga
Tuvalu
Puzzle: SYNC?
– Multilateral climate change negotiations
– Pacific Islands states involvement in climate negotiations?
– Pacific Islands regional solidarity?
– State national climate-interest?
– Inside Negotiations: unpacking the ‘state’, people,
relationships, strategies, the politics?
– Processes and Mechanics of Building and
Reaching Consensus
4
• Cook Islands
• Fiji
• Kiribati
• Marshall Islands
• F.S Micronesia
• Nauru
• Niue
• Palau
• Papua New Guinea
• Samoa
• Solomon Islands
• Tonga
• Tuvalu
• Vanuatu
Research Question
In multilateral climate change negotiations, how do states
participate building and reaching consensus?
In multilateral climate change negotiations, how do (small Pacific
island) states participate building and reaching consensus?
- Who are the actors that are influential in the negotiation process?
- What are the negotiation activities (monitoring, coordinating and
bargaining) they employ in building consensus?
-What states (and their actors) are influential at the consensus point or
the final moments in concluding an agreement?
5
MethodologyInductive qualitative methodology utilising principles from following:
– Process Tracing
• causal inference/ causes-of-effect: variables in negotiation process that
enable consensus (usefulness in unpacking historical narratives and
decision making)
• positivist hypotheses on existing consensus decision making
– Global Political Ethnography
• multi-sited and multi-level policy formulation and negotiation
• impact of (local and) actors in international policy making (and
implementation)
– Talanoa Method
methods of (cultural empathetic reciprocal relationship of the participant and the
researcher the complexity of cultural and political lived realities of participants for
flexible opened-ended discussions ‘talanoaga’
6
SOURCES:
• Document Analysis:
UNFCCC official, ENB
reports, blogs and
media
• Participant
Observation field notes
9 sites/ forums
• Talanoaga: 67
accounts (35 people)-
informal corridor talks
7
International UNFCCC Road
(Formal Process)
• Jan- Geneva Text ADP-8
• Jun- Bonn Session ADP-9
• Aug- Bonn Session ADP 10
• Oct- Bonn Session ADP 11
• Dec- Paris ADP 12
Regional Road (Informal Process)
• April- Liufou (Oceania 21)
• April- HLSM (SPREP Pacific Climate
Change Roundtable
• May- PALM 7 (Japan)
• July- Boknake Haus (MSP)
• July-Taputapuitea (PLG)
• August- SPREP meeting
• August- IPIC (India)
• Sept- Suva (PIDF)
• Sept- SIS Pacific (PIF SIS)
• Sept- Port Moresby (PIF)
• November- HLSM (SPREP)
• November- PSIDS New York
• November- CHOGM
• November- France-Oceania Summit
December COP 21- PARIS
Multilateral Consensus Decision Making Literature
• Psychology/Anthropology/Sociology- Meeting Science (conceptualising consensus in
multilateral meeting context)
– Consensus is not Unanimity, Avoidance ‘voting’;
– Interactional Consensus Participants determine when and where consensus exits;
– Absence of opposition (agreeing not to disagree, can live with decision)
– Logic of Consent (to finalise, continue to cease)
• International Relations- Decision Making Theories and Multilateral Studies
– Decision Making Theories (Individual/Cognitive, Small Group, Game Theory)
– Procedural/Process Norm since post 1945 with voting; but preferred procedure over voting since
1970’s to present
– Consensus, irrespective of power dynamics, controlled by minority in disagreement
– UNFCCC regime no consensus on consensus procedure; regime of consensus
8
• Diplomatic Studies: Negotiation Analysis (integrative analysis and phases of
negotiations)
– Consensus is the act or practice of negotiation; negotiation is consensus (multi-, many);
compromise (bi-)
– Achieved through incremental participation, or logic of consent in various phases
– Multilateral consensus achieve “lowest common denominator agreements”
• Pacific Studies/Political Science (idiosyncratic practices Pacific consensus?)
