I have little to report from the official negotiations, but despite - or perhaps because - of this, it's been an emotional day. Several times today I have cried out of anger and frustration that those with the power to help secure an agreement have failed to do so. I spent an hour in the Oksnehallen, a hall that has been opened up next door to the alternative summit to accomodate those excluded from the Bella Center, watching one world leader after another, all men, deliver their set-piece speeches. It's hard not to feel like crying when Obama fails to improve on the US's pathetic offer at emissions reductions, or Rudd suggests that we will not be able to reach the two degree target because of developing countries' actions.
Yet my spirits have been kept up by activities that have been going on in spite of the inaction inside the conference. At lunchtime those in the Oksnehallen were treated to the presentation of the "Fossil of the year" award. Each day Climate Action Network have asked NGOs to vote for a "fossil of the day" award, for the country that has performed the worst in the previous day's negotiations. As a result of winning the daily award most during the conference, Canada took the prestigious annual award in a hilarious award ceremony.
This afternoon I heard a speech from the mother of a campaigner who was arrested for helping to organise the demonstrations earlier in the week, and who still hasn't been released. She was justifiably angry about her daughter's treatment, yet managed to cheer and fire us up by getting us all singing.
And the closing ceremony of Klimaforum was a reminder of how much has been achieved outside the official conference in terms of building networks and a movement which will carry on pushing for the necessary action on climate change long after the delegates, and Klimaforum participants, have left the city. I left behind a hall full of passionate individuals, dancing to Danish klezmer orchestra Mames Babegenush - it could be a wild night for many.
Tommorrow I leave Copenhagen for home, so this may be my last blog. As yet there's no information as to whether a deal has been reached - a close friend who is one of the few NGO representatives who was admitted to the Bella Center today says that they are due for an update in the next hour or so. A member of GenderCC is also inside the Bella Center - keep an eye on their website for the latest news on the outcome of the talks from a gender perspective.
18 December 2009
When there are no people, how can there be women?
GenderCC released a press release last night reflecting the feeling at the Women's caucus. It concludes that:
"There is no participation in partition. There is no process without people.
There is no climate justice without gender justice.
There is no gender justice without climate justice."
You can read the whole press release here.
"There is no participation in partition. There is no process without people.
There is no climate justice without gender justice.
There is no gender justice without climate justice."
You can read the whole press release here.
17 December 2009
Women's caucus
Every morning since the conference started, there has been a Women’s caucus meeting in the conference centre, to allow women and organisations representing women to meet, share information and strategise. On Monday, WEN’s Chair, Bernadette chaired the meeting, and yesterday I had the privilege of doing so.
Today, only 300 people representing NGOs were allowed into the Bella Center, so the six organisations of the Women’s caucus, representing 2% of all NGOs, were allowed one representative each. There was therefore little point in holding the women’s caucus inside the conference centre, so it was moved to KULU, a women’s centre in central Copenhagen.
The few of us who were able to get the information about the new arrangements and make it to the new venue were in low spirits. There is a feeling among NGOs that they are being deliberately excluded from the UN process, with respected NGOs such as Friends of the Earth being completely banned. Those of us present at the caucus reflected that, even if there were legitimate concerns about the number of people accredited exceeding the capacity of the conference centre, this is something that could have been foreseen weeks ago: NGOs had to submit their lists of representatives by mid November. Had those representing civil society had known that they might not be allowed access to the conference centre, they could have considered how else to engage in this important process, and whether it was worthwhile them spending valuable resources to travel to Copenhagen at all.
It seems that if the UN is unable to properly organise an international conference, there is little chance of them facilitating an agreement to take the action to tackle climate change that is desperately needed. With one day to go, it is doubtful that anything will be agreed, and even more doubtful that it will be fair and as ambitious as necessary.
