GS3 – Environment
Context:
In the lead-up to COP30 in Brazil, there is growing discontent—especially from developing nations—regarding the effectiveness of the UNFCCC. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), established during the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, is a legally non-binding treaty. Its annual Conference of the Parties (COP) is the top decision-making body.
Major Criticisms:
- Decision-Making Delays:
The consensus-based model often stalls progress, as seen in the unfulfilled $100 billion climate finance pledge from 2009. - Weak Accountability:
Developed countries regularly default on their commitments without facing real consequences due to the absence of enforcement mechanisms. - Neglect of Vulnerable Nations:
Least developed and developing countries often find their concerns underrepresented or ignored. - Inadequate Financing:
A stark contrast exists between the $1.3 trillion needed for energy transitions in developing countries and the $300 billion that developed nations may mobilise, and that too not before 2035. - Loss of Credibility:
The failure to produce tangible outcomes has cast doubt on the UNFCCC’s effectiveness.
Proposed Reforms:
- Shift from Consensus to Majority Voting:
When consensus fails, majority-based decision-making should be adopted to avoid indefinite delays and empower more nations. - Improve Operational Efficiency:
Remove redundant discussions by streamlining agendas and limiting negotiation teams for better focus during COP meetings. - Ensure Accountability:
Countries and entities (e.g. fossil fuel firms) failing to meet climate goals should be restricted from participating in or hosting COPs.
Example: Azerbaijan faced backlash for its fossil fuel connections during COP (Baku). - Introduce a Peer Review Mechanism:
Develop a parallel climate review body, coordinated under the UNFCCC, to provide a multi-faceted governance system with stronger checks and balances.