Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) Press Release (reprinted with permission)
By Makereta Komai for Climate Pasifika in Bonn, Germany
11 June 2010 Bonn, Germany — After two weeks of climate change talks in the German City of Bonn, there are more questions than answers to what was expected to be a consensus text to usher in a possible legally binding deal in Cancun, Mexico at the end of the year. A non paper introduced Thursday by the chair of the long term co-operative action, Margaret Mukahanana-Sangarwe was re-submitted as the revised text Friday in the hope that it becomes the conclusions of the negotiations here in Bonn.
Much to the dismay of many Parties, including the Alliance of Small Island States and the influential Group of 77 and China described the revised text as “unbalanced and not reflective of the views expressed in the informal contact groups.”
A delegation from Egypt told the plenary that his delegation does not want to see the revised text again in August and urged the chair that the text remains a non-paper and not be used as a basis for negotiations.
India joined in the chorus of opposition, saying new un-bracketed paragraphs have appeared in the text which is inconsistent with the Convention.
It called for line by line negotiations in the August negotiating session.
Brazil was equally furious. “We are dismayed because the revised text did not bring the Parties to any consensus. Many of our views are deleted in this revision making this text less balance and therefore less acceptable for negotiations.”
Another delegate said, “The chair presented us with a recipe at the start of the talks two weeks ago and when it came to meal time today, we were presented with a very strange meal that we cannot eat. Since this is a Party driven process, the chair needs to take our ingredients.”
Surprisingly, the United States was not happy with the revised text. “We are studying the draft text and as it stands, it contains language that is unacceptable to us. It has parts that incorporate the Kyoto Protocol that we will not accept.
This is in complete opposite to the position of the Umbrella Group of countries of which the U.S is a member.
Speaking on behalf of the Umbrella Group, Australia said they are pleased that the text contains fast start financing that was committed in Copenhagen.
In his last appearance before the international media, the executive secretary of the UN climate body, Yvo de Boer agreed that there are differences but the document can be used as a starting point for negotiations.
“Yes it has shortcomings but we can use it as a basis to continue talking to each other. Some feel that it is not balanced but it’s not being totally rejected.
“The process here has resulted in many Parties talking to each other rather than at each other.
De Boer said more work needs to be done and urged negotiators to up the tempo in the last two rounds of negotiations – Bonn in August and Beijing in October.
“The work here opens the way for Cancun to deliver a full package of operational measures that will allow developing countries to take part in stronger action across all areas of climate change but governments must make full use of the next two formal sessions.
“There is a real need for intense work at all levels including the highest level to provide guidance, said de Boer.
The Dutch national, who leaves the UNFCCC Secretariat this month after almost four years at the helm urged negotiators to begin an in-depth consideration of the legal nature of any new agreement or set of agreements.
It’s essential to take a “cold look” at the 76 emission reduction and emission limitation pledges that have been made by developed and developing countries since the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, he said.
All industrialised countries have pledged emission reduction targets, and 39 developing countries have pledged voluntary actions to limit their greenhouse gas emissions.
“The fact remains industrial country pledges fall well short of the -25-40 percent range the IPCC has said gives a 50 percent chance to keep the global temperature rise below 2 degrees,” he said. “Take all current pledges and plans from all countries and we won’t stop emissions growing in the next 10 years,” he added.
The pledges made by rich countries so far add up to about 12-19percent of emissions over 1990 levels by 2020. Industrialized countries as a group have indicated their willingness to take on a -80 percent goal for 2050.
The European Union acknowledged that some progress had been achieved during the two weeks where Parties were beginning to talk to each other and understand each other’s negotiating positions.
But, ‘the rejection of the revised text by many Parties showed how fragile the process was and that there was still mistrust amongst Parties.’
Cook Islands lead negotiator, Pasha Carruthers was frustrated with the dilly dallying attitude towards adaptation. This, she said, was a delaying tactic from developing countries to meet their obligations.
“It was frustrating at this session because it seemed like developing countries were trying to put things on hold or outside the UNFCCC process rather than engaging on climate change in the central forum that involves all parties.
“There is still mistrust amongst Parties and no willingness to accept some of the responsibilities they are obligated to and that is why they want to push it out of the process. Article 4.4 of the Convention obligates developed countries to assist vulnerable countries in meeting the costs of the impacts of climate change, said Carruthers.