Today, only 300 people representing NGOs were allowed into the Bella Center, so the six organisations of the Women’s caucus, representing 2% of all NGOs, were allowed one representative each. There was therefore little point in holding the women’s caucus inside the conference centre, so it was moved to KULU, a women’s centre in central Copenhagen.
The few of us who were able to get the information about the new arrangements and make it to the new venue were in low spirits. There is a feeling among NGOs that they are being deliberately excluded from the UN process, with respected NGOs such as Friends of the Earth being completely banned. Those of us present at the caucus reflected that, even if there were legitimate concerns about the number of people accredited exceeding the capacity of the conference centre, this is something that could have been foreseen weeks ago: NGOs had to submit their lists of representatives by mid November. Had those representing civil society had known that they might not be allowed access to the conference centre, they could have considered how else to engage in this important process, and whether it was worthwhile them spending valuable resources to travel to Copenhagen at all.
It seems that if the UN is unable to properly organise an international conference, there is little chance of them facilitating an agreement to take the action to tackle climate change that is desperately needed. With one day to go, it is doubtful that anything will be agreed, and even more doubtful that it will be fair and as ambitious as necessary.
Copenhagen on wheels
As the workshop on gender and climate change responses that I was due to go to this afternoon has been cancelled, I thought I'd share some of my reflections on Copenhagen as a city.I've been really impressed by how many people in Copenhagen get around on human-powered wheels, both on bikes, and for the younger ones, in prams.
There was heavy snow yesterday evening, but that didn't stop my host leaving for work by bike this morning. Copenhagen is a city build for cycling, not one that cyclists have to squeeze themselves into - there are wide and consistent cycle lanes, separated from the rest of the traffic, with separate traffic signals. As a result, cycling is the norm, leaving quiet roads where much of the traffic is buses. By contrast, as a cyclist in London, I often feel I'm regarded with sympathy and incredulity, and have to be a confident and assertive rider to be safe.
In the UK, despite women's generally greener attitudes, significantly fewer women than men cycle, but the women who do cycle are more likely to be involved in cycling accidents. This is because women tend to be less confident cyclists, for example, riding close to the kerb when approaching junctions which puts them are risk of collisions with turning vehicles which are less likely to have seen them. Organisations like London Cycle Campaign are working hard to address this, but with policies like that introduced by London Mayor Boris Johnson to allow motorbikes in bus (and cycle) lanes, who can blame them? We need strong policies to make pro-environment behaviour such as cycling easier.
When it comes to prams, I've been surprised both by the number of prams, and the number of men pushing them. Scandanavia countries have much more progressive policies on maternity and paternity leave, allowing parents flexibility in how they divide up caring responsibilities for their children. Compare this with the UK, where women have the right to a year off work to care for their new baby, compared with just two weeks for men. The result is that, right from the start, it is very difficult for men to share caring responsibilities with their female partners, and so they fall predominantly to women, reinforcing the gendered division of labour even where a couple would like to share family caring responsibilities more evenly.
One reason that climate change affects women in particular ways relates to the social roles that they tend to take. This is not to suggest that traditional female roles are of lesser value, but that both genders need choices as to whether to take them. The pre-budget report last week provides some hope for new parents in the UK: from April 2010 the Government propose to introduce a policiy which will allow new fathers after 1 April 2011 to take up to 26 weeks leave once the mother has returned to work. While this allows less flexibility than the arrangements in many Scandanavian countries, it represents considerable progress in addressing the structural factors that force women and men to adopt particular roles in society.
Image: efeb (creative commons)
Gender champions in Copenhagen
Though the outcome at the talks in Copenhagen are currently looking grim, there were two bits of good news from the Women's caucus yesterday. (Apologies for the delay in getting these to you - it's been difficult getting internet access.)
First, the Women's caucus and the Women and Gender constituency held their second Gender Champion Awards to honour two more countries which have continued to promote a strong gender focus in the negotiations of COP 15. The awards highlight the great effort made by delegations in trying to bring a gender approach back into negotiated COP15 document, and also for their efforts at home.
