As a recent Emory Law graduate, I thought I was prepared for the formality of the SB60 climate conference in Bonn, Germany this June. What I didn’t anticipate was the moment that challenged my perspective on how climate negotiations should work.
It came from Francisco Vera, a 14-year-old UNICEF activist from Colombia. Standing before a room of seasoned diplomats, Francisco spoke with a clarity and urgency that cut deep. "We need a COP for children," he declared, his words sounding through the chamber. It was a powerful reminder of why these talks matter – and whom they ultimately affect.
This was more than just a memorable moment. It signaled an important shift that could break the mold of traditional negotiations: for the first time, the conference held dedicated sessions on children's involvement in climate action. It’s a step in the right direction but one that also highlights how far we still have to go to make climate consultations truly inclusive and effective.
Legal experts in the field of climate negotiations increasingly call for significant reforms to make negotiations more inclusive and effective. Many scholars emphasize that expanded participation of marginalized communities, indigenous people, and small island states is critically important. These groups often bear the brunt of climate impacts, yet have limited representation in formal discussions. By amplifying these voices, negotiations can better reflect the realities and needs of those most affected by climate change.
Furthermore, lawyers argue for engagement and suggest involving local communities can lead to more equitable and just outcomes. This approach goes beyond merely listening to concerns. It involves integrating traditional knowledge and practices into climate strategies and recognizes that effective climate action must be grounded in local contexts and realities.
My legal education imparted a deep appreciation for structure in high-stakes discussions. But as I watched the proceedings unfold, I couldn't help but question whether our current approach is serving us well in the face of the climate crisis. The SB60 meeting was held to lay the groundwork for the COP29 climate summit scheduled for November in Baku, Azerbaijan. However, at the conclusion in Bonn, United Nations officials warned more talks will be needed to pave the way for a COP29 agreement.
As I observed the SB60 discussions, I felt concerned that our current formal processes may not be up to the urgent task at hand. The initial plenary session, for instance, was suspended twice due to a political protest and then a negotiator’s complaint. These suspensions were eventually resolved, but they underscored a pressing question: in an era of climate crisis when every year counts, can we afford such delays?
So how do we move forward? Drawing on my legal background and discussions with experts in international negotiations, here are some potential solutions that go beyond surface-level changes:
- Streamlined Processes: We need to critically examine our negotiation procedures. Can we reduce unnecessary formalities that slow progress without compromising the integrity of the process? One way to accomplish this could be to explore more meeting formats that encourage more dynamic, solution-oriented discussions. This could include more interactive sessions, leveraging technology for wider participation, and creating spaces for cross-sector collaboration.
- Climate-Focused Arbitration: Establish specialized arbitration panels for climate disputes, similar to those used in international commercial law. This could provide a faster, more flexible alternative to traditional diplomatic channels.
- Structured Youth Participation: Instead of ad-hoc youth involvement, implement a system where youth delegates are integrated into official negotiating teams, with defined roles and responsibilities. Establishing more permanent groups and boards, such as the Youth Advisory Group on Climate Change, could ensure that young voices are consistently heard and incorporated into decision-making processes.
- Tiered Negotiation Process: Adopt a multi-level approach where technical details are hammered out by experts in advance, leaving high-level meetings to focus on key political decisions.
- Legal Innovations in Treaty Design: Explore new legal frameworks that allow for more dynamic, adaptive agreements. This could involve built-in mechanisms for regular updates based on the latest climate science.
- Enhanced Transparency Mechanisms: Implement legal requirements for real-time reporting on negotiation progress and roadblocks, increasing accountability and public engagement.
The path forward isn't about dismantling the structures of international negotiation entirely. Rather, it's about evolving structures to meet the urgency of the climate crisis. By incorporating fresh perspectives and honing our processes, we can create a more broad-based, effective and successful approach to global climate action.
My experience in Bonn left me with a mix of concern and hope. The inclusion of voices like Francisco's is promising, but it's just the beginning. As citizens, we have a role to play too. Stay informed about these negotiations, support youth climate initiatives, and advocate for more comprehensive processes. After all, these talks aren't just shaping policy. They're determining our collective future.