Email · kontakt@ine.org.pl
Institute of New Europe Institute of New Europe Institute of New Europe Institute of New Europe
  • Home
  • Ukraine
  • Reports
  • Publications
  • Programmes
    • Europe
    • Security
    • Indo-Pacific
    • Three Seas Think Tanks Hub
  • People
  • Contact
  • Newsletter
  • Polski
Institute of New Europe Institute of New Europe
  • Home
  • Ukraine
  • Reports
  • Publications
  • Programmes
    • Europe
    • Security
    • Indo-Pacific
    • Three Seas Think Tanks Hub
  • People
  • Contact
  • Newsletter
  • Polski
Jan 24
Geopolitics, International Politics, Publications, UN

Lost and damaged: the geopolitics of belatedly tackled climate and biodiversity adaptation

January 24, 2023

The 2022 COP conferences in Sharm el-Sheikh and Montreal were, depending on who you ask, either regrettable or no short of spectacular. The COP27 climate gathering in Egypt will not go down in history as groundbreaking in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but in retrospect it will perhaps be considered a landmark edition. This is because the loss and damage principle finally materialized, albeit imperfectly, paving the way for the formalization and aggregation of the efforts to compensate the poorest states for the climate-related damage they incur. The conference perhaps initiated a certain change in perception of the climate COP format, hitherto focused almost exclusively on mitigation efforts. A similar thing can be said about this year’s COP15 conference on biodiversity, where a deal was struck to declare 1/3 of the planet as a protected zone and to flow billions of dollars into the developing world to reverse biodiversity loss. All in all, the two outcomes portend a new chapter in international climate negotiations. More importantly still, they herald  the advent of a new sphere of interstate competition: the geopolitics of climate adaptation.

Up until this year, climate adaptation had largely remained out of the climate COP’s scope of business. Largely, because to help finance climate action in developing countries, the richest economies pledged in 2009 at the Copenhagen summit to provide them with $100 billion a year starting in 2020. The promises have remained unfulfilled however, and Britain’s Oxfam estimates that by 2025 developed countries will donate at most $93-95 billion for adaptation. Separately, the Chinese-brokered accord with 190 signatories at the COP15 UN Biodiversity Conference this December pledged to provide $30 billion in yearly conservation aid for the developing world to protect lands, oceans and species from pollution, degradation and the climate crisis. While the very notion of “loss and damage”, a principle for addressing the harm caused by anthropogenic climate change, applies to the climate domain, its role is functionally rather similar to the solution now conceived for addressing biodiversity loss. And rightly so, because, as highlighted by the leaders gathered in Canada last month, “we cannot achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement without drastically reducing the threat to biodiversity – and Vice Versa”.

While both developments are huge news for adaptation, as always, the devil hides in the details. It is going to take some years before the climate loss and damage fund becomes operational. A roadmap was adopted, but technicalities are missing – who will provide funding, how, and what role is to be given to multilateral investment institution(s).  These deficiencies have attracted criticism, and so have those underlying the biodiversity deal, belittled for “its loopholes, weak language, and timelines around actions that aren’t commensurate with the scale of the nature crisis we’re all witnessing”, as one expert put it. But these criticisms, however valid, overshadow a crucial point: that adaptation is finally finding an actual and well-deserved place in the entwined climate and nature agendas. Perception matters, and even if full implementation of these achievements will take time, their adoption has hopefully set in motion a political dynamic which admits that adapting to a changing climate is a struggle of at least equal importance to that of climate mitigation. 

These acknowledgments of the relevance of adaptation are belated, but indispensable.  The Cost of Delay report, released this fall with widespread endorsement, pointed out the consequences of the lack of streams of adaptation financing from the Global North to the Global South. Since 1991, 55 countries most vulnerable to the consequences of climate change have suffered economic losses from extreme weather events totalling over half a trillion dollars,  or 20% of their total GDP, while the profits of the fossil fuel industry have exceeded these losses nearly 60 times. In developing countries, extreme weather events – of which the number more than doubled – were responsible for  almost 80% of all recorded deaths caused by such events, killing nearly 7 million people.

Meanwhile, as laid out in the prominent 2019 IPBES report, the Earth has already lost roughly half of its natural ecosystems, ⅔ of the oceans are negatively impacted, ¾ of its land surface has been significantly altered, and over 85% of wetlands have been lost.