The first award of the week went to Ghana. Ghana has committed itself to the promotion of gender in climate change adaptation and mitigation, through:
. Setting up a focal point on gender and climate change at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
. Collaboration between the gender focal point of the EPA with other government institutions such as the Ministry of Women's and Children's Affairs (MOWAC) and civil society organizations such as ABANTU for Development to incorporate gender responsive measures in combating desertification in Ghana.
. Incorporating gender issues and indicators into the proposal for the National Adaption Plan to ensure that the differential experiences, knowledge and perspectives of women and men become core issues to be addressed.
. Having developed a gender responsive national disaster risk management/reduction plan/programme by the National Disaster Management Organisation (NADMO) in collaborating with civil society.
Furthermore, at the COP, the Ghana Team is promoting gender sensitive approaches, as were evident from the president's speech, the speech of the Minister of Environment (who is also a woman), and presentations on REDD, adaptation, and capacity building.
The second award goes to Iceland, for including a strong gender language into the shared vision document last Friday.
Second, it is looking promising that language acknowledging gender will be included in the two main texts which are being negotiated at the talks. While this doesn't mean that we are close to an agreement that is fair, ambitious and binding, it does show that gender considerations are moving up the agenda. For more detail, see the Global Gender and Climate Allaince press release.
First, the Women's caucus and the Women and Gender constituency held their second Gender Champion Awards to honour two more countries which have continued to promote a strong gender focus in the negotiations of COP 15. The awards highlight the great effort made by delegations in trying to bring a gender approach back into negotiated COP15 document, and also for their efforts at home.
The first award of the week went to Ghana. Ghana has committed itself to the promotion of gender in climate change adaptation and mitigation, through:
. Setting up a focal point on gender and climate change at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
. Collaboration between the gender focal point of the EPA with other government institutions such as the Ministry of Women's and Children's Affairs (MOWAC) and civil society organizations such as ABANTU for Development to incorporate gender responsive measures in combating desertification in Ghana.
. Incorporating gender issues and indicators into the proposal for the National Adaption Plan to ensure that the differential experiences, knowledge and perspectives of women and men become core issues to be addressed.
. Having developed a gender responsive national disaster risk management/reduction plan/programme by the National Disaster Management Organisation (NADMO) in collaborating with civil society.
Furthermore, at the COP, the Ghana Team is promoting gender sensitive approaches, as were evident from the president's speech, the speech of the Minister of Environment (who is also a woman), and presentations on REDD, adaptation, and capacity building.
The second award goes to Iceland, for including a strong gender language into the shared vision document last Friday.
Second, it is looking promising that language acknowledging gender will be included in the two main texts which are being negotiated at the talks. While this doesn't mean that we are close to an agreement that is fair, ambitious and binding, it does show that gender considerations are moving up the agenda. For more detail, see the Global Gender and Climate Allaince press release.
16 December 2009
Intervention from women and gender constituency
Jo Tenner from Australia made the following intervention yesterday:
Mr Chairman, my name is Jo Tenner, I come from Australia which is the world's highest per capita emitter of greenhouse gases. I speak today on behalf of the Gender and Women's Caucus and GenderCC.
Gender is about all of us, men and women, it is crucial to understanding the social and economic context in which policies, programs and legislation are constructed. This is no less true for the case of climate change.
The focus of my comments today is on the mitigation dimensions of climate change. As we know the vast majority of emissions have come from developed countries, when we examine the attitudes of their people we find that mitigation is gendered.
Significantly, in the countries that will have to undertake the greatest mitigation efforts, women express higher levels of concern about climate change as well as greater levels of willingness to take action in their own lives to mitigate climate change.
Unfortunately, this level of concern is not matched by women's representation in decision making on climate change, nor are women adequately enabled to take actions in our own lives to abate emissions.
