21/03/2021

(AU) A Climate Change Vandal Goes To Paris

CounterPunch - Binoy Kampmark

Australia’s former Finance Minister Mathias Cormann elected Secretary-General of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

Author
Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. 
The hallmark of any institution is the ability to withstand ironic dysfunction.

The United States under the stewardship of that unintentional comic George W. Bush made John Bolton ambassador to the United Nations.  Bolton had loathed the body, wishing for it to implode under its own weight.

The parliamentary chamber of the European Union, between 1999 and 2020, hosted that most anti-EU of proponents, the bilious Nigel Farage.  Hatred for European institutions did not stop the little Englander from drawing a salary and being rather cavalier with his expenses.

The Organisation for Economic Development is the latest institution to encounter its dose of fair perversion. For the first time in its history, its secretary general will be from outside the Americas and Europe.  In terms of birth, Mathias Cormann is Belgian.  But in terms of pedigree, he is a veteran of Australian conservative politics, having been a cabinet minister and, it should be said, powerbroker, in the Liberal Party.

Very little chance was given to Cormann in his bid.  The field of applicants seemed too varied, too strong.  His abysmal record on climate change policy was seen as the most obvious handicap. 

“Governments are not stupid, they have highly intelligent officials and ambassadors who work out what is really going on and advise them,” claimed Bill Hare, climate change scientist and chief executive of Climate Analytics.

But the former finance minister kept making it through the rounds.  Lobbying efforts on his behalf were unsparing.  Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison rang numerous world leaders.  Meetings were held between senior officials and ambassadors.  Candidates began withdrawing their bids.

Swiss candidate Philipp Hildebrand, whose pitch focused on climate change, pulled out, citing lack of support.  The former EU trade commissioner, Cecilia Malmström, fell at the final hurdle.  She had also promised an aggressive approach towards climate change, declaring that she would use her post to globalise Europe’s carbon-tax scheme on high-emission imports.  This was a bit much even for the new climate conscious administration in Washington.

Of the 37 ambassadors to the OECD, a few recorded the view that it had been a “very close race”.  France and the UK decided on Cormann but Malmström was unable to secure a unified bloc of voters.  Christopher Shorrock, the UK representative, told the Financial Times that both candidates had “broad support” but a straw poll showed “Cormann as the candidate with the most support”.

Sending Cormann to the OECD could be seen as a Trojan horse gesture on the part of Australia’s Morrison government.  As a front bencher in right wing administrations, climate change was treated as a secondary concern.  Suggestions to turn his adopted country towards the goal of net zero carbon emissions by 2050 were denigrated as the musings of extremists.

The Australian Greens leader, Adam Bandt, was almost desperate in trying to convince each of the ambassadors with a vote not to appoint him.  His letter from last November to the voting bloc documented various highlights of Cormann’s time in parliament.  He had voted to “repeal Australia’s successful carbon price” in 2014.  He had attempted to abolish the Clean Energy Finance Corporation and the Australian Renewal Energy Agency.  “As finance minister, he tried to abolish the very same green finance bodies he will no doubt be promoting as evidence of his green credentials for the job.”

The OECD itself has reproached Australia’s climate change policies.  In a 2019 report, the organisation notes Australia’s “progress in decoupling the main environmental pressures from economic growth” but that it remains “one of the most resource- and carbon-intensive OECD economies”.  The country was on track to meet its 2020 climate target but needed to “intensify efforts to reach its Paris Agreement goal of reducing GHG emissions (including emissions from land use change and forestry) by between 26% and 28% below its 2005 levels by 2030.”

Cormann’s lobbying exercise, one well aided by the tax-payer funded services of a Royal Australian Air Force jet, chose to focus on other matters.  Here was a European connected to the Asia-Pacific.  He was keen to be a “consensus” candidate.  If needed, he would waffle about the green agenda.  During his campaign, he proposed that the OECD “provide important global leadership to drive ambitious and effective action on climate change” and “help economies around the world achieve global net-zero emissions by 2050”.