Bear in mind that nature itself is mitigating half of the anthropogenically induced CO2 emissions via natural carbon sinks and photosynthesis. Halting biodiversity loss is therefore critical to effective climate action.

As mind-blowing as the figures cited above are, the fear they engender is hopefully finally bringing about the much needed prioritization of adaptation measures. Yet the glass remains half full and half empty. Regardless of the well-established causal relationship between the extent of emissions in rich countries and its dire consequences for the poor ones, the leverage of the former over the latter which climate adaptation confers is immense. First of all, the question of profitability casts a long shadow over the consistency of the assistance to adapt. Adaptation finance has less lure than mitigation as it is more akin to sunk costs rather than investments – e.g., foreign funding of coastal shore-ups in Vanuatu will not bring the profit of a wind farm financed in India. On the other hand, many of the countries most exposed to climate risks possess some of the terrestrial resources much needed to advance the green energy transition: think cobalt in Congo or nickel in Indonesia. Then there is the Sino-American rivalry, practically opposing the collective West on one hand, and China, Russia and Iran on the other, with both camps courting other countries to join them. China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and US-led Build Back Better World (B3W) both propose climate investments to bait emerging economies and choose joining one block over the other.

These are just two of the various examples of geopolitical leverages which the Global North is discovering that it has over the Global South in the sphere of climate adaptation. Ample space has therefore emerged for the billions needed for increasing climate resilience in most vulnerable countries to come with strings attached. Climate change knows no state boundaries, and while in the very long run taming it is in the interest of all nations, in the short to mid-term we may witness assistance to adapt being conditioned to the geopolitical requirements of the donors. Let it be yet another reminder that even in a world on fire great power rivalry is not going away.

Foto: PAP/EPA

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Tumblr
  • Pinterest
  • Google+
  • LinkedIn
  • E-Mail

Related Posts

See All Publications
  • China, Indo-Pacific, Publications

Watching the 20th CCP National Party Congress from Taipei

From the perspective of Taiwan, a de facto independent sovereign state which continues to exist in the shadows of an…
  • Kuan-Ting Chen
  • January 26, 2023
  • 3SI, Economy, Reports

“Financing the Future. How to attract more foreign investors to the Three Seas Region” [Report]

Authors: George Byczynski, Marta Kakol, Sandra Krawczyszyn, Wojciech Lieder PhD, Mateusz Ptaszek, Radosław Pyffel, Piotr Sosnowski PhD, Patryk Szczotka, Julita…
  • Julita Wilczek
  • January 16, 2023
  • Asia, China, Publications, Taiwan

The CPC 20th National Congress: Taiwan has Become a Key Front Line in the U.S.-China Tech Rivalry

Changes in personnel arrangement and economic policies are widely considered as most important elements in watching the 20th Chinese Communist…
  • Claire Lin
  • December 22, 2022
See All Publications

Comments are closed.

Maciej Bukowski. A PhD candidate in the Institute of Political Science and International Relations at Jagiellonian University. A graduate of l’École de Droit de la Sorbonne and Cornell Law School, he is a senior expert at Poland’s Ministry of Climate and Environment.
Program Europa tworzą:

Marcin Chruściel

Dyrektor programu. Absolwent studiów doktoranckich z zakresu nauk o polityce na Uniwersytecie Wrocławskim, magister stosunków międzynarodowych i europeistyki Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. Prezes Zarządu Instytutu Nowej Europy.

dr Artur Bartoszewicz

Przewodniczący Rady Programowej Instytutu Nowej Europy. Doktor nauk ekonomicznych Szkoły Głównej Handlowej. Ekspert w dziedzinie polityki publicznej, w tym m. in. strategii państwa i gospodarki.

Michał Banasiak

Specjalizuje się w relacjach sportu i polityki. Autor analiz, komentarzy i wywiadów z zakresu dyplomacji sportowej i polityki międzynarodowej. Były dziennikarz Polsat News i wysłannik redakcji zagranicznej Telewizji Polskiej.