Responding to the ‘adaptation’ clause in the revised text, Carruthers said some of the concerns are reflected in the language of the text especially the establishment of an international mechanism for loss and damage.
“For now, I can safely say that we are still a long way from an agreement. There has been some reaching out amongst Parties behind closed doors, which have proved fruitful. It was through these bilateral meetings that we realised that some of our positions weren’t as far apart as we thought, said Carruthers.
Carruthers, who has been part of the climate change negotiations for almost ten years, remains optimistic and urged Pacific and AOSIS negotiators not to give up too soon.
“People have suggested to me that some things will not get through because they are red light for many parties but we have to believe in the integrity of the process and ensure that we have an outcome that does guarantee our survival”.
International civil societies also jumped on the opposition bandwagon calling for more transparency from the chair of the LCA.
The World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) said climate change negotiators have missed some important goals, while showing a much stronger performance than in previous rounds.
“Bonn made good progress on some crucial building blocks that will be essential parts of a future regime to tackle climate change, and there is really no reason for negotiators to go into extra-time instead of concluding them at the Climate Summit in Mexico this December.”
In WWF’s view, progress in Bonn was mainly a result of improved team spirit among negotiators, with countries from North and South teaming up in unusual coalitions, creating fresh dynamics and space for solutions and compromise.
However, Bonn did not see any major victories on challenging issues like funding and policies to wean economies off fossil fuels and make them fit for the low carbon future, mainly due to a lack of progressive champions and blocking tactics by oil-exporting countries like Saudi Arabia.
The new negotiating text emerging from the Bonn talks could put delegates attending the next two rounds of negotiations before Mexico – one in August and one in October – in a good position to turn trust into traction in Mexico.
“Bonn reminded parties that negotiating in good faith is the best choice, and on this basis Mexico can be the moment where they agree on a significant package of actions and solutions, so that striking a new climate deal in South Africa the following year becomes a realistic goal”, said Gutmann.
“While the football teams of Mexico and South Africa are playing today’s opening match of the football world cup 2010, their governments are key players for success in the low carbon world cup 2011, where it’s not about the victory of one nation, but about a safe future for the entire planet.”
The results of a WWF poll among delegates, observers and journalists at the Bonn talks revealed that a majority of people following the negotiations shares this view. As part of the WWF Climate Deal Oracle, they were asked when we should and when we will get a global climate deal.
54.7 percent of the 265 participants thought we should get a deal by Mexico this December. However, 53.6 percent acknowledged that – realistically – we’d get this deal only in South Africa a year later.
The Bonn gathering was attended by more than 5,500 participants, including government delegates from 185 governments, along with representatives from business and industry, environmental organisations and research institutions.
This is the final posting on the Climate Change negotiations from Ms Makereta Komai who provided media coverage on the Bonn Climate Change talks from 31 May – 11 June 2010, thanks to support from Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF).
We would like to commend her for her hard work during the Climate Change negotiations in Bonn, which has helped raise the profile amongst Pacific communities of international climate change negotiations and their impact upon the Pacific islands region.
Fa’afetai lava.
Related Link: http://www.climatepasifika.blogspot.com/
Contact Name
|
Nanette Woonton |
e-mail
|
nanettew@sprep.org |
Phone
|
(685) 21929 |
Fax
|
(685) 20231 |
1 Comment
Posted on September 1, 2010 by Laura Brewington
SPREP Launches study on regional financing for climate change
Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) Press Release (reprinted with permission)
7/23/2010
The Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) has commenced a study with a view to establishing a regional Climate Change Fund or other mechanism. It will aim to help Pacific island countries improve access to and management of the various financial resources being committed globally to combat climate change.
The study responds to recommendations of the Pacific Climate Change Roundtable held in the Marshall Islands in 2009. Delegates to the Roundtable meeting had expressed concern that, while millions of dollars in climate change funding are currently available at the global level, the Pacific region faces challenges in the ability to access this funding. There are also the added difficulties with effectively managing and implementing many of the projects under current funding arrangements.
The lack of human resources to design and develop proposals and general limitations in technical expertise are major challenges. Compounding the issue are the different expectations and reporting requirements of the different donor organisations.
