Development of a Gender Action Plan

The Lima Work Programme on Gender established the need for a Gender Action Plan that would promote development of gender-sensitive climate policy and advance gender balance throughout the UNFCCC.  A two-session workshop was held in Bonn to consider and develop possible elements of the Gender Action Plan. 

The workshop was launched by the Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC, Patricia Espinosa, Ambassador Khan of Fiji, and the Chair of the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI), Tomasz Chruszczow.  Earlier this week Ms. Espinosa became an International Gender Champion and founded the Bonn-Berlin Chapter of the International Gender Champion Network, the aim of which is to advance executive-level gender equality in institutions; Ms. Espinosa will be inviting senior leaders from the public and private sectors to join her in this initiative. Ambassador Khan discussed the Fijian custom of talanoa, which involves telling stories without concealment, and listening and learning as much as speaking; the process helps to build relationships and enables us to learn from each other. Talanoa can be used to ensure the climate policies developed are sound and just for all by listening to and incorporating diverse knowledge and perspectives. Tomasz Chruszczow echoed this sentiment by calling for universal participation and empowerment, and for the needs and voices of women to be incorporated into every aspect of policy.

Co-facilitator of the workshop, Winfred Lichuma, discussed the plan for the day and for the next workshop. At this session, the overall approach was discussed and the breakout groups for the next session decided. The breakout groups will contribute to a report prepared by the Secretariat that will be published on the UNFCCC website before the closing of the SBI.  More information on and from the workshop can be found here: http://unfccc.int/gender_and_climate_change/items/10289.php

Advance comments on the Gender Action Plan were submitted by nine Parties and eleven Observers.  Comments included the need for:

·       capacity building at the international and national levels to effectively incorporate gender;

·       reporting mechanisms, tools and knowledge sharing for enhancing participation of women;

·       training for delegates;

·       establishment of national gender focal points;

·       enhanced gender budgeting that is integrated and not part of a separate work stream;

·       tools for gender-responsive implementation in NDCs;

·       means to ensure effective participation of local, grassroots and indigenous women; and

·       action plans that are concrete, verifiable, and achievable.

Fleur Newman, the gender focal point for UNFCCC, then discussed the need to integrate gender mandates with existing decisions through UNFCCC.  Because the focus of gender mandates, such as increasing participation of women, is often recurring, it should be determined how associated actions might support multiple decisions and mandates. 

Grassroots comments were then provided.  Sasha Middleton, of the Marine Ecosystems Protected Areas Trust of Antigua and Barbuda, said that involving women in environmental policies is the key to successful implementation, and that grassroots women are often the people most affected, so their opinions and priorities should be consulted. Noreen McAteer of the Native Women’s Association of Canada said that participation needs to be funded or it remains an empty promise.  She also discussed the gap between traditional knowledge and knowledge of decision makers, and the gap between men and women’s knowledge and how important it is to build bridges between these gaps at the earliest stages of climate action. 

Pieter Terpstra of the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, discussed an informal consultation on Climate and Gender that was held in The Hague in March 2017, and co-organized with Costa Rica and UN Women.  It was discussed that the Gender Action Plan development process could be informed by other established processes, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity, the UN Convention to Combat Desertification, and the Green Climate Fund. They suggested a possible format for the Gender Action Plan that would include priority areas, activities, targets and indicators, a timeline, key actors and resources needed.  Priority areas proposed were capacity building and knowledge sharing, gender balance and participation, coherence within UNFCCC and synergy with other UN agencies, gender-responsive implementation, and monitoring and reporting.  These priority areas were agreed upon by the workshop participants and formed the basis for the breakout groups for the second part of the workshop. The summary report generated at the workshop will be posted on the UNFCCC site, presumably with an opportunity for comment before or at the Conference of Parties (COP) in November.