Maciej Pawłowski

Ekspert ds. migracji, gospodarki i polityki państw basenu Morza Śródziemnego. W latach 2018-2020 Analityk PISM ds. Południowej Europy. Autor publikacji w polskiej i zagranicznej prasie na temat Hiszpanii, Włoch, Grecji, Egiptu i państw Magrebu. Od września 2020 r. mieszka w północnej Afryce (Egipt, Algieria).

Jędrzej Błaszczak

Absolwent studiów prawniczych Uniwersytetu Śląskiego w Katowicach. Jego zainteresowania badawcze koncentrują się na Inicjatywie Trójmorza i polityce w Bułgarii. Doświadczenie zdobywał w European Foundation of Human Rights w Wilnie, Center for the Study of Democracy w Sofii i polskich placówkach dyplomatycznych w Teheranie i Tbilisi.

Program Bezpieczeństwo tworzą:

dr Aleksander Olech

Dyrektor programu. Wykładowca na Baltic Defence College, absolwent Europejskiej Akademii Dyplomacji oraz Akademii Sztuki Wojennej. Jego główne zainteresowania badawcze to terroryzm, bezpieczeństwo w Europie Środkowo-Wschodniej oraz rola NATO i UE w środowisku zagrożeń hybrydowych.

dr Agnieszka Rogozińska

Członek Rady Programowej Instytutu Nowej Europy. Doktor nauk społecznych w dyscyplinie nauki o polityce. Zainteresowania badawcze koncentruje na problematyce bezpieczeństwa euroatlantyckiego, instytucjonalnym wymiarze bezpieczeństwa i współczesnych zagrożeniach.

Aleksy Borówka

Doktorant na Wydziale Nauk Społecznych Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, Przewodniczący Krajowej Reprezentacji Doktorantów w kadencji 2020. Autor kilkunastu prac naukowych, poświęconych naukom o bezpieczeństwie, naukom o polityce i administracji oraz stosunkom międzynarodowym. Laureat I, II oraz III Międzynarodowej Olimpiady Geopolitycznej.

Karolina Siekierka

Absolwentka Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego na kierunku stosunki międzynarodowe, specjalizacji Bezpieczeństwo i Studia Strategiczne. Jej zainteresowania badawcze obejmują politykę zagraniczną i wewnętrzną Francji, prawa człowieka oraz konflikty zbrojne.

Stanisław Waszczykowski

Podoficer rezerwy, student studiów magisterskich na kierunku Bezpieczeństwo Międzynarodowe i Dyplomacja na Akademii Sztuki Wojennej, były praktykant w BBN. Jego zainteresowania badawcze obejmują m.in. operacje pokojowe ONZ oraz bezpieczeństwo Ukrainy.

Leon Pińczak

Student studiów drugiego stopnia na Uniwersytecie Warszawskim na kierunku stosunki międzynarodowe. Dziennikarz polskojęzycznej redakcji Biełsatu. Zawodowo zajmuje się obszarem postsowieckim, rosyjską polityką wewnętrzną i doktrynami FR. Biegle włada językiem rosyjskim.

Program Indo-Pacyfik tworzą:

Łukasz Kobierski

Dyrektor programu. Współzałożyciel INE oraz prezes zarządu w latach 2019-2021. Stypendysta szkoleń z zakresu bezpieczeństwa na Daniel Morgan Graduate School of National Security w Waszyngtonie, ekspert od stosunków międzynarodowych. Absolwent Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego oraz Uniwersytetu Mikołaja Kopernika. Wiceprezes Zarządu INE.

dr Joanna Siekiera

Prawnik międzynarodowy, doktor nauk społecznych, adiunkt na Wydziale Prawa Uniwersytetu w Bergen w Norwegii. Była stypendystką rządu Nowej Zelandii na Uniwersytecie Victorii w Wellington, niemieckiego Institute of Cultural Diplomacy, a także francuskiego Institut de relations internationales et stratégiques.

Paweł Paszak

Absolwent stosunków międzynarodowych (spec. Wschodnioazjatycka) na Uniwersytecie Warszawskim oraz stypendysta University of Kent (W. Brytania) i Hainan University (ChRL). Doktorant UW i Akademii Sztuki Wojennej. Jego zainteresowania badawcze obejmują politykę zagraniczną ChRL oraz strategiczną rywalizację Chiny-USA.