“There is a need to develop a process that will help countries access funds that can be mobilised in a timely fashion to meet their priorities in mitigation and adaptation,” said SPREP’s Climate Change Adviser, Mr Espen Ronneberg.
At the same time, it is recognised that countries also require assistance in implementation and management of mitigation and adaptation initiatives and in ensuring timely reporting to donors.
“The funding mechanism will need to also address this issue and provide some form of technical backstopping for those countries requiring this additional assistance,” said Mr Ronneberg.
The study will assess resources currently available to Pacific Island Countries for Climate Change initiatives and will identify likely new funding.
“This information will help guide future national and regional responses and policies, including coordination arrangements,” explained Mr Ronneberg.
The SPREP-commissioned study is timely with climate change financing set to dramatically increase as a result of the Copenhagen Accord, which includes a collective commitment by developed countries to provide new and additional resources approaching US$30 billion for the period 2010 – 2012.
The Copenhagen Accord, which was the outcome of the 10th Conference of Parties to the 2009 UN Climate Change Convention, also commits developed countries to jointly mobilise US$100 billion a year by 2020 to address the needs of developing countries.
“The outcomes of the study will help ensure that Pacific requirements are well-articulated and that current challenges and barriers to accessing available climate funds are minimised under current international financing mechanisms,” said Mr Ronneberg.
The results of the study will be presented to the SPREP Ministerial Meeting in Madang, Papua New Guinea in September this year.
Leave a Comment
Posted on July 26, 2010 by Laura Brewington
Climate Change Threatens U.S. Water Sustainability
The Nature Conservancy Press Release (reprinted with permission)
Nearly 1/3 of U.S. Communities at “Extreme” or “High” Risk of Water Supply Falling Short of Demand
ARLINGTON, VA – July 20, 2010 – Climate change will increase the risk of over-allocating future water supply across the United States, according to a report released today by the Natural Resources Defense Council.
The report, based on research from scientists at Tetra Tech, Santa Clara University, and The Nature Conservancy , is a county-by-county analysis of water supply sustainability risk based on five criteria: 1) use of renewable water; 2) sustainable groundwater use; 3) susceptibility to drought; 4) growth in water demand; and 5) future increased need for water storage.
Based on this assessment, nearly 1/3 of all U.S. counties will be at extreme or high risk of water supply sustainability by 2050— triple the number that would be at risk without climate change impacts. More than 70% of all counties will have at least moderate risk to water sustainability.
“This report sends a strong and clear message that we need a national policy now to halt climate change,” said Eric Haxthausen , Director of US Climate Policy for The Nature Conservancy. “Meaningful reductions in greenhouse gas emissions will require a suite of integrated solutions that call on every sector of society. A strong U.S. policy can catalyze global efforts to solve the pressing challenge posed by climate change.”
Several places on the future water sustainability map emerge as being particularly at risk. One of the most striking is the Ogallala Aquifer from Nebraska to Texas, one of the largest in the world. About 30% of water used for farmland irrigation in the U.S. comes from the Ogallala Aquifer.
However, the aquifer replenishes at a very slow rate compared to the rate of water extraction. Water levels have dropped by more than 100ft in many places; some estimates show it could dry up in as few as 25 years.
The good news, scientists point out, is that people can respond with on-the-ground actions that help moderate these impacts and slow the decline of this aquifer.
“One example is the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Conservation Reserve Program, which pays farmers to restore agriculture land to natural habitat. This in turn reduces water use and increases water infiltration into the aquifer,” said Evan Girvetz, Senior Scientist at The Nature Conservancy. “This and other kinds of nature-based adaptation projects can help protect our natural resources, while protecting people against disruptive impacts to our water supply.”
Florida is already experiencing extreme water sustainability risk. Here, wetlands restoration is preserving the landscape’s ability to store water naturally.
Through restoration and strategic land protection, the USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), The Nature Conservancy and private landowners are re-establishing natural hydrology and providing tens of thousands of acre-feet of “dispersed water storage” on more than 30,000 acres of ranchlands.
“Through the restoration of large and small wetlands throughout Florida, water will move more slowly through the region,” said Girvetz. “This provides greater flexibility of use for both nature and people.”
