New Delhi: Even as world leaders, NGOs and activist groups gather in Sharm-El-Sheikh for COP27, the world’s largest platform for climate negotiations, the summit is facing ‘greenwashing’ allegations from critics.
Greenwashing is a set of deflective practices through which ‘green PR’ and ‘green marketing’ are used to persuade the public into believing that an organisation’s aims and policies are environment-friendly.
From dubious sponsors and the host country’s reported human rights abuses, to empty net-zero pledges and the ‘limited space’ being given to Africa’s young activists — COP27 is coming under a great deal of scrutiny.
International campaign group Greenpeace has also faced greenwashing accusations for downplaying concerns about Egypt’s human rights record.
Egypt is being burdened by droughts, water scarcity, and extreme heat. It is also the world’s fourth-most flood-prone country. But, climate activism in Egypt is confined to “safe environmental topics” such as recycling and renewable energy. “Thornier and critical issues” cannot be discussed, said a Reuters report.
In September, Human Rights Watch said Cairo has imposed arbitrary funding, research, and registration obstacles that have debilitated local environmental groups, forcing some activists into exile and others to steer clear of important work.
Also Read: What is COP26, why it is important & India’s role at the climate change conference
Egypt’s human rights records
The decision to hold climate dialogues of this magnitude in Egypt has triggered controversy as the African nation currently holds 60,000 political prisoners.
Pressure to release prisoners — especially pro-democracy activist Alaa Abd-el Fattah — who is reportedly on the verge of death after a hunger strike against his imprisonment, is building on Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi.
Fattah entered the public eye as a pro-democracy blogger during Egypt’s 2011 uprising against Hosni Mubarak. He was first arrested in 2015 for violating ‘protest laws’, and then again in 2019 for allegedly propagating fake news.
Last week, an Egyptian lawmaker was escorted out of COP27 while Fattah’s sister Sanaa Seif was addressing a group of journalists about Fattah’s ‘unjust incarceration’ and demanding his immediate release.
Also Read: Why definition of climate finance remains a major bone of contention at COP27 talks
Questionable sponsorships
Soft drink giant Coca-Cola, which was named the world’s largest plastic polluter in 2021, is one of the major sponsors of COP27.
Today’s plastic is made of fossil fuels, derived from a combination of crude oil, natural gas, and coal.
“Coca-Cola spends millions of dollars greenwashing their brand, making us believe they are solving the problem. But, behind the scenes, they have been lobbying to delay and derail regulations that would prevent pollution, keeping us addicted to global plastics,” reads a petition by green activist Georgia Elliott-Smith, who was a delegate at COP26 in Glasgow.
“COP conferences are supposed to be gatherings of national leaders, engaged in urgent negotiations to prevent climate change, not a multi-million dollar jamboree for corporate polluters and their lobbyists,” it says.
The UN climate summit’s other sponsors include multinational corporations Vodafone and Microsoft. Vodafone recorded 10.29 million tonnes Co2 equivalents (MtCO2EQ) in emissions and Microsoft 3.8 MtC02EQ. Calculations are done by comparing a greenhouse gas emission to the same amount of carbon dioxide.
“Partnership between the host country and the secretariat — each working in their sectors of leadership in a collaborative way — is essential for delivering a successful United Nations climate change conference,” say United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) guidelines.
The summit varies depending on who the host country is. At COP26, the approach was different — fossil fuel companies were effectively barred from sponsorship, though remaining widely represented through participation. Corporate sponsors, though, have always been the norm at COPs. Last year, FMCG giant Unilever was a primary sponsor of the climate summit, despite its history of questionable ethics.
The reduction, and now total elimination of fossil fuels. has long been on the agenda of the UNFCCC. This year, Tuvalu, an island nation in the Pacific, was the first to demand an international fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty. In September, Vanuatu declared the same at the UNGA meet in New York.
Vanuatu Prime Minister Bob Loughman Weibur has referred to adverse climate effects as an “existential threat” to the Pacific islands.
“Here in the Pacific Islands, climate change is an existential threat. It is the greatest single threat to our livelihoods, security, and well-being. Our economies routinely suffer damages of more than 50 per cent of GDP from climate extremes, taking us back decades in our goals for sustainable development,” he wrote in Down to Earth.
Kiribati — located in the centre of the Pacific Ocean — is predicted to be the first nation to go underwater this century due to sea-level rise. The Kiribati government has purchased land in Fiji to ensure food security for its population of about 1 lakh, and a place for eventual migration.
“Countries like Tuvalu are the ones on the frontlines, they know they can’t just give in to the vested interests of the fossil fuel companies,” Harjeet Singh, of Climate Action Network International, reportedly said.
No place for activists from Africa?
COP27 was initially touted as an ‘African COP’, with activists and organisations eager for African groups to be platformed. However, reports say young activists from African nations have been prevented from participating.
“Despite Egypt being called an African COP, we’re having a very serious challenge and many countries most affected by the climate crisis won’t be represented,” an activist told The Guardian.
However, world leaders from Africa, as well as the Global South, which have long borne the brunt of climate change despite having low emissions are officially advocating compensation at this year’s talks.
Swedish environmental activist Greta Thunberg will not be attending this year’s conference, citing the limited space for civil society as one of her reasons. “The COPs are mainly used as an opportunity for leaders and people in power to get attention, using many different kinds of greenwashing,” said the 19-year-old Swedish environmentalist.
Empty net-zero pledges
At COP27, a UN group demanded a crackdown on greenwashing of emissions and proposed new standards to harden net zero claims. Climate policy should be about cutting emissions and not corners, the group said, referencing the reliance of countries and corporations on carbon offsetting, through which carbon footprints are ‘balanced’ through the investment in environmental projects, mostly in low to middle-income countries.
Offsets are considered murky territory as they have led to a number of human rights violations.
A global carbon market, set up according to Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, regulates ‘carbon credits’ that are distributed to countries, companies, or individuals if their projects are approved by a UN supervisory body.
However, at COP27, the carbon market body suggested that safeguards put in place to lessen violations should be the prerogative of the host country, implying that it is outside the domain of the UN body.
India’s ‘climate friendly’ challenges
India’s pavilion at COP27 — Mission LiFE (Lifestyle and environment) — is said to be “a healthy and sustainable way of living based on traditions and values of conservation and moderation, including through a mass movement.”
It aims “to drive climate friendly-behaviors among individuals, households, and communities”. “The vision of LiFE is to live a lifestyle that is in tune with our planet and does not harm it,” says a government statement.
However, experts say this is inconsistent with India’s aspirations to be an economic superpower. “We should not be overly optimistic about how much emission reduction will come out of it,” Eugenie Dugoua of London School of Economics and Political Science, told the BBC.
The second day at COP27 saw India and China being told to pay compensation for their emissions by the Association of Small Island States (AOSIS). Up until now, only historically high emitters have been encouraged to pay reparations. India is currently the world’s third-highest emitter, whereas China is the first.
(Edited by Tony Rai)
Also Read: Adaptation too slow, COP27 must address loss and damage caused by climate change, says UN