– ‘Pacific Way’ Mara and elite decision making process at regional forums, compromise,
‘Islander Way’ and special political relations with Australia NZ
– ‘Melanesian Way’ of Consensus (blame and apology, before agreement)
– Compromise, solidarity or ‘unanimous compromise
9
Multilateral Consensus Decision Making Literature
Multilateral Consensus Framework Negotiation Integrative analysis emphasis on
negotiation phases, actors, and their activities
10
Sites1. UNFCCC ADP
2. PIDF
3. SIS
4. PIF
5. UNFCCC COP21Paris
Phases(Touval, Zartman)
• Pre-
negotiations
• Negotiations
• Agreement
• Actors- Coalition or political
groupings of countries
- State Delegation Position
- Leader/ Lead negotiator
(Individual)
• Activities(Druckman)
- Monitoring
- Coordinating
- Persuasive Debates
- Bargaining
Phases Actors Activities
Building
Consensus
Pre-negotiation
(Informal)
-Participants agreed;
Coalitions emerge
-Role Differentiation; leaders and
mediators
Leaders
State Delegations
Coalitions
Monitoring and
Coordinating
Informal Networking
Negotiation Stage
(Formal)
-Exchange of Information
-Explore Alternative Package
-Tentative Agreement
Leaders
State Delegations
Coalitions
Small ‘Coalescence
Groups’
Monitoring and
Coordinating
Persuasive Debates
Bargaining
Informal Networking
Reaching
Consensus
Agreement Stage
-Last Minute Scenario
-Consensus Point
Leaders
State Delegations
Small ‘Coalescence
Group’
Monitoring and
Coordinating
Bargaining
Informal Networking
11
Multilateral Consensus Framework
UNFCCC and the Pacific Islands• Pacific Islands in UNFCCC 1990-2014
– Alliance of Small Island States 1990 (leadership and formation, agenda
setting, ‘moral conscience’ and borrowed power)
– Other: G-77 and China (Fiji, Samoa PNG),
Least Developing Countries (2000 Tuvalu Solomons (Samoa)),
Coalition of Rainforests (2004 Papua New Guinea)
Climate Vulnerable Forum (2009 Kiribati)
Cartagena Dialogue (2010 Marshall Island)
– SIDS seat in the Bureaux (always Pacific) and special committees
• Climate Change and Regionalism- Forum Communique and multiple declarations since 1988
- SPREP climate science and technical (COPs support)
- Climate Change Action Plans and
12
Regional Politics: Climate Change Solidarity 2015
13
Organisation Declaration Date Participating Members
Melanesian Spearhead
Group
MSG Declaration on Environment and
Climate Change
2013 Fiji, PNG, Solomons, Vanuatu
Pacific Islands Forum Majuro Declaration for Climate Leadership 2013 Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall
Islands, Nauru, Niue, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon
Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, VanuatuAustralia, New Zealand
Oceania 21 Lifou Declaration “Paris 2015: Save
Oceania”
April Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, French Polynesia,
Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Nauru, New Caledonia, Palau, Samoa,
Solomon Islands
Niue*, Palau*, Tokelau*, Vanuatu* Timor Leste, Wallis Futuna
Micronesian Presidents’
Summit
Boknake Haus Declaration July Marshall, Palau, FS Micronesia
Polynesian Leaders’
Summit
Taputapuatea Polynesian Leaders
Declaration on Climate Change
July Cook Islands, Niue, Samoa, Tonga, Tuvalu,
American Samoa, French Polynesia, Tokelau
Pacific Islands
Development Forum
Suva Declaration on Climate Change Septe
mber
Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall
Islands, Nauru, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu,
Vanuatu**
French Polynesia, New Caledonia, Timor Leste, Tokelau
Pacific Islands Forum
Smaller Island States
Smaller Island States Leaders’
Declaration
Septe
mber
Cook Islands, Kiribati, Marshall, Nauru, Niue, Palau, Tuvalu
Pacific Island Forum Pacific Island Forum Leaders Declaration
on Climate Action
Septe
mber
Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall
Islands, Nauru, Niue, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon
Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu
Australia, New Zealand
The 14 Pacific island states who are signatory to UNFCCC are emphasised in BOLD
*Attended the Oceania 21 meeting but did not sign the final agreement. France, Australia and New Zealand representatives were also present as observers**Notable absence of Niue, Palau and Samoa at the Pacific Islands Development Forum
1. ADP 2-8 Bonn (June)- FOCUS: Coalition Consensus
- Mechanics of Participating in Coalitions
• Pre-negotiations (5days)
– Coalitions: AOSIS, G-77, CfRN, Cartagena (LDC)
• Negotiations (10 days)
– Formal: Contact Group
– Informal: 12 Facilitated Negotiation Groups and spinfoffs
• Agreement: Outcome: Mandate to continue negotiations
Inside Accounts
1. Coalition Consensus- cohesiveness and politics in coalitions; focus and structures, coordination groups,
and critical role of lead coordinators
2. Pacific SPREP/SIDS Collective- informal chambers, information sharing position - but without a political
mandate to work as a regional grouping; inspirations and challenges: regional architecture, consistent,
regional vs NGO consultant vs New York missions
– Pacific: SPREP informal information sharing and challenges from regional architecture
14
• Focus: Inclusive Discussion (Talanoa) Consensus
Pre-negotiations (2 days plus months of circulation)
• Draft text PSIDS New York and circulated since July, Email Text drafts to focal points Senior Officials Committee
(Aug 31-Sept 1)- text finalized for Council approval
Negotiations (2 days)
• 8 drafts sent around Open and inclusive town-hall style seminar forums (all sectors including development partners
• COP 21 Strategy
• Amendments to text emailed to Secretariat daily
Agreement
• Council approval
• Outcome: Suva Declaration
Inside Accounts
• Inclusive Open Deliberative forums
-Little to no negotiations- deliberative, mutual understading
• Role of Senior Officials Committee
• Open delibertion, closed decision making– Small number of technical officials, support of NGOs
15
2. Pacific Islands Development Forum (Sept 2-4)
Focus: Discussion (Urgent) Consensus
Pre-negotiations (2 hours)
- Climate change not the only priority: Health, Transportation and Finance
- No text before Sept 7the leaders set the original text
- Leaders morning session- calls for officials to draft a SIS on the 1.5 LTTG issue
- Suggestions by leaders, urgency to re-affirm Suva Declaration
- Attempts to make contact with Bonn and capital for technical expertise
Negotiations (2 hours)
- Officials drafting between 12pm-2pm lunch hour drafted declaration
- Reverted back to leaders for approval at 2p
Agreement
- Smaller Island States Leaders’ Port Moresby Declaration on Climate Change
Inside Accounts
= Top-down declaration, influenced by leaders but driven by SIS Officials
16
3. PIF Smaller Islands States (Sept 7)
Focus: Closed Discussion/Negotiated Consensus)
Pre-negotiations (three weeks- online)
- Drafted Forum Officials Committee (August12/13), email
Negotiations (2 days)
- Draft Committee Sept 8 track changes and streamline text
- Draft Committee Sept 9 (1.00pm) language touch up
- Draft Committee Sept 9 (8.30pm) a new revised text, last munite
Plenary: mobilize a strategy and give mandate for One CROP Pacific COP 21 Team
- Leaders Retreat to endorse the final language and text (closed session) only Leaders, plus Sec General
and Dep Sec.
Agreement
- PIF Leaders Declaration on Climate Change Action
Inside Acounts:
Negotiations within the Forum Officials- the influential role of technical negotiators
Leaders Tuvalu and RMI persisting for political mandate for taskforce
CROP One Team willingness open participation.