Jakub Graca

Magister stosunków międzynarodowych na Uniwersytecie Jagiellońskim; studiował także filologię orientalną (specjalność: arabistyka). Analityk Centrum Inicjatyw Międzynarodowych (Warszawa) oraz Instytutu Nowej Europy. Zainteresowania badawcze: Stany Zjednoczone (z naciskiem na politykę zagraniczną), relacje transatlantyckie.

Patryk Szczotka

Absolwent filologii dalekowschodniej ze specjalnością chińską na Uniwersytecie Wrocławskim oraz student kierunku double degree China and International Relations na Aalborg University oraz University of International Relations (国际关系学院) w Pekinie. Jego zainteresowania naukowe to relacje polityczne i gospodarcze UE-ChRL oraz dyplomacja.

The programme's team:

Marcin Chruściel

Programme director. Graduate of PhD studies in Political Science at the University of Wroclaw and Master studies in International Relations at the Jagiellonian University in Krakow. President of the Management Board at the Institute of New Europe.

PhD Artur Bartoszewicz

Chairman of the Institute's Programme Board. Doctor of Economic Sciences at the SGH Warsaw School of Economics. Expert in the field of public policy, including state and economic strategies. Expert at the National Centre for Research and Development and the Digital Poland Projects Centre.

Michał Banasiak

He specializes in relationship of sports and politics. Author of analysis, comments and interviews in the field of sports diplomacy and international politics. Former Polsat News and Polish Television’s foreign desk journalist.

Maciej Pawłowski

Expert on migration, economics and politics of Mediterranean countries. In the period of 2018-2020 PISM Analyst on Southern Europe. Author of various articles in Polish and foreign press about Spain, Italy, Greece, Egypt and Maghreb countries. Since September 2020 lives in North Africa (Egypt, Algeria).

Jędrzej Błaszczak

Graduate of Law at the University of Silesia. His research interests focus on the Three Seas Initiative and politics in Bulgaria. He acquired experience at the European Foundation of Human Rights in Vilnius, the Center for the Study of Democracy in Sofia, and in Polish embassies in Tehran and Tbilisi.

PhD Aleksander Olech

Programme director. Visiting lecturer at the Baltic Defence College, graduate of the European Academy of Diplomacy and War Studies University. His main research interests include terrorism, international cooperation for security in Eastern Europe and the role of NATO and the EU with regard to hybrid threats.

PhD Agnieszka Rogozińska

Member of the Institute's Programme Board. Doctor of Social Sciences in the discipline of Political Science. Editorial secretary of the academic journals "Politics & Security" and "Independence: journal devoted to Poland's recent history". Her research interests focus on security issues.

Aleksy Borówka

PhD candidate at the Faculty of Social Sciences in the University of Wroclaw, the President of the Polish National Associations of PhD Candidates in 2020. The author of dozen of scientific papers, concerning security studies, political science, administration, international relations. Laureate of the I, II and III International Geopolitical Olympiad.

Karolina Siekierka

Graduate of International Relations specializing in Security and Strategic Studies at University of Warsaw. Erasmus student at the Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1) and the Institut d’Etudes Politique de Paris (Sciences Po Paris). Her research areas include human rights, climate change and armed conflicts.

Stanisław Waszczykowski

Reserve non-commissioned officer. Master's degree student in International Security and Diplomacy at the War Studies University in Warsaw, former trainee at the National Security Bureau. His research interests include issues related to UN peacekeeping operations and the security of Ukraine.

Leon Pińczak

A second-degree student at the University of Warsaw, majoring in international relations. A journalist of the Polish language edition of Belsat. Interested in the post-Soviet area, with a particular focus on Russian internal politics and Russian doctrines - foreign, defense and information-cybernetic.

Łukasz Kobierski

Programme director. Deputy President of the Management Board. Scholarship holder at the Daniel Morgan Graduate School of National Security in Washington and an expert in the field of international relations. Graduate of the University of Warsaw and the Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń

PhD Joanna Siekiera

International lawyer, Doctor of social sciences, postdoctor at the Faculty of Law, University of Bergen, Norway. She was a scholarship holder of the New Zealand government at the Victoria University of Wellington, Institute of Cultural Diplomacy in Germany, Institut de relations internationales et stratégiques in France.

