The UN Climate Change Conference (COP29) will discuss funding for adaptation strategies amid warnings from experts against viewing adaptation efforts as unmeasurable. The authors stress that properly funded adaptation can mitigate adverse effects on vulnerable populations while emphasizing the need for clear success indicators. They advocate for a climate reparations agenda to support the Global South, which bears the brunt of climate change consequences despite contributing minimally to its causes.
The forthcoming UN Climate Change Conference (COP29), set in Baku, Azerbaijan from November 11 to 22, 2024, intends to tackle critical issues surrounding the financing of adaptation strategies for climate change. In a recent commentary published in Science, Professor Dr. Lisa Schipper of the University of Bonn and Dr. Aditi Mukherji, Director of the CGIAR Climate Impact Platform, caution against the misuse of claims that adaptation strategies are unmeasurable, which could lead to funding reductions. Both scholars contributed their expertise to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). As debates on climate adaptation financing continue, key questions arise regarding the funding sources, accountability measures for financial contributions, and the evaluations needed to determine adaptation success. Professor Schipper alerts that when policymakers assert the impracticality of measuring adaptation outcomes due to complexity, it jeopardizes the financial backing essential for these initiatives. The authors emphasize that successful adaptation relies on adequately structured funding. Meanwhile, many developed countries question the validity of indicators used in measuring adaptation progress. Schipper highlights, “Without such indicators, however, the countries of the Global South fear that their arguments for funding will come to nothing.” The researchers underscore that maladaptation, which refers to measures that inadvertently worsen conditions for affected populations, often stems from inadequate planning, lack of context-awareness by external donors, and improper execution of strategies. They note that significant investment in adaptation measures has occurred globally over the past decade, yielding many successful examples that allow for evaluation and refinement. Dr. Mukherji illustrates this point by explaining how irrigation is frequently criticized as a maladaptive strategy; however, when correctly applied to suitable crops in appropriate contexts, it can greatly enhance food security. Furthermore, the discussion surrounding climate vulnerability frequently overlooks critical social determinants, such as the marginalization of certain communities based on ethnicity, religion, or political beliefs. Areas prone to flooding often house marginalized groups, indicating that early warning systems should be prioritized over merely avoiding these settlements. The authors propose that maladaptation should serve as both a cautionary tale and a framework for ensuring successful adaptation practices. A climate reparations agenda could facilitate funding for the most affected communities without imposing stringent conditions, recognizing that those communities which are most vulnerable have contributed minimally to the climate crisis. According to Dr. Mukherji, “The UNEP estimates that hundreds of billions need to be raised annually for such adaptation measures.” Given the recent findings in the ‘Adaptation Gap Report 2024’ published by the United Nations Environment Programme, she reiterates, “We are still a long way from this sum.” Professor Schipper concludes by asserting that prioritized spending must not only be effective but also carefully align with developmental objectives to mitigate maladaptive risks. Publication: E.L.F. Schipper and A. Mukherji: Misguided negative adaptation narratives are hurting the poor, Science, DOI: 10.1126/science.adq7821
The critical discourse surrounding climate change adaptation involves determining effective funding strategies to assist vulnerable populations, largely in the Global South. Experts are expressing concerns that allegations regarding the measurability of adaptation strategies might be leveraged politically to minimize financial support. This commentary has surfaced in anticipation of COP29, illustrating the necessity for a balanced approach where adaptation strategies are both evaluated and financed to foster equitable outcomes for all nations facing climate crises.
In conclusion, the commentary highlights the importance of securing adequate funding for climate adaptation strategies, while cautioning against the oversimplification of adaptation measures as maladaptive. It underscores the critical role of proper planning and contextual understanding in effective adaptation implementation, and calls for a fair allocation of financial resources, particularly aimed at the most affected communities. Moreover, it stresses the need for clear indicators to measure success, as well as a focus on developmental alignment to prevent maladaptive outcomes, thus ensuring that funding contributes positively to climate resilience.
Original Source: www.cgiar.org