See original article at http://www.nature.org/pressroom/press/press4602.html
Leave a Comment
Posted on June 23, 2010 by Laura Brewington
Condolence Message for Friends and Family of Joe Konno
The Pacific RISA research team sends sincere condolences to the family and friends of Joe Konno. We are very saddened by Joe’s sudden passing and will miss him greatly. Joe’s experience and expertise made a unique contribution to addressing the impacts of climate change on Pacific Islanders. His tireless work helped people around the world to better understand the challenges being faced. We will remember Joe for his most dedicated and generous nature.
A press release by the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia can be found at:
http://www.fsmgov.org/press/pr052810.htm
Leave a Comment
Posted on June 11, 2010 by Laura Brewington
No consensus towards Cancun, revised text not balanced, says negotiators
Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) Press Release (reprinted with permission)
By Makereta Komai for Climate Pasifika in Bonn, Germany
Much to the dismay of many Parties, including the Alliance of Small Island States and the influential Group of 77 and China described the revised text as “unbalanced and not reflective of the views expressed in the informal contact groups.”
A delegation from Egypt told the plenary that his delegation does not want to see the revised text again in August and urged the chair that the text remains a non-paper and not be used as a basis for negotiations.
India joined in the chorus of opposition, saying new un-bracketed paragraphs have appeared in the text which is inconsistent with the Convention.
It called for line by line negotiations in the August negotiating session.
Brazil was equally furious. “We are dismayed because the revised text did not bring the Parties to any consensus. Many of our views are deleted in this revision making this text less balance and therefore less acceptable for negotiations.”
Another delegate said, “The chair presented us with a recipe at the start of the talks two weeks ago and when it came to meal time today, we were presented with a very strange meal that we cannot eat. Since this is a Party driven process, the chair needs to take our ingredients.”
Surprisingly, the United States was not happy with the revised text. “We are studying the draft text and as it stands, it contains language that is unacceptable to us. It has parts that incorporate the Kyoto Protocol that we will not accept.
This is in complete opposite to the position of the Umbrella Group of countries of which the U.S is a member.
Speaking on behalf of the Umbrella Group, Australia said they are pleased that the text contains fast start financing that was committed in Copenhagen.
In his last appearance before the international media, the executive secretary of the UN climate body, Yvo de Boer agreed that there are differences but the document can be used as a starting point for negotiations.
“Yes it has shortcomings but we can use it as a basis to continue talking to each other. Some feel that it is not balanced but it’s not being totally rejected.
“The process here has resulted in many Parties talking to each other rather than at each other.
De Boer said more work needs to be done and urged negotiators to up the tempo in the last two rounds of negotiations – Bonn in August and Beijing in October.
“The work here opens the way for Cancun to deliver a full package of operational measures that will allow developing countries to take part in stronger action across all areas of climate change but governments must make full use of the next two formal sessions.
“There is a real need for intense work at all levels including the highest level to provide guidance, said de Boer.
The Dutch national, who leaves the UNFCCC Secretariat this month after almost four years at the helm urged negotiators to begin an in-depth consideration of the legal nature of any new agreement or set of agreements.
It’s essential to take a “cold look” at the 76 emission reduction and emission limitation pledges that have been made by developed and developing countries since the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, he said.
All industrialised countries have pledged emission reduction targets, and 39 developing countries have pledged voluntary actions to limit their greenhouse gas emissions.
“The fact remains industrial country pledges fall well short of the -25-40 percent range the IPCC has said gives a 50 percent chance to keep the global temperature rise below 2 degrees,” he said. “Take all current pledges and plans from all countries and we won’t stop emissions growing in the next 10 years,” he added.
The pledges made by rich countries so far add up to about 12-19percent of emissions over 1990 levels by 2020. Industrialized countries as a group have indicated their willingness to take on a -80 percent goal for 2050.
The European Union acknowledged that some progress had been achieved during the two weeks where Parties were beginning to talk to each other and understand each other’s negotiating positions.
But, ‘the rejection of the revised text by many Parties showed how fragile the process was and that there was still mistrust amongst Parties.’
Cook Islands lead negotiator, Pasha Carruthers was frustrated with the dilly dallying attitude towards adaptation. This, she said, was a delaying tactic from developing countries to meet their obligations.
