More than one year after the United Nations Security Council discussed the challenge of climate change to peace and security, it may be appropriate to ask what kind of follow up, if any, can be observed. The presidential statement, adopted by the participants on 20th July at the Security Council, asks for further contextual information on possible security implications of climate change, especially when the respective impacts are endangering processes of peace consolidation. The New York event has so far been followed by two international conferences: one in Berlin in October 2011 and one in London in March 2012. They took different perspectives but shared a joint intention: to give guidance to urgently needed geopolitical change management in the light of a changing climate.
The participants at the Berlin Conference “Climate Diplomacy in Perspective” in the Federal Foreign Office asked decision makers to reach beyond their traditional, thematic and even geographic focus. Based on discussions on the distinct challenges of water resource management, food security and coastal stability, the relevance of informal diplomacy, e.g. via Track II initiatives, was emphasized. In addition, the conference participants called for a conflict-sensitive design of climate policies to create peace-positive environments.
The London Conference, “A Climate and Resource Security Dialogue for the 21st Century“, reconfirmed that the climate change threat requires a “new diplomacy” approach involving the whole of society. Existing institutions should be the focus of restructuring processes to enable a transformation towards resilient societies. This institutional dimension was further elaborated by making more concrete recommendations on institutional innovations as a response to a more insecure climate. According to the participants, the UN should establish a Special Representative on Climate and Security. His or her mandate would be to advocate and assess the implications of climate and security in developing nations. In addition, foreign ministries should play a key role by coordinating the integration of different policy areas affected by climate change, such as development and security. Better coordination may also be needed to implement another set of recommendations at the national level: the creation of national platforms for dialogue and regular climate security impact assessments.
With the two conferences, the Foreign Ministries of Germany and the UK showed a strong commitment to take this non-traditional foreign policy challenge seriously. With a high-level side event during the UN Week at the end of September, the Federal Foreign Office also brought the topic back to New York. In the months to come, further regional dialogues are planned. In London, South Korea indicated its willingness to invite diplomats for another round. In sum, these efforts may help to ensure that the Security Council debate is not an isolated event but the starting signal for a new era of diplomacy.
As we step into 2020, time has come to implement the Paris Agreement and raise climate ambition, but the geopolitical tide seems to be against it. The best way forward at this crucial juncture might be to forge a ‘climate coalition of the willing’ – recognising and streamlining actions of all actors at all levels.
For the first time in the survey’s 10-year outlook, the top five global risks in terms of likelihood are all environmental. They are: extreme weather events, failure of climate change mitigation and adaptation, major natural disasters, major biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse, and human-made environmental damage and disasters.
Millions of people across Sub-Saharan Africa could face grave hunger in the first half of 2020 because of armed conflict, political instability and climate change-linked disasters, a report says.
The report published by the UN World Food Programme (WFP) this month says that the countries affected will require life-saving food assistance and investment to prevent humanitarian catastrophes.
Australia is currently experiencing one of its worst bushfire seasons, with swathes of the southern and eastern coastal regions having been ablaze for weeks. As the fires have spread, there has been extensive media coverage both nationally and internationally documenting – and debating – their impacts. This Carbon Brief overview summarises how the fires – and the political response to them – have been covered by the media.