The 27th conference of the parties (COP27) held in Egypt in the city of Sharma el Sheikh has come to an end. Dubbed the African COP, the expectation from this year’s conference was that the global south countries would rally together and press rich countries on their role in driving climate change. This, however, has not been the case and for most African countries, there is nothing to smile about.
The gap when it comes to climate financing in Africa is still in existence, and for it to be bridged, focus needs to shift to a more robust and transparent tracking and reporting mechanism. Should this happen, then the trust between those who have committed to providing climate finance, and those who should be receiving it will be strengthened.
Africa is responsible for only 3.8 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions, with countries like China accounting for up to 23 per cent, 19 per cent in the United States and 13 per cent in the European Union. However, despite its low contribution to greenhouse emissions, Africa still remains the most vulnerable continent; in fact, seven out of 10 of the most vulnerable countries are in Africa.
Back in 2009 during the COP 15 at Copenhagen, developed nations collectively pledged to deliver $100 billion annually as climate finances to African countries. To this time this has not yet been fully executed.
In this year’s summit, Senegal’s President and chairperson of the African Union Macky Sall said richer nations need to not only deliver on their financing pledges, but also double annual climate financing to Africa to $200 billion. Africa requires $2.5 trillion of climate finance between now and 2030. On average this adds up to $250 billion each year.
If Africa is to secure the 2009 $100billion pledge, then making presentations of how we are being affected by the effects of climate change is not enough. The rich nations know this already. What African representatives need to also do is to adequately formulate a reporting strategy to show how over the years we have been spending the funds we get.
In the just-concluded summit, countries like Kenya and Tanzania have secured $30 billion and $18 billion in form of investments from various companies and nations. Money is always the bone of contention and what is worrying here is how these funds will be used to combat climate change in Africa.
How often do these companies and nations investing and funding Africa do their due diligence and follow-ups to ensure that the funds are put to good use? How are these funds tracked and how is their impact then measured?
A recent report by the Boston Consulting Group, in collaboration with the Rockefeller Foundation, titled 'What gets measured gets financed' argues that better climate financing depends on better data. According to the report, lack of reliable and transparent tracking is a major barrier to increased investment. It is important to understand that donor accountability is lowered when climate funding statistics are not reported and tracked properly.
Currently, climate financing is tracked using poor data and measurement methods. The traceability problem is made worse in sectors like energy efficiency and adaptability and resilience (A and R) infrastructure, where it is more difficult to quantify the benefits of climate interventions, and in sources like the private sector, where disclosures are scarce to make things easier.
In the subsequent COPs, Africa will need to have a solid case study that details where we are, where we are coming from and why we need more funds to combat climate change.
During this year’s summit, a number of deals have been signed. Countries like South Africa will be able to secure loan agreements of up to R10.7 billion for just transition plans. However, these loans are prone to leave such a country in more debt as Africa is still reeling from the effects of the pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine war.
The argument from African representatives is that the continent needs climate finances in the form of non-debt funds, but far more worse is if the usage of these funds is not properly tracked the effects can be more damaging.
Currently, climate change costs Africa between $7 billion and $15 billion annually. By 2030, if nothing changes, this may amount to $50 billion annually. Africa lacks access to the funding it needs to adapt to climate change, but if we can create a case study to document and evaluate how we have been using the cash we have received, this may persuade the wealthy countries to uphold their commitments.
In the absence of a standardised approach to accounting and accountability of climate finance funds, Africa will continue to be underserved.
Public relations practitioner at Edelman Kenya
