This week another annual climate summit begins. The media, as usual, do not show much interest in this issue; the issue that is already changing the quality of life of millions. Sometimes, it is incomprehensible why the leaders of nations do not respond to such am important topic. Do they not care about the well-being of their nations and citizens? Or do private and profit interests overshadow their sense of responsibility? In the following lines, we will explore how economic interests influence the efficiency of the UNFCCC summit.
Climate change issues present a growing environmental and security threat. While we have the scientific evidence and knowledge we need to combat the situation, we are witnessing reluctance and frivolousness in real political action. Climate change influences the function of society, its economic activities and requires considerable financial costs. Therefore, economic stakeholders are strongly interested and involved in the process of the climate summits. Unfortunately, the impact of corporations and lobbying groups hampers any efficient outcome.
The relationship between UN/UNFCCC and corporations has a lot of history. Neoliberalisation processes have contributed to an environment in which mutual cooperation is necessary. However, this cooperation does not always enable progress in development and welfare targets, but creates profitable and market-driven mechanisms that are favourable only for the pockets of investors.
The Polaris Institute, a Canadian think-tank, provides analysis of the influence of corporations and businesses on UNFCCC negotiations. According to the paper, the biggest lobbying group consists of 200 leading corporations whose annual yield is $7 trillion and which distribute their products and services to the more than half of the global population. In 1997, Ted Turner, the famous media magnate, established the foundation focusing on assistance to the UN in resolutions for global problems. A year after, a similar voluntary program was created by multinational corporations; Global Compact. Despite the fact that these and many other similar programmes aim to implement sustainable and socially responsible policies, their activities do not really deal with sustainability and social justice. This is because profits are their main aim and they are looking primarily for profitable solutions within business initiatives, e.g. Clean Development Mechanism, transfer of technologies, adaptation framework, Green Climate Fund or technological mechanisms.
The paper states that corporations and business communities are engaged through five channels of influence: direct lobbying, industrial associations, industrial events, partnerships between UN and business sphere and corporate financing and investments. In order to work more effectively, direct lobbying targets leaders at the climate conferences. The oil and gas industries spent $175 million in 2009 just in the USA to influence the proposals in government about climate change that subsequently haven’t been passed by Senate. The lobbying power of the oil, gas, chemical and car industries was also responsible for the USA’s refusal to sign the Kyoto protocol. Such groups also use industrial association; they influence negotiations through national lobbying or lobbying of particular delegations. These associations have been named BINGO- business and industrial non-governmental organizations. Over 4000 lobbyists have participated directly at COP delegations, including representatives from ExxonMobil, Shell, Total, Chevron, Volkswagen, Duke Energy, BP, Barclays, Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank and Coca Cola.
Cooperation among various actors is essential in order to create a functioning and sustainable model of society. Cooperation means also democracy and tolerance, but can be such cooperation really tolerant? Under such conditions, the climate change conferences under the UNFCCC do not provide optimal space for political but unbiased discussion and will therefore never resolve the environmental threat. Sometimes I wonder why it is that competent people with means do not have strong moral intelligence and willingness, and that those without means are able to risk their lives for the common good, justice and a more advanced and decent life. The upcoming summit is taking place in Doha, Qatar, a country that has the highest carbon dioxide emissions per capita. This seems symbolic. Qatar’s present may be the world’s future.
About the Author