“It was frustrating at this session because it seemed like developing countries were trying to put things on hold or outside the UNFCCC process rather than engaging on climate change in the central forum that involves all parties.
“There is still mistrust amongst Parties and no willingness to accept some of the responsibilities they are obligated to and that is why they want to push it out of the process. Article 4.4 of the Convention obligates developed countries to assist vulnerable countries in meeting the costs of the impacts of climate change, said Carruthers.
Responding to the ‘adaptation’ clause in the revised text, Carruthers said some of the concerns are reflected in the language of the text especially the establishment of an international mechanism for loss and damage.
“For now, I can safely say that we are still a long way from an agreement. There has been some reaching out amongst Parties behind closed doors, which have proved fruitful. It was through these bilateral meetings that we realised that some of our positions weren’t as far apart as we thought, said Carruthers.
Carruthers, who has been part of the climate change negotiations for almost ten years, remains optimistic and urged Pacific and AOSIS negotiators not to give up too soon.
“People have suggested to me that some things will not get through because they are red light for many parties but we have to believe in the integrity of the process and ensure that we have an outcome that does guarantee our survival”.
International civil societies also jumped on the opposition bandwagon calling for more transparency from the chair of the LCA.
The World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) said climate change negotiators have missed some important goals, while showing a much stronger performance than in previous rounds.
“Bonn made good progress on some crucial building blocks that will be essential parts of a future regime to tackle climate change, and there is really no reason for negotiators to go into extra-time instead of concluding them at the Climate Summit in Mexico this December.”
In WWF’s view, progress in Bonn was mainly a result of improved team spirit among negotiators, with countries from North and South teaming up in unusual coalitions, creating fresh dynamics and space for solutions and compromise.
However, Bonn did not see any major victories on challenging issues like funding and policies to wean economies off fossil fuels and make them fit for the low carbon future, mainly due to a lack of progressive champions and blocking tactics by oil-exporting countries like Saudi Arabia.
The new negotiating text emerging from the Bonn talks could put delegates attending the next two rounds of negotiations before Mexico – one in August and one in October – in a good position to turn trust into traction in Mexico.
“Bonn reminded parties that negotiating in good faith is the best choice, and on this basis Mexico can be the moment where they agree on a significant package of actions and solutions, so that striking a new climate deal in South Africa the following year becomes a realistic goal”, said Gutmann.
“While the football teams of Mexico and South Africa are playing today’s opening match of the football world cup 2010, their governments are key players for success in the low carbon world cup 2011, where it’s not about the victory of one nation, but about a safe future for the entire planet.”
The results of a WWF poll among delegates, observers and journalists at the Bonn talks revealed that a majority of people following the negotiations shares this view. As part of the WWF Climate Deal Oracle, they were asked when we should and when we will get a global climate deal.
54.7 percent of the 265 participants thought we should get a deal by Mexico this December. However, 53.6 percent acknowledged that – realistically – we’d get this deal only in South Africa a year later.
The Bonn gathering was attended by more than 5,500 participants, including government delegates from 185 governments, along with representatives from business and industry, environmental organisations and research institutions.
This is the final posting on the Climate Change negotiations from Ms Makereta Komai who provided media coverage on the Bonn Climate Change talks from 31 May – 11 June 2010, thanks to support from Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF).
We would like to commend her for her hard work during the Climate Change negotiations in Bonn, which has helped raise the profile amongst Pacific communities of international climate change negotiations and their impact upon the Pacific islands region.
Fa’afetai lava.
Related Link: http://www.climatepasifika.blogspot.com/
Leave a Comment
Posted on May 6, 2010 by Laura Brewington
Pacific Biodiversity and Climate Change
Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) Press Release (reprinted with permission)
Opening remarks from David Sheppard Director of SPREP at the Pacific Biodiversity and Climate Change workshop at SPREP in Samoa, 6 and 7 May.
“This is an important workshop and an important topic. Climate Change is the current hot topic throughout the Pacific
We are all aware of the serious and immediate threats facing the low lying atolls and islands of the Pacific. In all of our Pacific countries climate change is not just an environmental issue – it is also an issue with major social, economic and moral dimensions.