17
4. PIF Leaders (Sept 8-10)
UN international diplomatic/political level
**Pacific Small Islands Developing States (New York)
-with AOSIS and Islands’ First
18
Regional Technical Level
**SPREP High Level Support Mechanism
-with Climate Analytics (Science)
19
5. UNFCCC COP21Pre-negotiation (5 days)
- Coalition coordination- to complete
- Pacific SIDS CROP Team Plus
Negotiation
- High Level Leaders Foumf
- ADP 2-12 (Nov 29-Dec 5)
- 48 pages, still no agreement
- Pacfic SIDS CROP Team Plus
Agreement
- Comité de Paris (Dec 7-12)
- no longer coalitions but individual states take the lead- states with disagreement become
prominent
- Consensus Point (Dec 10, 11, 12)
- Role
Paris Agreement (from 92 to 25 pages)
20
21
Pacific SIDS and CROP Plus
-38,000
delegates
15,000 officials
375 Pacific
(multi-actor),
but only less
than 50
engaged in the
process right
-Coalition leads
and recognition
by the
Presidency
Tuvalu-United States: Loss and Damage
• After affirming G-77 and China support in ADP 2-10
(Oct); the text of LD was then only negotiated in on Dec
10.
• Bilateral of two extremes: U.S.- Tuvalu
• working against “holding position”
22
Marshall Islands-
High Ambition Coalition:
LTTG 1.5- working with countries outside of coalition divide
- working with
Multilateral Consensus TypologyConsensus Forum Actors Activities Consensus Point
Coalition Consensus ADP2-8 Technical Negotiators Bottom-Up; Coordination,
Monitoring Bargaining
1 hour final plenary
- Consent to Continue
Inclusive Discussion
Consensus
PIDF Leaders, Govt Official, Private
and CSO (Technical
negotiators)
Bottom-Up; Planning,
Coordination , Monitoring
1 day Forum Officials
- Consent to Act
Closed Discussion
Consensus
PIF SIS Leaders, Govt Officials
(Technical negotiators)
Top-Downp; Proactive 2 hours lunch (before
Leaders endorsement)
-Conesnt to Negotiate
Officials, Leaders
Consensus
PIF Leaders Leaders, Govt Officials
(Technical negotiators)
Bottom-Up;
Proactive
Coordination ,Monitoring
Bargaining
3 hour night drafting
session (night before
Leaders Retreat)
- Consent to Act
Technical, Officials and
Leaders
COP21 Technical negotiators, Leaders Bottom-Up; Proactive
Coordination Monitoring
Bargaining
3 days (and plenary)
- Consent to act and
conclude - continue
23
“Consensus: the influence and power of the minority”
- Actors:• Coalitions
- prevalent in the informal process actual negotiations, carry positions
- lead coorinators
- Coalitions (G-77, LDC, CfRN, AOSIS---Pacific SIDS)
• State (delegations)
– State interest- PNG in PIF, Fiji PIDF, Tuvalu and RMI in COP21
• Leaders
– Sopaaga, De Brum, Tong and Remengsau
– Political mandate
• Technical Negotiators (Climate Negotiator Network)
- technical (scientific, law, and political strategists)
- government official, NGO consultants, regional servants, academia
Small core group influences policy agenda and influential in Pacific islands
climate change in region and technical negotiators of UNFCCC
24
25
“Consensus: the influence and power of the minority”
- Activities: importance of a political mandate that allows a taskforce (only
received after PIF)
- : working as a standalone group versus working with AOSIS. The importance
of a regional mechanism in order to prepare- technical receiving
- specialised technical language, text manipulation, technology forums of
coordination, ‘secret side’ meetings deals, strategies of blocking bigger
states, dealing with coalitions, cultural to garner coalition support, perceived
weakness and inadequacy of decision making process both in region and
international process
- Unconsciously the group of UNFCCC technical negotiators not only
international policy formulation but also slow implementation
26