When countries adopted the Paris Agreement in 2015, they agreed to convene a “facilitative dialogue,” which would allow countries to come together to evaluate the world’s progress toward the goals of the Agreement. At last year’s climate talks, countries adopted the Talanoa Dialogue as the concept for this facilitative dialogue. The Talanoa Dialogue platform provides a space where governments and non-governmental stakeholders can take stock of where we are, share collective efforts, and work together to increase the ambition of climate action in the face of the increasingly devastating impacts of climate change. The Talanoa Dialogue not only facilitates a conversation between governments, but also invites civil society and interested groups to participate. Thus, it creates a space for non-governmental participants to help craft the political discussion leading up to the COP24 climate talks in December. CIEL, with the help and support of other civil society organizations, joined the conversation with a joint submission.
“Talanoa” is a traditional word used in Fiji and across the Pacific to refer to an inclusive, participatory, and transparent form of dialogue. In the context of negotiations around the Paris Agreement, the Talanoa Dialogue is a space to collectively reflect on the progress communities have already made to combat climate change, as well as to create long-term goals as the international community works towards implementing the Agreement. Through storytelling, mutual listening, and avoiding antagonistic discussions, the Talanoa Dialogue is meant to foster consensus in decision-making by offering an opportunity for participants to hear each other’s stories with empathy. With this in mind, participants were asked to share good practices, highlight real-world stories, and explain the lessons they’ve learned while planning and implementing climate action.
The goal of the Talanoa Dialogue is to prevent ensuing negotiations from becoming contentious and, by avoiding the blame game, encourage more ambitious action to combat climate change.
In this spirit, the Talanoa Dialogue asked three questions of participants:
Where are we now? Where do we want to go? How do we get there?
Opening the Talanoa Dialogue to civil society, indigenous peoples, and other non-state actors ensures that the focus of the discussion does not remain limited to only greenhouse gas emissions and quantitative data. By inviting participants from many backgrounds to share stories and good practices in a non-adversarial manner, the Talanoa Dialogue could reframe and expand the conversation to include a wider understanding of the impacts of climate change (and actions to address it) on the realization of human rights. Therefore, the discussion has the potential to make efforts to combat climate change more ambitious.
In the Talanoa Dialogue’s spirit of inclusiveness, CIEL collaborated with other organizations through the Human Rights and Climate Change Working Group to share how rights-based climate policies and action contribute to more effective climate outcomes and more ambitious climate action. Both the Paris Agreement and human rights bodies have explicitly recognized the link between human rights and climate change. For this reason, the scope of the Talanoa Dialogue should not be limited to discussing emissions reductions alone, but should also encompass the overall implementation of the Paris Agreement.
Rights-based climate action results in better climate policy, as shown by countless community testimonials and empirical research. For instance, respecting the rights of indigenous peoples and ensuring their participation in climate change mitigation and adaptation plans allows them to use their long-standing knowledge to help countries combat climate change. There can be significant climate benefits when indigenous peoples’ rights are secured, particularly through land rights and participation. In Peru, legal recognition of indigenous peoples’ land rights reduced deforestation by 81 percent after one year, and a further 56 percent the next year. Incorporating other international frameworks into climate negotiations will help guarantee ambitious, sustainable climate action, while ensuring that climate action does not exacerbate human rights abuses.
So, how do we answer the Talanoa Dialogue’s three questions?
Where are we now?
All too often, well-intentioned climate actions have contributed to environmental damage and social harms by failing to consider human rights obligations. Several cases from around the world, such as the Barro Blanco dam in Panama, show how climate action can adversely affect the rights of communities. But other climate actions have led to a better understanding of good practices, showing how rights-based climate action can lead to greater success and avoid harms.
Where do we want to go?
The world needs rapid, large-scale, rights-based mitigation efforts to meet the goal of keeping global temperature rise to below 1.5°C.
How are we going to get there?
Good practices in rights-based climate action around the world should be used to shape the international community’s continuing discussion and implementation of climate responses that also protect public participation, indigenous peoples’ rights, gender equality, land tenure rights, and a just transition for workers. For example, women-led climate action has been shown to improve the climate responses of rural communities. In the Laramate district in Peru, women led the response to the decrease in the region’s crop production, which was a result of climate change. By using ancestral techniques to conserve seeds and cultivate the land and then teaching these techniques to others in the community, the women in Laramate experienced economic and political empowerment while also fostering sustainable climate action.
With the support of other organizations, CIEL hopes our input will help to broaden the scope of the Talanoa Dialogue to include rights-informed climate action and ensure that the link between human rights and climate change remains strong going into the COP24 climate negotiations this December.
By Olivia Bonner, Geneva-based intern
Originally posted April 26, 2018