Workshops and Workstreams

Even after five years, there is much to be confused about at the COP meetings between all the acronyms, jargon, and complicated governance frameworks. There are contact groups, informal consultations, open-ended consultations, meetings, workstreams, work programmes (yes, the British spelling is correct), workshops, daily programmes (that change several times a day), briefings, official documents, informal papers, and even non-papers. (I am not kidding about that one!) Plus, some of these sessions are open to observers (civil society) one day, but not the next. Week one is an intense work week as different groups collect data and ideas to draft language and plans for moving forward. When the high-level segment commences on Tuesday of week #2, high ranking ministers and heads of states use these materials, but have also been known to scrap all the work and start from scratch at the negotiating table. Science seems so much easier (and more logical) than this multilateral policy stuff!

This year, there seems to be an unusual number of workshops. I have been to three already, and it is only day #3. I went to one last year, which was the first I ever recall seeing on the agenda, err, I mean daily programme. In subsequent posts, I will elaborate on the content of the three workshops I attended on

• “Issues related to agriculture” (as mandated in paragraph 83 of FCCC/SBSTA/2013/3);
• "Gender and climate change”; and
• “Lessons learned from relevant experience of other multilateral environmental agreements.”

When I was a graduate student in the 1980s, our lab worked on the impact of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide on photosynthesis in algae and plants. This information had implications for crop yields (agricultural productivity), and we knew that different types of plants (C3 vs C4; I won’t bother you with the biochemical details) respond differently to increasing carbon dioxide availability. During those graduate school years (1981 – 1986), carbon dioxide levels went from 338 to 346 ppm. This year the levels hover around 400 ppm. As the implications of rising greenhouse gases became more apparent, scientists realized that there would be many impacts on agriculture.

Yet despite the wealth of scientific publications around this issue, it wasn’t until COP17 in Durban, South Africa (2011) that text was adopted that enabled (mandated) a dialogue about agricultural impacts and adaptation. This was assigned to a working group within the SBSTA framework, and plans were made to hold this workshop – now two years later.

What is SBSTA (besides one of the many IPCCC acronyms)? Following the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol, two bodies were set up to deal with the technical discussions. The Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (or SBSTA) is one of these. And alas, agriculture is one of the issues that now falls under this group’s auspices.

At COP18 in Doha, issues of women and gender were front and center (oddly enough in a country where women’s rights are a bit different than what we are accustomed to in the United States). Concerns centered on the fact that, globally, women are disproportionately impacted by climate change for many reasons, yet the policy work related to the environmental problem is negotiated mainly by men. Two important decisions were adopted which “promote gender balance and improving the participation of women in Convention negotiations and in the representation of the Parties in bodies established under the Convention or the Kyoto Protocol.” The work to implement these decisions fell to the SBI, the Subsidiary Body for Implementation – the group that advises the COP (Conference of the Parties) on “improving the effective application of the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol”.

The third workshop was organized by yet another group – the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action or ADP. This new working group was established in 2011 in Durban (sometimes things make sense) and is charged with adopting an agreement by 2015 to be implemented in 2020, effectively replacing the Kyoto Protocol. Given the difficulties in achieving consensus on pretty much anything – details of mitigation (reducing the causes of climate change), adaptation (learning to live under a new climate regime and increasing resiliency), and financing things like technology transfer, a Green Climate Fund, or loss and damage resulting from historic, current, and future emissions – this new group is looking elsewhere for ideas. In this workshop, representatives from other successful multilateral agreements related to the environment shared their models of decision making and implementation. These included CITES (an agreement related to endangered species and international trade), an agreement under the Stockholm Convention related to Persistent Organic Pollutants (the “dirty dozen” and other toxic compounds), and the Montreal Protocol that addresses the phase out of ozone-depleting chemicals that degrade the stratospheric ozone layer.

If you are still following along, you should know that these items represent only a small percentage of the work that goes on at a COP meeting!

A panel discussion during the "Gender and Climate Change" workshop

Note:  I am grateful to the Organization Internationale de la Francophonie for their extremely value resources including the "Guide to the Negotiations for COP 19 and CMP 9 (#13), and "Background Analysis".  These resources are handy references and contain detailed analysis on the history and status of negotiations.