It’s eight o’clock in the morning of Dec. 13, 2023. I’m on my way to Expo City in Dubai and just received a notification in my email that the new Global Stocktake (GST) draft decision text has just been released. As I was skimming through the document, I already anticipated that the closing plenary would have an extended debate regarding this text because there’s no way this watered-down text would be adopted. But I was wrong.
Four hours later, while sitting in the overflow room with other observers, watching the live stream of the closing plenary, that exact text was gaveled down. The room was silent, which is a stark contrast to the roaring applause in the plenary hall. In his speech, the COP president said that the world has reached a consensus on transitioning away from fossil fuels. But there seems to be no consensus outside that plenary hall, outside Expo City, outside Dubai.
That was over a month ago—a month since the largest and one of the most consequential COP has concluded. Being there in person was an overwhelming experience, both good and bad. I was fortunate enough to witness the dynamics of the different moving parts of the COP process, meet inspiring people who are catalyzing climate actions, and contribute to the process in various capacities. However, it’s disheartening to see how the climate talks devolve into a discussion of semantics and distractions, forgetting that human lives are at stake when climate action is further delayed.
In COP28, I followed the negotiations on GST, the outcome of which will guide how countries will update their climate targets, or their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), in time for the next round of submissions in 2025. I’ve witnessed in real time the efforts to put doubts on the reports released by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, soften the reference to the principle of common but differentiated responsibility and respective capacities, insert false solutions, and lessen the responsibility of developed countries.
While these things were happening, I wondered how some countries could parade their “climate ambitions” in front of the media and simultaneously undermine climate justice inside negotiation rooms. Maybe that’s why, after three decades of climate negotiations, we’re still far from reaching our goal of addressing the climate crisis.
Using the GST outcome text as an example, the adopted decision failed to highlight the responsibility of developed countries in leading climate mitigation efforts and providing the means of implementation, such as climate finance, needed by developing countries to implement their climate action strategies.
Paragraph 28 of the adopted decision, which outlined the different mitigation strategies countries must take, mentioned false solutions such as transition fuels and nuclear energy. If countries are indeed true to their word about climate justice, they should have left these provisions out of the adopted text.
Instead, the text should have a solid reference to the need of developed countries as historical emitters to fast-track decarbonization efforts using science-based solutions and pay up for the impacts their activities have caused through the provision of adequate and accessible climate finance. Additionally, the text shouldn’t have mentioned ambiguous terms such as “phase down of unabated coal” and “inefficient fossil fuel subsidies” but instead called for a global phaseout of all forms of fossil fuel in a just and equitable manner.
Being inside the negotiation rooms, caught up with everything happening, made me forget that COPs are not the end-all-be-all of climate action. Thinking that COPs are epicenters of climate action is a disservice to the countless climate actors implementing climate actions on the ground, helping those on the frontline of the climate crisis. Stepping out of the negotiation rooms reminded me that vital actions happen outside COPs.
This is not to discount the efforts of negotiators of climate-vulnerable countries fiercely fighting to hold the line and keep 1.5 within reach. Rather, it is to highlight that the most important thing to do is to implement genuine climate solutions at the grassroots level, which are being done everywhere with or without COP decisions. This means that we need to go above and beyond the watered-down climate package adopted in Dubai if we want to have a fighting chance against the impacts of climate change.
Many individuals and grassroots organizations have already been implementing climate measures that have had more impact than the decisions happening inside negotiation rooms and plenary halls during COPs. In the two weeks of COP28, I’ve talked with different individuals leading climate solutions in their communities—doing not just whatever they can, but whatever the community needs them to do.
We need to amplify the initiatives these amazing people are taking and follow suit. We also need to ensure that government officials and other decision-makers translate the commitments they made in Dubai. Let’s continue holding the people in power to account. And let us demand justice from the top polluters, urge them to pay up for the impacts that they have caused, and force them to put a stop to practices rooted in the exploitation of people and the planet.
About the Author: Keith Sigfred Ancheta is a climate advocate, communicator, and stubborn optimist. He volunteers as one of the youth coordinators of the Climate Reality Project Philippines and co-leads projects on youth empowerment, climate policymaking, and capacity development. In 2021, he became a mentor for the global training of the Climate Reality Leadership Corps. Keith is a researcher-educator by training and profession, finishing his Bachelor of Secondary Education (Biological Sciences) in 2019 at Saint Louis University and his Master of Science in Microbiology at the University of the Philippines Diliman in 2023. He currently works as a technical associate of Parabukas.