The success of the Paris climate talks, COP 21, this December will not be measured by whether or not countries can all agree on a new global deal. It will rest on deals made outside the negotiation halls and beyond the traditional scope of international climate talks.
The New York climate change summit last September offers one bellwether for tracking this change, where 481 private companies and investors joined national, city and regional governments, and nearly 400 civil society groups to craft and sign 29 different pledges for climate action. These commitments take on targets that range from reducing deforestation to mitigating aviation sector emissions.
There is a gap between the emissions cuts countries have pledged and the reductions needed to keep the world from dangerous levels of climate change. We analysed the climate summit’s potential impact, finding that these 29 collaborative commitments could close the 2020 emissions gap by one-fifth, a quantity equal to India’s annual emissions in 2012.
Given these numbers, it is unsurprising that the NY Climate Summit was largely lauded as a success. The growing force of “non-state” (e.g., businesses and non-profits) and “sub-national” (e.g., cities and states) actors, begs the question how -- and if -- these groups will be included in the upcoming Paris climate negotiations.
Past efforts to integrate commitments from new kinds of actors into high-level, global environmental summits have had mixed results. Out of over 300 partnerships that were announced at 2002’s World Sustainable Development Summit, 65 percent were still trying to find funding and begin their work in 2012. Avoiding outcomes that amount to little more than greenwashing and empty promises is a key concern for the Paris organisers. With events like the upcoming Climate Action Day and the launch of the Lima-Paris Action Agenda, conference officials intend to make space for new climate actors to formally join the international climate dialogue.
While these efforts are taking shape, a multi-level framework that allows businesses, cities, and civil society actors to make climate pledges alongside the commitments of national governments is clearly the best path forward. Paris marks a crossroads for how these different groups will cooperate to tackle climate change. However, a number of issues must be resolved to ensure the negotiation’s success.
Broad engagement should not mean a free-for-all
Not all climate actions are equal, nor should they be classified as such. The organisers of the New York summit established criteria in a way that encouraged the participation of CEOs who may not have otherwise joined
For the Lima Paris Action Agenda to work, it will need to establish baseline definitions or criteria, so that commitments can be understood and compared to one another. For instance, how does IKEA’s goal of powering its facilities by clean energy by 2020 compare to the Burberry Group’s commitment to support all store and office energy needs with renewable energy by 2017? Can we add these efforts together to get a sense of their overall impact?
Without necessary guideposts, the Lima Paris Action Agenda could be overrun with empty statements and over-promises. We should welcome action, but we should also set minimal entry points for businesses who choose to sign up.
Element of competition
This strategy creates the desired balance between welcoming and screening new commitments. Popular websites like LinkedIn or TurboTax offer templates for recording climate commitments made in Paris and elsewhere.
A primary form outlining the minimal requirements for participation could serve as an initiation. Actors who go above and beyond the minimum criteria would be rewarded with increased access to funders and additional distinction on the site (an approach that borrows from Yelp.com’s highlighting of “elite” reviewers).
The same logic that video game and app developers use to incentivise behaviours can also encourage businesses to raise the bar on their climate commitments. As companies join climate action platforms, profiles can be linked up and down supply chains to develop a clear picture of climate impacts across a firm’s portfolio.
Metrics to inspire, not discourage, action
It’s time to do away with the archaic thinking that frames metrics as burdensome. Paris can be a powerful demonstration of how a shift towards increasingly open data and transparency spurs healthy competition and a race to the top. Yale’s work on the Environmental Performance Index, for example, shows that comparing countries to their peers prompts national leaders to ask, “how can we improve and achieve those results?” These kinds of targeted comparisons encourage environmental action.
The Paris climate change conference has already revived old narratives that only legally-binding, national action can deliver needed emission cuts. Last year’s climate summit and the 400,000 strong People’s Climate March issued rallying cries for an “all-hands-on-deck” approach. With five months remaining before the Paris negotiations begin, time is running out to give shape to the promising movement of non-state and sub-national action.
New structures and criteria for accountability can convert this energy into tangible progress. Rather than squashing innovation, metrics can help inspire and power it. Highlighting the business sector’s true leaders can spark a race to the top. Common benchmarks will show how far businesses, cities, states, and countries have come together – and how much further we all have to go.