Five Themes to Track at #COP28
As COP28 negotiations kick off in earnest today—amid vocal criticism of their utility, impartiality, and commitment to meaningful progress—here are key themes to look out for over the course of the next two weeks.
1. Welcome to the era of climate geopolitics
The Global North has produced the lion’s share of carbon emissions since the Industrial Age. It has also benefited the most economically from rapid industrialization. This circular dynamic, naturally, has produced a consistent source of tension and opprobrium that will reach a fever pitch in the UAE this week and next. Nation states in the Global South rightly argue that the destructive impacts of climate change are disproportionately felt within their borders. And now they are under pressure to decarbonize, delaying their economic growth and the opportunity to reap the rewards of what has been enjoyed for generations through fossil fuel dependency in the Global North. In more stark terms, the world’s top 1% of emitters produce over 1,000 times more CO2 than the bottom 1%.
Expect island nations, in particular, to be louder, more coordinated, and more existential in the tenor and tone of their advocacy. A one-size fits all approach—from a financial, regulatory, and decarbonization standpoint—is going to be strongly contested from this constituency. With wars and strife advancing at pace, China and Russia, in particular, will be watching these conversations closely. The geopolitics of energy supply has arguably never been more fraught and delicate. They will be looking for ways to expose perceived Western hypocrisy and build coalitions with smaller countries to advance their geopolitical position at the expense of the EU and the United States. From the war in Ukraine to the Belt and Road Initiative, Western geopolitical dominance is under threat, and climate change provides a fissure for many actors to explore and exploit. President Biden may regret not attending.
2. One question matters
The past few COP meetings, in particular, have been animated by a single question: When will the world meaningfully and concretely commit to weaning itself off of fossil fuels? Countries agreed at COP26 to phase down the use of coal, but they have never agreed to divorce themselves from all fossil fuels—the main source of planet-warming emissions. Indeed, fossil fuel production and consumption will likely reach its historic record in 2023. The European Union, joined by many climate-vulnerable countries, are insisting on a final COP28 deal that commits countries to phase out fossil fuels. But the Group of 20 failed to agree on this point at their summit in July, and many countries, including Russia, have said they would oppose a fossil fuel phase-out altogether.
The incoming President of COP28, Dr Sultan al-Jaber, is the head of the UAE’s state-owned oil and gas company, ADNOC, which—at least optically—doesn’t imbue civil society with confidence that a robust fossil agreement can be forged. So far, the mood music is not good, with serious allegations leveled at the UAE’s use of the COP28 platform to ink strategic fossil deals (COP spokespeople have said these reports are inaccurate). While it is politically and economically short-sighted to think that reducing our dependence on fossil fuels will not involve the fossil sector to some degree—it has immense capital resources, as well as the power, the influence, and the infrastructure—the perception that the fossil fuel lobby still shapes predetermined outcomes behind closed doors is hard to shake. As a foundational point, COP has failed to deliver so far on this most critical question and the power dynamics for far too long have been skewed in the direction of the highest polluting sector. Will the UAE facilitate a historic declaration? Big oil and gas will be doing everything in their collective power to stop one. The bottom line is that if the UN’s IPCC wants to avoid having this COP characterized as an abject failure, they must deliver real results. However, with renewables outpacing fossil for the first time, delegates and COP leadership have some political and economic permission to throw targeted punches. Will they use it? Chances are slim, but not nil.
3. Follow the money
At the last two COP events in Scotland and Egypt respectively, the issue of who is going to pay for climate resiliency and loss and damage has been top of the agenda, in particular for low-income countries and island nations that are disproportionately exposed to the existential threat of rising sea levels. In Sharm-El-Sheikh in 2022, the Loss and Damage Fund was established, but so far the exact parameters of the Fund’s vision and, most importantly, who pays remain unclear.