In a statement released after his selection thanking the organisation, Cormann made the mandatory salute to environmental policy, putting the case that the OECD will continue to “drive and promote global leadership on ambitious and effective action on climate change to achieve global net-zero emissions by 2050.”  But it was merely one of a range of other objectives: maximising the economic recovery in the wake of the pandemic, reaching multilateral understanding on digital taxation and, as ever, the promotion of “market-based policies and a rules-based international order”.

His vision statement similarly talks of the need to “get to zero net emissions as soon as possible.  Climate policy responses will increasingly need to factor into long-term planning.”  Not exactly the sort of language he was known for when a member of the Australian government.

The narrative of a climate change vandal turned green advocate failed to convince the environmental lobby that campaigned against Cormann as a viable choice.  On being notified of Cormann’s appointment, Greenpeace’s international executive director Jennifer Morgan was aghast.  “We have little confidence in Mr Cormann’s ability to ensure the OECD is a leader in tackling the climate crisis when he himself has an atrocious record on the issue, including opposition to carbon pricing.”

It is unlikely that the new secretary general will be able to do much in the way of redirecting climate change policy. The consensus, if it can be called that, is increasingly towards decarbonising the economy even as COVID-19 recovery is pursued.  Whether the OECD continues being relevant with Cormann at the helm is the pressing question.  Till an answer is provided, activists such as Hare will just have to accept that governments can be monumentally stupid.

Links

(AU) Bold Actions Needed - There's No Vaccine For Climate Change

Canberra Times - Adrian Zammit


Author
Dr Adrian Zammit is chief executive of Landcare NSW.
Every day we hear how COVID-19 vaccines are being rolled out across Australia to put a lid on this pandemic and allow us to resume our lives.

Every day we also hear about excessive carbon emissions and the resulting climate change, and how this will change our lives.

Unfortunately, we do not have a vaccine for climate change.

Instead, decarbonisation of our economy will require productive partnerships between governments, corporates and communities.

I believe that Landcare is the partner of choice for government and corporates in our collective fight against climate change.

Landcare NSW and its member groups recognise the significant challenges of climate change and its impacts on farming systems, environmental conservation, and communities.

Through peer-to-peer learning across fence lines, more formalised community workshops, and by implementing projects in urban, rural and regional NSW, Landcare groups are pioneering ideas that drive practice change towards more sustainable farming and increased biodiversity protection.

At a state level, Landcare NSW is actively engaging with its partners in government and the corporate sector to help facilitate the changes needed.

By working with the members of the NSW Parliamentary Friends of Landcare or through our formal partnership arrangements with Local Land Services, the NSW Biodiversity Conservation Trust, the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment, Saving our Species, corporates and other NGOs, Landcare NSW ensures that sustainable farming, conservation, and resilient communities are at the heart of government and corporate policies and projects.

Only this week we celebrated the launch of the Federal Parliamentary Friends of Landcare in Canberra, a positive step forward as we position Landcare as a key stakeholder in our sustainable future.

I believe these mutually beneficial partnerships are fundamental to the future success of Landcare NSW and its member community as they highlight Landcare as the ideal delivery partner for regional, state and national projects, programs and other initiatives, for which success is underpinned by community engagement.

The COVID-19 crisis has reminded us that our well-being is dependent on the wellbeing of our planet.

Time is running out. We must work together to take bold actions to protect, restore and sustainably manage our environment while safeguarding our economic wellbeing before it is too late.

Landcare, working hand-in-hand with government and corporates, is perfectly placed to play a significant role in sustainable farming, conservation and healthy communities.

Links

Climate Change-Related Disasters A Major Threat To Food Security – FAO

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change


Simon Fanger / Unsplash

Rome – A new report released today by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) shows that the increasing frequency and  intensity of extreme weather disasters such as floods, droughts and megafires as a result of climate change is having a devastating effect on food security and livelihoods.

The report highlights the need for stronger disaster risk reduction policies and intensified efforts to build resilience to the adverse impacts of climate change to ensure agriculture’s crucial role in achieving a sustainable future.