As the President of Kiribati put it in his speech at Copenhagen, “climate change is overarching and it is a matter of national security”
Many of us from the Pacific travelled to Copenhagen to participate in the Climate Change Meeting in Copenhagen in December last year. Not only was it very cold but the outcome was far less than expected.
It is interesting to note that the organisers of the next UNFCCC meeting in Mexico are lowering expectations – perhaps they have learnt the lesson of Copenhagen.
The key outcome from the Copenhagen Conference was the Copenhagen Accord.
In the Pacific this Accord has had a mixed reception. Some countries have signed, some have not, and some are undecided.
It is understood that the Government of Japan, as a key donor in the region, has noted that future funding for climate change may be linked to whether or not countries have signed the Accord.
Whatever happens with the Accord, it is clear is that there will be a quantum increase in the amount of future funding for the Pacific.
A major slice of this funding will be for adaptation to climate change. What is obvious to us but is perhaps less obvious to others, including those providing the money, is that nature based adaptation offers one of the most cost effective and efficient ways to positively address climate change.
We saw in Samoa that the protection of coastal mangroves and vegetation was one of the most effective ways to protect coastal communities from the impacts of the tragic Tsunami in October last year. The protection of the catchment area surrounding Pohnpei in FSM is one of the most effective ways to ensure water quality and supply in the face of climate change.
There are many other examples, but we as professionals in biodiversity must better make the case that an investment in biodiversity is an investment in climate change adaptation. This message is not getting through at the moment, particularly to donors.
Many proposals and suggestions from donors on climate change have crossed my desk in recent times. Very few appear to have made the link between climate change and ecosystem based adaptation. This concerns me.
This workshop is thus very important – both in terms of developing a framework for moving forward in this area but also in terms of developing the case and arguments for Ecosystem Based Adaptation as a key tool for addressing climate change in the Pacific.
It is particularly important to make the case and linkages at national levels – you as professionals in environmental and natural resource management agencies need to be convincing other Ministries, particularly Ministries of Finance – which will be directly involved in decisions regarding the allocation of climate funds – as to why an investment in environmental protection is an investment in climate change.
We all need to make the economic case of the importance of biodiversity for protecting fundamental requirements for life in the Pacific, such as the provision of clean water, the protection of fisheries, as well as the protection of basic attractions and assets for the tourism sector.
Linkages also need to be made with donors and also within our own organisations.
Within SPREP, for example, I think there are opportunities for building strong and effective links between this project and the PACC – Pacific Adaptation to Climate Change – Project. I understand a number of you will be attending the PACC meeting next week, and also that a number of you are PACC national coordinators. Please consider how we can develop these projects in a mutually reinforcing way.
A key outcome of this workshop is to agree the scope of this current project and to discuss options for a future, larger project.
In doing this I would urge you to consider the practical issues of implementation – in particular how we can build ownership of the project at the country level, and also which donors may be interested in funding a larger project.
In this context the coming GEF 5 may provide a useful opportunity and a potential funding source for this project. However national ownership and buy in will be essential.
I would urge you to consider opportunities for partnership in moving forward on this project. The challenges relating to biodiversity conservation and climate change in the Pacific are too big for any one organisation to tackle – we can and we must work better together.
It is good to see CI, UNEP, UNDP and USP represented here – let’s look at how we can develop this as a joint and cooperative project.
I would also urge you to be opportunistic in the development of this project.
This year is the international Year of Biodiversity, celebrated in the Pacific under the theme “Value Island Biodiversity – It’s Our Life”.
SPREP, working with partners, has developed an Action Strategy for the Year of Biodiversity, which has been widely circulated.
We are also strengthening our capacity to help Pacific countries on biodiversity matters and we are delighted to have recently welcomed Easter Galuvao to our team. Additional biodiversity related staff will be starting at SPREP over the next few months, including a Terrestrial Ecosystems Management Officer and a Biodiversity Intern – an exciting opportunity for a young Pacific professional.
We heard about many exciting national level IYB activities in Pacific countries at the recent CBD workshop held here last month: TV documentaries in Tonga, holding a Lagoon Day in the Cook Islands, the development of a biodiversity phone book in Palau, and many others.
There are also a number of key events coming up, including the Pacific Nature Conservation Roundtable, to be hosted by SPREP in Apia in July, and the CBD COP 10 in Japan in October.