Many women have undertaken activities to lessen their carbon footprint but in the absence of an effective international agreement, these efforts are negated by the continued growth in emissions.
An acceptable outcome from these negotiations includes both: very ambitious, effective commitments from developed countries in the form of emissions cuts and funding for mitigation and adaptation in developing countries, as well as strong language on gender. Only one of these two is not sufficient. Developed nations must resolve this, the women of your countries expect nothing less.
Thanks you.
Mr Chairman, my name is Jo Tenner, I come from Australia which is the world's highest per capita emitter of greenhouse gases. I speak today on behalf of the Gender and Women's Caucus and GenderCC.
Gender is about all of us, men and women, it is crucial to understanding the social and economic context in which policies, programs and legislation are constructed. This is no less true for the case of climate change.
The focus of my comments today is on the mitigation dimensions of climate change. As we know the vast majority of emissions have come from developed countries, when we examine the attitudes of their people we find that mitigation is gendered.
Significantly, in the countries that will have to undertake the greatest mitigation efforts, women express higher levels of concern about climate change as well as greater levels of willingness to take action in their own lives to mitigate climate change.
Unfortunately, this level of concern is not matched by women's representation in decision making on climate change, nor are women adequately enabled to take actions in our own lives to abate emissions.
Many women have undertaken activities to lessen their carbon footprint but in the absence of an effective international agreement, these efforts are negated by the continued growth in emissions.
An acceptable outcome from these negotiations includes both: very ambitious, effective commitments from developed countries in the form of emissions cuts and funding for mitigation and adaptation in developing countries, as well as strong language on gender. Only one of these two is not sufficient. Developed nations must resolve this, the women of your countries expect nothing less.
Thanks you.
15 December 2009
Civil society locked out
Changes to the entry arrangements to the UN conference meant I wasn't able to attend the women's caucus or any other events inside the conference centre today. Today and tomorrow, only 7,000 slots are being given to civil society organisations (CSOs). On Thursday, only 1,000 participants from CSOs will be accommodated, and the numbers will be further reduced on Friday as only 90 participants from CSOs will be granted entrance to the Bella Centre.
Gotelind Alber, the focal point of the Women and Gender Constituency expressed our concerns clearly: “This is quite a serious process and civil society is being marginalised. If people had known that they would not access the convention centre, they would have explored other ways to link up with this process. We are also worried for the small organisations that already had difficulty being here. It is likely that they would not be able to get in at all on Thursday and Friday.” This is a particular concern for participants from developing countries, for whom finding the resources to travel here and stay can be a huge challenge.
However, it looks like tomorrow there are enough passes for everyone from GenderCC, who WEN is accredited through, so I should be able to attend. However, there is no chance that I will be able to get into the conference centre on Thursday or Friday, when the numbers are even further limited.
So instead I spent today at Klimaforum, where there were plenty of interesting happenings. A group of feminist dancers, the Latin American Irate Panthers, performed several times during the day, with chants in their routine including "emissions down, women's rights up!" and "there is no climate justice without gender and social justice". Their performance was invigorating, and a great way of drawing attention to the gender issues around climate change which, even in the alternative summit, aren't getting that much attention. You can now see the action for yourself at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GiR21BuBEck
This afternoon a "political salon" on gender and climate change, held in a participatory way so that anyone could contribute, resulted in some interesting debate, particularly around whether gender mainstreaming within the new agreement documents will be sufficient, or whether more fundamental change is required.
Finally, the winner of the Angry Mermaid Award (see photo above), for the big business which has done the best lobbying to block effective action to tackle climate change while also seeking to benefit from it, was announced. Monsanto came away with the award, for promoting its genetically modified (GM) crops as a solution to climate change and pushing for its crops to be used as biofuels (the expansion of GM soy in Latin America is contributing to major deforestation and greenhouse gas emissions), followed by Shell and the American Petroleum Institute.
Image: jodyecolabs (creative commons)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)