Paweł Paszak

Graduate of International Relations (specialisation in East Asian Studies) from the University of Warsaw and scholarship holder at the University of Kent (UK) and Hainan University (China). PhD candidate at the University of Warsaw and the War Studies University. His research areas include the foreign policy of China and the strategic rivalry between China and the US in the Indo-Pacific.

Jakub Graca

Master of International Relations at the Jagiellonian University in Krakow. He also studied Arabic therein. An analyst at the Center for International Initiatives (Warsaw) and the Institute of New Europe. Research interests: United States (mainly foreign policy), transatlantic relations.

Patryk Szczotka

A graduate of Far Eastern Philology with a specialization in China Studies at the University of Wroclaw and a student of a double degree “China and International Relations” at Aalborg University and University of International Relations (国际关系学院) in Beijing. His research interests include EU-China political and economic relations, as well as diplomacy.

Three Seas Think Tanks Hub is a platform of cooperation among different think tanks based in 3SI member countries. Their common goal is to strengthen public debate and understanding of the Three Seas region seen from the political, economic and security perspective. The project aims at exchanging ideas, research and publications on the region’s potential and challenges.

Members

The Baltic Security Foundation (Latvia)

The BSF promotes the security and defense of the Baltic Sea region. It gathers security experts from the region and beyond, provides a platform for discussion and research, promotes solutions that lead to stronger regional security in the military and other areas.

The Institute for Politics and Society (Czech Republic)

The Institute analyses important economic, political, and social areas that affect today’s society. The mission of the Institute is to cultivate the Czech political and public sphere through professional and open discussion.

Nézöpont Institute (Hungary)

The Institute aims at improving Hungarian public life and public discourse by providing real data, facts and opinions based on those. Its primary focus points are Hungarian youth, media policy and Central European cooperation.

The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (Austria)

The wiiw is one of the principal centres for research on Central, East and Southeast Europe with 50 years of experience. Over the years, the Institute has broadened its expertise, increasing its regional coverage – to European integration, the countries of Wider Europe and selected issues of the global economy.

The International Institute for Peace (Austria)

The Institute strives to address the most topical issues of the day and promote dialogue, public engagement, and a common understanding to ensure a holistic approach to conflict resolution and a durable peace. The IIP functions as a platform to promote peace and non-violent conflict resolution across the world.

The Institute for Regional and International Studies (Bulgaria)

The IRIS initiates, develops and implements civic strategies for democratic politics at the national, regional and international level. The Institute promotes the values of democracy, civil society, freedom and respect for law and assists the process of deepening Bulgarian integration in NATO and the EU.

The European Institute of Romania

EIR is a public institution whose mission is to provide expertise in the field of European Affairs to the public administration, the business community, the social partners and the civil society. EIR’s activity is focused on four key domains: research, training, communication, translation of the EHRC case-law.

The Institute of New Europe (Poland)

The Institute is an advisory and analytical non-governmental organisation active in the fields of international politics, international security and economics. The Institute supports policy-makers by providing them with expert opinions, as well as creating a platform for academics, publicists, and commentators to exchange ideas.

YouTube

Najnowsze publikacje

  • Watching the 20th CCP National Party Congress from Taipei
    by Kuan-Ting Chen
    January 26, 2023
  • Lost and damaged: the geopolitics of belatedly tackled climate and biodiversity adaptation
    by Maciej Bukowski
    January 24, 2023
  • “Financing the Future. How to attract more foreign investors to the Three Seas Region” [Report]
    by Julita Wilczek
    January 16, 2023
  • The CPC 20th National Congress: Taiwan has Become a Key Front Line in the U.S.-China Tech Rivalry
    by Claire Lin
    December 22, 2022
  • The institution of marriage and divorce in Judaism vs. in Islam
    by Aleksandra Siwek
    December 20, 2022

Categories

THE MOST POPULAR TAGS:

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

China economy European Union International politics International security Poland Russia Security terrorism Ukraine USA

  • Home
  • Ukraine
  • Publications
  • Reports
  • Programmes
  • People
  • Contact

Funded by the National Liberty Institute – Center for Civil Society
Development under the Governmental Civil Society Organisations Development Programme for 2018-2030

© 2019-2020 The Institute of New Europe Foundation · All rights reserved · Support us