It’s vital to note that loss and damage is about more than capital and infrastructure. It cuts to the heart of complex moral and political questions around where the burden of responsibility for climate change lies—and who pays for its catastrophic implications. Remember, fighter jets, boats, bombs, and battalions don’t run on wind or solar. In the minds of policymakers from many countries, the major global powers have advanced their power—both economically and militarily—through burning fossil fuels and extracting finite resources overseas. In effect, their geostrategic leadership positions in an increasingly multipolar age are tightly bound to their emissions. Justice and equity in the context of climate change, therefore, requires these same powerful nation states to foot the bill. With war, economic headwinds, inflation, wage stagnation, and the threat of recession facing many of the world’s dominant economies, will they be able to sell a large financial commitment to their own citizens? One thing is clear: History will judge those who abstain or obstruct harshly.
4. Beware of the value-action gap
Unfortunately, COP suffers from a crippling value-action gap. It’s clear that its aspirations and global convening power are worthy and significant, but too often proceedings are driven by announcements, rather than delivering substantive and demonstrable progress. This is something we’ve talked about before at Blue Owl Group, but doing the actual work is always more important than what you say about the work—and COP to date has been typified by more telling than showing. If it is to shore up its reputation and advance its legitimacy as the global coordination vehicle for climate change, these events must project an authoritative stance and coherently articulate a vision. COP arguably needs a new and revitalized mission statement; one that can inspire in an era of disinformation and disillusionment.
However, because COP is inextricably bound to the infrastructure of the UN and the realpolitik of the Security Council, detractors will say the legal infrastructure and nation state buy-in doesn’t exist to hold signatories accountable. Therefore, critics say, COP is tantamount to PR sheen and a facilitated forum for corporate greenwashing—a Davos for carbon. Conversely, supporters are keen to highlight that reputational threats are the forcing function, and more importantly, that COP is the best we’ve got. But at a time when we are rapidly approaching temperature thresholds that will have catastrophic and lasting consequences, some soul-searching and introspection would be wise. COP cannot continue to afford to be perceived by its critics as a glorified talking shop that facilitates and protects corporate reputation laundering and fossil fuel dominance. The language of milestones, measurement, periodic reviews, and standardization should all be embraced. Exactitude is a must. The public is tired and angry, and people won’t continue to go on the journey with COP unless it shows that it has the bite to match its bark. Encouragingly, politicians who go big and bold on climate change have more political space than ever from their voters to act bravely.
5. Bright and shiny objects
COP, particularly this UAE edition, consistently touts the latest and greatest technologies that can deal with halting the negative effects of emissions. One motivation is to demonstrate a commitment to innovation and showcasing the entrepreneurial ambition required to meet the moment. A more cynical reading is that they provide bright and shiny photo opportunities for the media and corporations, and shift the conversation away from the big questions discussed earlier in this piece. These technologies vary from carbon capture and storage technologies, to fusion, green hydrogen, and electrification of heavy logistics. Naturally, expect AI to feature heavily, too.
The reality, of course, is that we will need everything to decarbonize and stay below critical temperature thresholds—both the boring and mundane elements of decarbonizing our energy grids, and the ambitious moonshots that generate headlines. COP signatories and the event writ large should be measured more on the former than the latter. Venture capital has pushed extraordinary amounts of investment into the moonshots; nation states, too. But the reality is none of these technologies are ready for scale and the returns have been poor—most require, at minimum, a five-ten year timeframe to make an impact—spooking already fearful investors. First, we need the commitment to decarbonize our economies, the infrastructure to hold that process accountable, and to dilute the power and influence of the fossil fuel industry over proceedings. Once we have the shared reality, we can focus more of our collective energy on the moonshots.
Hope in the desert
Optimism can be hard to muster, particularly after the BBC’s reporting this week, but like it or loathe it, COP still represents the most important coordination vehicle in the world to deal with climate change. Historically, there is much to commend, particularly the consensus around 1.5 degrees that was solidified in Paris in 2015, the extraordinary research efforts, and the increasingly direct, unvarnished scientific communications strategies deployed by the IPCC. These significant gains should not be sniffed at. With rapid global destabilization and retrenchment to the era of isolation and naked national self-interest, COP represents a vital global platform for dialogue and debate on an era-defining challenge. Cynicism is easy, solutions are harder, and COP has a chance—albeit tentatively—to emerge on the side of the angels. That, in and of itself, is worth fighting for. Let’s hope, under renewed pressure, they hold up their end of the bargain in Dubai.