According to the report, the annual occurrence of disasters is now more than three times that of the 1970s and 1980s as a result of our warming climate. Relative to agriculture, industry, commerce and tourism taken as a whole, on its own agriculture absorbs the disproportionate share of 63% of impact from disasters, with the least developed countries (LDCs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) bearing the major brunt of these scourges.

Thus, between 2008 and 2018, the impacts of natural disasters cost the agricultural sectors of developing country economies over USD 108 billion in damaged or lost crop and livestock production. Such damage can be particularly detrimental to livelihoods of smallholder and subsistence farmers, pastoralists, and fishers.

Over the analyzed period, Asia was the most hard-hit region, with overall economic losses adding up to a staggering USD 49 billion, followed by Africa at USD 30 billion, and Latin America and Caribbean at USD 29 billion.

"The upheaval set in motion by COVID-19 may push even more families and communities into deeper distress," said FAO Director-General QU Dongyu in the foreword to the report. "Disaster impact is pervasive and requires immediate efforts to better assess and understand its dynamics, so that it may be reduced and managed in integrated and innovative ways. The urgency and importance of doing so have never been greater".

Major threats

The report identifies drought as the single greatest culprit of agricultural production loss, followed by floods, storms, pests and diseases, and wildfires. Over 34% of crop and livestock production loss in LDCs and LMICs is traced to drought, costing the sector USD 37 billion overall. Drought impacts agriculture almost exclusively. The sector sustains 82% of all drought impact, compared to 18% in all other sectors.

Crop and livestock pests, diseases and infestations have also become an important stressor for the sector. Such biological disasters caused nine percent of all crop and livestock production loss in the period from 2008 to 2018. The potential threat of disasters of this category was rendered evident in 2020 when huge swarms of desert locusts ravaged across the Greater Horn of Africa, the Arabian Peninsula, and Southwest Asia, destroying crops and jeopardising food security.

Meanwhile, the COVID-19 pandemic is placing an additional burden on agri-food systems exacerbating existing, systemic risks with cascading effects on lives, livelihoods, and economies worldwide.

Disaster impacts on food security and nutrition

Disasters extend beyond the economic realm having deleterious consequences for food security and nutrition. For the first time ever, this edition of the FAO report converts economic losses into caloric and nutrition equivalents.

For example, it estimates that crop and livestock production loss in LDCs and LMICs between 2008 and 2018 were equivalent to a loss of 6.9 trillion kilocalories per year. This equals the annual calorie intake of seven million adults.

In Latin America and the Caribbean, disaster impacts during that same time frame convert to a loss of 975 calories per capita per day, accounting for 40% of recommended daily allowance, followed by Africa (559 calories) and Asia (283 calories).

A disaster-resilient future is possible

Investing in resilience and disaster risk reduction, especially data gathering and analysis for evidence-informed action, is of paramount importance to ensure agriculture's crucial role in achieving a sustainable future, FAO's report argues.

Holistic responses and cross-sectoral collaboration are key in the disaster response. Countries must adopt a multi-hazard and multi-sectoral systemic risk management approach to anticipate, prevent, prepare for and respond to disaster risk in agriculture. Strategies need to integrate not only natural hazards, but also anthropogenic and biological threats, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, and must be based on an understanding of the systemic nature and interdependencies of risks.

Innovations such as remote sensing, geospatial information gathering, drones and disaster robotics, and machine learning are powerful new assessment and data gathering tools that have much to offer in the quest to reduce disaster risks in agriculture.

In addition to efficient governance, it is crucial to promote public-private partnerships to address the urgent need for investment in reducing agriculture's susceptibility to disasters and climate change.

About the report

FAO's recurring report The Impact of Disasters and Crises on Agriculture and Food Security presents the most recent trends in agricultural production loss attributed to disasters across all agricultural sectors. The 2021 edition covers 457 disasters in 109 countries across all regions and income categories, including for the first time upper-middle- and high-income countries (UMICs and HICs).

Of the 109 countries to register disaster-related agriculture loss, 94 are in the LDC and LMIC categories, where 389 disasters hampered agricultural production.

Links