Africa cannot pay the bill for climate change

Can you imagine having to take out a loan to repair the damage caused by an accident that you did not cause and which, on top of that, was particularly damaging and burdensome? Can you imagine this situation happening to you when you are unemployed and have no savings to fall back on? This is the dilemma facing many African countries regarding climate change. Although the continent generates only 4% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, it is suffering the most from the devastating effects of global warming. In previous articles and during the previous COPs, we already pointed out that severe droughts, floods, desertification processes and other natural disasters hit different areas of the African continent, putting lives, livelihoods and millions of people at risk. In addition, the debt to deal with these disasters or simply to exist and survive brings African countries to the edge of the abyss, while we, in the West, let us to teach lessons and take advantage of their vulnerability through loans that we disguise as independent. kindness

This introduction comes from a question I asked myself as a result of the COP29 being held in Baku (Azerbaijan) and which refers to who will pay the bill for change climate The quickest and simplest answer is, of course, Africa.

We know that three quarters of the world’s forcibly displaced people live in countries that are highly vulnerable to climate risks and that the number of people fleeing from conflict has doubled in the last ten years, reaching 120 million, with 90 million of these in countries where the weather is very exposed. risks. Cases like those of Sudan, Chad or South Sudan come to mind, present in the media these days and reminding us that climate change is about people, stories and lives. Conflict, forced migration, environmental degradation and climate change make up a terrible cocktail that mortgages the future of countries like the ones I mentioned.

To deal with an environmental crisis that they did not create, African countries must rely on external funding, which comes mainly in the form of loans. These loans, although they sometimes offer lower interest rates or longer repayment terms, add to the already large debts outside the continent. 1.12 trillion dollars. Of the $8 billion that multilateral financial institutions gave to Africa in 2022 for climate action, $5.4 billion were loans.

The lack of financing for change forces African countries to prioritize debt repayment, putting it above basic needs such as health and education of their citizens. Furthermore, only half of the climate finance that Africa received in 2022 was dedicated to adaptation, with the rest going to mitigation, a priority in the global north. By not investing enough in adaptation, developed countries contribute to Africa’s weakness, making the continent dependent on humanitarian aid in times of crisis. It is estimated that if greenhouse gas emissions are not stopped by 2050, Africa could lose $50 billion a year and suffer 250,000 deaths annually between 2030 and 2050.

In the context of climate change, adaptation and mitigation are two complementary strategies that, although often used interchangeably, have different meanings and address different aspects of the problem.

Mitigation refers to actions that attempt to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming and include changes in the way we produce and use energy: moving to renewable energy sources, improving energy efficiency and promoting sustainable practices in agriculture and industry. On the other hand, adaptation focuses on adapting to the effects of climate change that we are already experiencing and preparing for future effects. It can include building infrastructure that is resilient to extreme weather, developing early warning systems for natural disasters, diversifying agricultural crops to withstand droughts and floods, and improving governance water resources.

In the case of Africa, as is evident, there is an urgent need for change.
We are facing a vicious cycle and COP29 should be the turning point to change course dramatically. We cannot allow African countries to continue paying more for debt service than for climate action, while global financial institutions enrich themselves at the expense of such precariousness. African countries need concrete solutions, not empty promises. It is time for developed countries, the real historical terrorists in the climate crisis, to take responsibility: for us to meet our climate finance commitments and provide money in the form of grants, not loans which will further strangle African economies. In addition, it is absolutely necessary to facilitate funding application processes, reduce the risk of credit rating agencies and stop putting pressure on African countries to prioritize our agenda and reduce emissions, even at the cost other policy development.

It’s not just about money. Africa needs urgent access to technology and innovation to build resilience and adapt to climate change. Artificial intelligence, for example, has great potential to improve food production and resource management in the current context, but the technology gap between Africa and the rest of the world is still staggering. Furthermore, many of us fear that if Western companies control these technologies, they could impose unsustainable prices or restrict access to them, increasing technological dependence. and limiting the ability of the continent to be autonomous in this matter. We do not consider it: we have already seen it in cases such as the treatment for HIV-AIDS, malaria or Covid.

Today solutions are emerging to balance the balance. Carbon markets can be a powerful tool to finance climate action in Africa, a continent that is positioning itself as a “hub” in the pollution rights market with the sale of carbon credits to industrialized countries. It is true that while this may generate income for Africa, it also means that developed countries can “buy” the right to continue polluting, producing the environmental responsibilities.

But it is not so true that there are interesting proposals in this sense that will contribute to the progress of Africans. Ghana, for example, has signed bilateral agreements with several industrialized countries for the sale of carbon credits. Through initiatives such as supporting improved stoves (that do not consume coal) in rural areas or rice farming practices that generate less methane, it receives resources to finance its sustainable development, and countries such as Switzerland to offset some of their emissions. On paper, at least, it seems like an idea to consider.

Another promising option is to reconsider the use of remittances, the money that migrants send to their families in their countries of origin and which is also a vital source of funding for many communities. In 2022, remittances to Africa will reach nearly $100 billion, surpassing official development aid and foreign direct investment. This sustainable funding stream could be used as a lifeline for societies by financing climate change projects, such as building sustainable infrastructure or investing in sustainable agriculture.

Anyway, at COP29, Africa must raise its voice and demand climate justice. The world cannot allow the continent that has contributed the least to climate change to pay the highest price. COP29 should be an opportunity to correct course and build a fairer and more sustainable future for Africa and the entire world.

* General Director of Casa Africa