VIEWS ON THE PHILIPPINES’ POSITION IN THE 2014 CLIMATE CONFERENCE IN LIMA, PERU

CARLOS O. TULALI Mobile: +639124126530 / +639258613669

Email: cjtulali@gmail.com

After two weeks of negotiations, parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Lima. Peru decided on a framework for the creation of an agreement in Paris in 2015. At the Lima climate talks, the Philippines was tasked to lead 20 other vulnerable countries to climate change under the Climate Vulnerable Forum, an international partnership of highly vulnerable countries from Africa, Asia, the Americas and the Pacific that are frequently affected by the adverse effects of climate change. This development indicates a major shift in position for the Philippines in the UNFCCC. While the Philippines is calling for an urgent action of all countries involved, it all boils down to a changed responsibility for countries that used to be small and are now big emitters, such that these developing countries that are now having big emissions, should also cut their emissions commensurate to what they are emitting. But this is not what common-but-differentiated-responsibility (CBDR) is all about. Art. 3.1 of the text of the UNFCCC itself says: “The Parties should protect the climate system for the benefit of present and future generations of humankind, on the basis of equity and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. Accordingly, the developed country Parties should take the lead in combating climate change and the adverse effects thereof.” CBDR as such, means that developed countries will take the lead in combating climate change, which means that the developed countries will have to make the most cuts in emissions, in order that the stabilization of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere will be achieved. For the Philippines to call for a different set of responsibilities now among developing countries, because some have become developed and some have not, is to run away from this position and perhaps sit alongside developed countries and its allies who are also calling on all countries to cut emissions. It will help greatly the negotiations after the Lima talks if the Philippines can articulate clearly what that changed responsibility would mean, in specific terms. In my view, the Lima talks barely delivered at a time when poor and vulnerable countries like the Philippines are already bearing the consequences of inaction. Even worse, our own Philippine delegation wavered in defending our own interests at a crucial point in the talks. A Philippine DFA representative even stated during one of the meetings in the Lima talks that the Philippines will allow loss, damage and human rights to be left out of the final decision! Fortunately, throughout the Lima talks, other Filipino negotiators have repeatedly stressed the importance of loss and damage and have worked behind the scenes to get it into the final decision. Loss and damage refers not just to the impacts of climate-related extreme weather events, like super typhoon Yolanda (Haiyan), but also slow-onset events, like sea level rise and coral bleaching, which are beyond the reach of adaptation and mitigation efforts. It involves not just funding but also technology and other support. These points did make it to the Lima Call for Climate Action although only affirmed in the introduction.

At the national level, the Philippines said it will submit its intended nationally-determined contributions (INDC) by mid-2015. This means it will have to do some serious mathematical calculations starting this January such that it will have to know where or in what economic sectors it will cut such that its emissions goals can be achieved. What now is in store for the country given that it expressed willingness to do its “fair share” in cutting its emissions and what it will mean for the Philippines’ development prospects?