IFG Programs: Climate Change

IFG PROGRAMS: CLIMATE CHANGE

	THE “COPENHAGEN CONVENINGS” OF CIVIL SOCIETY NETWORKS TO PRESS INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS TOWARD POSITIVE ACTIONS The IFG has emerged as a key convener of leading global researchers and campaigners coming from both the North and the Global South, creating a unique space for ongoing strategic dialogue on the difficult issues that will be essential to concluding a new global climate deal by the end of 2009 under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) meetings in Copenhagen, Denmark. Throughout 2009 and into 2010, IFG is hosting a series of “Copenhagen Convenings.” They are characterized by a flexible, rolling agenda that will adapt to the state of play in UNFCCC talks, but with the overall strategic objective of recasting global economic governance under climate equity imperatives by converging the distinct campaign capacities of civil society’s key global networks on climate, trade, and finance.
	In December 2009, governments will gather in Copenhagen, Denmark to finalize a new global climate deal under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Copenhagen represents an historic opportunity to impose ecological limits on the global economy by reducing greenhouse gases. Essential to any viable deal is how to equitably share resources in ways that enable poor countries to leapfrog dirty development. Any successful climate deal must also set into motion a broader recasting of global economic governance. The election of Barack Obama creates a better atmosphere for this discussion, but the global economic crisis is making many Northern governments less bold in term of their willingness to finance a major North-South resource transfer. Hence, we are also well aware that many of the proposals coming from our convenings may only see the light of day in 2010 or beyond. Toward that end, IFG is using its convening power to host a series of “Copenhagen convenings,” or strategic dialogues, where leaders of civil society’s key global networks can explore important issues such as: “How can Copenhagen accelerate global economic transitions?”, “What’s not on the official agenda that needs to be and how do we get it there?”, “How can we converge the collective capacities of our existing networks into a better-coordinated “movement of movements” like those that have proven effective in influencing global institutions in trade and finance?”. We are committed to continuing these dialogues, to keeping open the space into 2010 and 2011, so long as groups in the North and South find them useful. IFG took the decision to get involved in the UNFCCC process as a result of its September 2007 Triple Crisis Teach-in, and we returned from the UN Bali summit seeing how we could help change the conversation about climate. We embarked on a series of informal meetings with local leaders (including clean energy companies) to invite them with us on “the road to Copenhagen,” we embedded ourselves in the international climate networks, and we engaged our long-time global economic justice contacts via existing networks. We will pursue our local, national, and global approaches because all three levels are essential to a successful global deal. IFG’s initial convening on climate in November 2008 was called a “landmark event” by participants because it advanced an authentic equity agenda into the strategic approaches of climate campaigners. The meeting detailed policy proposals in finance and technology capable of forming the “support package” developing countries will need for a global deal, including a well-thought through plan for a “global climate fund.” Engaging developing countries is essential since, without their active participation, developed countries are unlikely to enact their own domestic climate commitments. In 2009/2010, IFG will continue building this unity platform by convening an ongoing series of NGO strategy sessions with a flexible agenda that will adapt to the state of play in negotiations while continuing to assess what’s still missing with a goal of moving the official talks forward toward success in Copenhagen.
•	April 28-29, 2009— Spring Convening: “Building a Shared Vision for Copenhagen,” Washington, DC The IFG was given an urgent mandate by key climate campaigners and global justice leaders at the close of our first climate strategy session on 15-16 November 2008 in Washington, DC: to quickly re-convene the same group of experts to articulate civil society’s “Shared Vision” for a global climate deal in Copenhagen. IFG’s second session, scheduled for 28-29 April 2009, aimed to begin addressing and correcting the lack of common understandings in the global civil society about “What We Want from Copenhagen.” Concretely, we assessed the implications of various scenarios for balancing deep emission cuts with the necessary support package that developed countries are legally obliged to provide developing countries so they can institute best practices in clean energy. We explored the options of committing to various emission paths, emphasizing a strong economic policy framework and its implications for strategies and campaigning. We looked closely at the Global Climate Fund proposal developed at the November meeting, and discussed next steps. Our aim was to agree on the following: the outline of a so-called shared vision for Copenhagen; the essential elements of what a durable deal must deliver; and how civil society’s key global networks can coordinate to achieve these common goals. Some of the topics that have been raised thus far as possible discussion points in future meetings include:
•	Addressing Competitiveness Concerns and ‘Carbon Leakage’ in a Global Climate Deal Some have argued that we should create space to discuss new thinking and collaborative approaches to address, as part of a global climate deal, the poisonous potential for “carbon leakage,” i.e., the migration of carbon intensive industries from countries with costly regulations to other countries with less costly ones. The concern is that “leakage” could simply shift production offshore, undercutting domestic production and employment while still allowing emissions to increase globally. Proposed climate laws in both the US and EU would contain such leakage with trade measures that 1) punish poor countries unable to afford upgrades to cleaner production processes; 2) trigger legal trade challenges under WTO rules punishable by sanctions; and 3) undermine badly needed trust in the UN climate process. Instead of concentrating on the “sticks,” we want to create the “carrots” developing countries have been asking for, especially a support package for the financing of clean technology transfer.
•	International Investment Rules to Address Climate Change Others have suggested we have space to talk about the need to establish a clear and compelling framework to ensure that private capital plays its part in quickly capping greenhouse gas emissions in order to eliminate them within decades. Carbon markets may offer incentives to investors but inherent design issues stand to limit their effectiveness and, even if successful, they will not even make 50% of the necessary cuts in carbon emissions. IFG’s initial “climate convening” in November 2008 included top specialists who influence energy investment decisions of big banks and international financial institutions. A “private capital policy-team” organized at IFG’s meeting produced six proposals for new instruments in a global climate deal that could rapidly shift international energy investment away from fossil fuels and toward conservation, efficiency, and renewables. We want to explore these ideas further, and where they could be advanced internationally, not only via UNFCCC but also within financial institutions including the G20 process and the UN Stiglitz Commission.
•	The Road to Copenhagen Working Group / Collaboration with 350.org - Coordinating a Northern California NGO Strategy & Approach for Local, State, Regional, National and International Impact and Action. These global convenings by the IFG have a counterpart in California, made possible by our headquarters in San Francisco, and the trust we have build with groups in our region. Together with our colleagues at 350.org, EarthJustice, Rainforest Action Network, EcoEquity, and Green for All, IFG launched the Bay Area Working Group on the Road to Copenhagen (aka R2C) in the summer of 2008. Beginning with the list of 150+ attendees from IFG’s four post-Bali briefings in the SF Bay Area, R2C began convening monthly meetings of Bay-Area based NGOs working directly on issues related to the global climate meetings taking place in the UNFCCC process leading up to Copenhagen. R2C is co-coordinated by IFG and 350.org staff in the Bay Area. R2C will be working together toward increased public awareness and media coverage in the lead up to and during Copenhagen itself. We are planning to organize a series of public Congressional District “town hall meetings” in 5-7 Bay Area Congressional Districts that will focus on the developments in the climate talks internationally and new proposals for US domestic policies. We will also use the “town halls” to spotlight local climate campaigns and seek greater local, regional and state media coverage on the issues: prior to each town hall, editorial board briefings and interviews will be organized with key local media outlets and outreach to area governments, NGOs, schools and community organizations will take place through the R2C organizing and media committees.