Kenya is this week hosting the country’s biggest event this year – the African Climate Summit – bringing together heads of state, leaders of big corporations and policymakers to the capital, Nairobi.
The timing coincides neatly with the signing of the Paris Treaty 240 years ago that signalled the freedom of the United States of America from its colonists (Great Britain, Spain and France) at a time Africa is seeking “climate reparations”.
That climate change has financial implications for Africa is a hot topic in the summit that is mainly dealing with “carbon trading” and “unlocking finances for climate-forward adaptation” in the Global South.
Those technical terms easily understood within climate-change circles are attempts by developed countries, mainly Europe and America, to provide funding for African countries to cope with extreme climatic conditions like drought and flooding and to implement “green energy” related policies like adopting solar energy and electric vehicles.
To demonstrate how far-reaching the climate-change talks are, this week’s Kenya and African Union-led summit brings with it a multisectoral approach to climate change, with involvement of health, finance, foreign affairs and environment ministries from the participating countries. It is a pity that such a significant summit has not attracted the attention it deserves at the grassroots where the policy decisions will be felt the most.
As a matter of fact, a pan-African group of civil society organisations last week expressed dismay that the planning of the summit had once again excluded non-state actors. In a media statement, the group said summit planners had excluded community-based organisations, indigenous people, people of faith, trade unions, the private sector, farmers, women and gender constituencies, youth movements, academia and research institutions, foundations and finance institutions.
The concern by civil society echoes similar sentiments at the conference of the East Africa Communication Association in Kigali, Rwanda, where it was observed that climate change as a concept and public policy issue has failed to attract the interest of academia.
However, the situation is understandable (but not excusable) because no proper structures exist to engage with academia, especially. Certain groups exist in some public universities, for example, but those are exclusive clubs where participation and the voice of academia are hushed.
But if policymakers might want to avoid rubbing shoulders with academia for now, how does that explain the exclusion of farmers, for example? Why should climate change talks bringing delegates from across the continent and the world not include Rachuonyo Beekeepers Association, for example?
Is it not strange that a summit supposedly discussing the plight of farmers (touching on flooding, famine, drought) has whole roads closed because, perhaps, some forlorn farmers might gate-crash the event?
On a global scale, issues like climate change have increasingly become elitist and exclusivist, to the extent that civil society has to “make noise like hell” in order to be heard. According to a statement from the Rockefeller Foundation, a major supporter, this week’s Summit is discussing major policy issues on health, energy, finance, foreign affairs, and the environment.
Barring numbers, it is a fallacy to imagine that civil society and ordinary Kenyans cannot effectively participate in such major events and create an authentic and credible voice that truly represents their interests. If the venue, the refurbished Kenyatta International Conference Centre is not big enough, let meetings be conducted in any of the many open-air grounds and public places in Nairobi.
But there is more. The mention of “carbon trading” and “financing for climate-forward adaptation” and things like “climate-smart food security” will be interesting to Kenyans at a time when food prices are high, inflation is beyond the roof, and businesses and other economic activities are in dire straits.
It is not lost on observers that there is a direct link between the cost of petrol and gilded, delegate-filled climate summits and conferences where decisions were made, for example, to “cut greenhouse emissions”. Might small-scale farmers and vegetable hawkers have something to say about it?
Again, when talking about carbon trading and suchlike, coming from the west to the global south, the summit must not make it sound as if, for 30 pieces of silver, developed countries are getting the licence to pollute the environment for as long and for as much as they have the money to pay.
It leaves a bad taste in the mouth of a continent still struggling with reparations for slave trade, a matter which the African Union should take leadership. Climate begging bowls must not appear to be the backdoor means through which reparations will come, and through which African sovereignty and dignity will be lost in the cacophony of harmonious choruses bleating climate change mumbo jumbo.
Without a doubt, the summit is a gathering of political leaders of many shades and colours. Some of the African leaders in Nairobi this week have credibility issues at home and will be flying in to take a break from the hot political climate at home.
African leaders’ pursuit of carbon credits must not replace the need for filling credibility gaps and revisiting governance issues at home, including corruption which will put potential benefits of carbon trading at risk of being returned, in a roundabout way, to Swiss banks, or a return to the colonial world of 240 years ago.
Open the roads, physically and metaphorically, because grassroots voices matter.
Teaches journalism and communication at the Technical University of Kenya, Nairobi. [email protected]
