Self-withering: The Biodiversity Convention and its new Global Biodiversity Framework
By Dr S Faizi
The Convention on Biological Diversity’s (CBD) Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), adopted at the end of 2022 marked another step in the process of weakening of the enforcement of the treaty that is finely balanced on the North-South axis. The CBD articles that protect the interests of the South continue to remain silenced, the West winning a virtual amendment of the treaty by default. The adoption of the GBF itself was procedurally flawed and while some of its 23 targets to be achieved by 2030 are meaningful, some are problematic. The target of increasing the global coverage of protected areas to 30 per cent each of the terrestrial and marine areas is likely to exclude the traditional caretakers of biodiversity and lead to further alienation of the historical custodians of biodiversity. The nature-based solutions (NbS) promoted by the GBF are likely to cause even more damage to the natural systems. The CBD provisions that are particularly favourable to the South are excluded from the GBF.
Inputs for the analytical study on the impact of loss and damage from the adverse effects of climate change on the full enjoyment of human rights, pursuant to Human Rights Council Resolution 53/6 on human rights and climate change
31 January 2024
The adverse impacts of climate related loss & damage on human rights in the Global South require concrete actions. Our submission shows that a just and fair green transition requires protecting human rights while prioritizing the needs of developing countries, especially by providing climate finance, access to green tech and integrating human rights in climate actions.
See the inputs provided by South Centre to an upcoming study by the UN Secretary-General. The study will be presented to the Human Rights Council in September 2024.
Statement for the Third South Summit of the Group of 77 and China
Kampala, Uganda
21-23 January 2024
South Centre stressed that the theme of the G77 Summit ‘Leaving No One Behind ’ reflects the urgent needs and aspirations of the Global South towards meeting their Sustainable Development priorities.
The Centre highlighted the importance of South-South Cooperation for dealing with the most critical challenges of our time, eradicating poverty, healing and securing our planet, & shifting the world onto a sustainable and resilient path.
The South Centre stands ready to support developing countries and the G77+China to find common positions and mutual understanding in key areas of global governance and multilateral negotiations for effectively addressing the global crises that define our time.
Solicitud de Opinión Consultiva presentada por la República de Chile y la República de Colombia
Observaciones remitidas por el Centro Sur
Diciembre de 2023
In reference to the invitation extended by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to submit amicus briefs in the matter of the Request for Advisory Opinion submitted by the Republic of Colombia and the Republic of Chile to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR or the Court) regarding the Climate Emergency and Human Rights. The South Center, an intergovernmental organization of developing countries, respectfully submits to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights the following amicus brief at the request of the Advisory Opinion submitted by the Republic of Chile and the Republic of Colombia.
These observations consider how the definition of shared and differentiated obligations and responsibilities in the legal regime related to climate change is linked to the obligations to cooperate and make reparations arising from the American Convention on Human Rights and the need to consider the right to life and survival of the most affected regions and populations in the various countries and in the region.
The Intersection Between Intellectual Property, Public Health and Access to Climate-Related Technologies
By Lívia Regina Batista
On the 20th anniversary of the Doha Declaration on the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement) and Public Health adopted by the World Trade Organization, we realize that its impact is beyond issues of public health stricto sensu. The Doha Declaration has inspired discussions at the Council for TRIPS regarding access to climate-related technologies. Climate change is the main and most globalized environmental problem with adverse effects on public health, especially for the vulnerable communities in the Global-South. The main argument of the proponents of the discussion in the TRIPS Council is the need to rebalance public interests (such as public health and environmental/climate issues) with the private/economic interests of the most powerful countries and corporations. This debate addresses both the recognition of intellectual property rights as an important means for the promotion of technological innovation, and the required wider dissemination of technologies – be they medicines or climate-related technologies. This research paper explores the possibilities that the TRIPS Agreement and the Doha Declaration create for international transfer of climate-related technologies. Even though such discussions on climate-related technologies have initially failed in linking climate change and public health, as well as the rhetoric of human rights, the relevance of the topic remains. Besides that, the response to public health issues also must learn from the experience in climate change, such as the case studies evidencing the insufficiency and inefficiency of fast-tracking programs to provide for a wider dissemination of technologies – which have now been widely replicated to address the COVID-19 pandemic. Such comparison can also be an entrance point to discuss the public health implications for the international regime on climate change, highlighting that such issues are deeply intertwined, and need to be addressed jointly as well.
The author argues that the term ‘anthropocene’ to denote the period of the modern environmental crisis is hollow and a political digression from the reality, and that the crisis is a product of corporate exploitation of the earth’s system. Putting the blame on the entire human society for the environmental crisis is a Western ideological ploy to shield the corporate culprits who have caused the destruction on the strength of their capital and technology. He therefore proposes the term ‘corporatocene’ to mark the epoch of environmental crisis. If anything it is the Western colonization and the invention of the steam engine that are the markers of the start of the pandemic assault on the earth’s natural systems. Obfuscating the debate on this by introducing politically motivated substitutes will only frustrate the efforts to forge meaningful solutions to the climate crisis.
Event at the 28th Meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP28) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
“Expanding South-South trade in low carbon technologies for development and resilience”
Co-organized by the South Centre (SC), United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) and the Forum on Trade, Environment and the SDGs (TESS)
THE WORLD EXPECTS COP28 TO AGREE ON CONCRETE CLIMATE ACTION
COP28 has raised expectations around the world that concrete actions will be taken to address the climate crisis, which is having devastating effects notably in developing countries. Read our statement:
Least Developed Countries and Their Progress on the Sustainable Development Goals
By Peter Lunenborg
This Research Paper reviews Least Developed Countries’ (LDCs) collective progress on the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), based on the available data on the indicators for the 169 SDG targets. It makes recommendations for LDCs and other States to consider advancing in relevant UN processes as well as the WTO’s.
LDCs made progress on 28% of the SDGs. This collective progress shows that these countries are far from achieving what were deemed achievable goals in 2015. With respect to trade-related SDGs, LDCs have not made progress on any of the five trade-related SDGs that mention LDCs specifically.
This paper does not delve into the causes of this gap, but it suggests that international cooperation and, particularly, the developed countries’ assistance, has been insufficient to address the needs of a large part of the world population that still lives in poverty and without hope of a better future. However, the Doha Programme of Action (DPoA), a development framework with targets specifically for LDCs -which overlap with SDG targets- appears to dilute several original SDG targets, in particular those in SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals).