I would urge this workshop to look at how we can use these events and activities as opportunities to move forward the development and implementation of this project on biodiversity and climate change in the Pacific.
Leave a Comment
Posted on April 20, 2010 by Laura Brewington
Pacific countries prepare to report on 2010 Biodiversity targets
Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) Press Release (reprinted with permission)
11 Pacific island countries are to meet in Samoa next week for a workshop to assist them in completing their fourth National Reports to the Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD).
The CBD is an international treaty that sets out commitments for maintaining the worlds’ biological diversity. 14 Pacific islands countries are contracting parties to this convention, of which three have completed and officially submitted the necessary fourth National Reports; Niue, Samoa and Tuvalu.
These reports outline national progress towards meeting the commitments of the CBD and it is crucial that the outstanding Pacific island fourth National Reports are completed within the next couple of months, in anticipation of the upcoming Conference of the Parties to the CBD in Nagoya, Japan in October this year.
This particular Conference of the Parties is of significant importance given that this is the International Year of Biodiversity and a time to monitor and evaluate the global progress towards meeting the 2010 Biodiversity target.
“There is an urgency to have these reports completed and submitted, they will be extremely useful in terms of helping provide information on the status and trends of biodiversity in our region, as well as by giving a regional picture of the progress that the Pacific is making in terms of the 2010 Biodiversity target,” said Vainuupo Jungblut of the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP).
All parties to the CBD have committed themselves to achieve by 2010 a significant reduction of the current rate of biodiversity loss at the global, regional and national level as a contribution to poverty alleviation and to the benefit of all life on Earth. National country reports are one method to measure progress.
The workshop next week is one step to ensuring that these reports are completed and submitted. As a follow up to the workshop, SPREP will continue to work with the 11 Pacific island countries to assist with the completion of these reports.
“The workshop next week will involve the sharing of experiences, lessons learnt by those that have completed their national report as well as hands-on practical activities which will enable countries to update their reports and get direct assistance from resource people. The National Reports to the CBD will also provide countries with the opportunity to show case and highlight some of their success stories as well as challenges that they face in meeting their biodiversity targets”
The workshop will be held at the SPREP Compound in Apia, Samoa from 19 to 22 April. The countries participating are Cook Islands, Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga and Vanuatu.
This workshop has been made possible through the kind support of the Government of Japan, the United Nations Environment Programme, the Global Environment Facility and through the close collaboration between the CBD Secretariat and SPREP.
Value Islands Biodiversity – It’s our life.
Leave a Comment
Posted on March 22, 2010 by Laura Brewington
Tonga forms a PACC Technical Team
Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) Press Release (reprinted with permission)
The first meeting of the Tonga PACC Technical Team was carried on the 3rd of March at the Office of Environment and Climate Change (OECC).
According to the PACC Coordinator Mr. Paula Taufa, the Team will be assisting the Tonga PACC PMU provide advice on technical issues related to the PACC project. Since the PACC project is focusing on water in Hihifo district, quite a number of water experts have been invited to be part of the Technical Team.
The Technical Working Group members are:
Te’efoto Mausia – Ministry of Health
Kutusi Fielea – Tonga Water Board
Rennie Vaiomo’unga – Ministry of Lands, Survey and Natural Resources
Sione Faka’osi – Tonga Trust
Sione Talo Fulivai – Second National Communication
Sione Tukia Lepa – Ministry of Environment and Climate Change (MECC)
Lilieta Takau – Australian High Commission
‘Onetoto ‘Anisi – Ministry of Finance and Planning
‘Ofa Fa’anunu – Meteorological Services
PACC Project Management Unit – Ministry of Environment and Climate Change (MECC)
Leave a Comment
Posted on March 10, 2010 by Laura Brewington
Perception of Environmental Risks among Pacific Islanders
EarthSky interviewed Melissa Finucane about perceptions of environmental risks among Pacific Islanders. Finucane described the importance of a partnership approach to risk management.
Click here to listen to the interview.
Our Vision
Resilient and sustainable Pacific Island communities using climate information to manage risks and support practical decision-making about climate variability and change.
Tag Cloud
Follow Pacific RISA
Subscribe to our mailing list
Archives
Links