Sabine Hoefnagel

BwB was pleased to attend “Countdown to Cop29: Raising Global Ambition on the Road to Baku” hosted by the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change & the Environment and the EU Delegation to the UK held this week during London Climate Action Week. BwB's Managing Director, Heather Matson, joined diverse group of speakers to discuss how countries can deliver on their #climateplans and #targets, as well as to assess which are the most urgent topics to tackle at this year’s COP meetings in Baku. "We are now less than 6 months out for #COP29 and this event brought together a diverse group of speakers, but with clear consistency in terms of messaging on 2 fronts - the need to mobilise #privatecapital to close the climate #financegap, and the need to look at development and climate as inter-related topics, not separate threads, particularly when it comes to financing” Heather commented. UNDP EBRD United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative (UNEP FI)

23

Corporate climate claims are back in the headlines with BBC Panorama's episode (https://lnkd.in/efvaNewq), which touches on demand and supply side integrity. It’s important to understand the mechanics of accountability in order to resolve how to deliver claims that can withstand scrutiny.   Good company claims should represent the last act of a cohesive, science-based package of responsibility. Good responsibility constructs are made up of a clear scope (i.e. what are responsible for?), robust definitions of how to enact (are we talking abatement/cessation, compensation?), mechanisms that enable them to enact (which mechanisms - direct funds, procurment, credit markets, EACs are 'good' at that job?) and finally a claim that represents all that truthfully.   Sometimes companies intentionally greenwash, this is obviously bad. Often though we're seeing a poorly thought through and applied responsibility construct that, like a dark room full of rakes leaves companies and proponents unable to work out why they keep getting criticised for taking action. Some thoughts:   1 - bad projects don't mean false mechanism - tighten up the mechanism supply side and there will be fewer bad apples (note, not none). Then have a way to deal with the bad apples that doesn't void the act and undermine the final claim.   2 - a bad match of act and mechanism undermines the whole construct. Arguments that start from which mechanism to use are fatally flawed because they leave people arguing for their interest rather than recognising whether their mechanism is fit for purpose. The carbon market is a good idea, if you apply that good idea to things it doesn't do (scope 3 abatement for e.g.) then its a good idea badly applied, one of the key rakes for companies to stand on. It also damages the reputation of the mechanism, see last night and as we’ve seen time and again.   3 - we've long advocated (2016!) to shift from offset to contribution. The intent to contribute remains true even if double claiming by countries and companies undermines an offset claim, even if you inadvertantly pick a bad apple. It better reflects the bundle of probabilities and estimates and gives you an act (and thus a claim) that is more aligned with the mechanism. Pass/fail binary claims are unsustainable. This is what brought down carbon neutrality, look out organisational nature positive claims.   To be credible you still have to set a target for Scope 1, 2, 3, make a good plan, keep it up to date, enact it to abate those emissions. The questions are about relevance and ambition of action, not whether you can use credits or EACs.   Then you have to take responsibility for the emissions happening while you're reducing; BVCM - a fair *contribution* to global net zero.   Couple with tightening supply integrity gives an authentic responsibility construct and at least turns the light on so you can see the rakes. #carbonmarkets #corporatesustainability

72

21 Comments

'Consistency' seems to be the word of the day at the Climate Change and Business Conference in all of today's sessions - whether it's consistency of government policy to drive #ClimateAction, or consistency at the board table to keep up momentum for a transition to a low-emissions future. The Climate Change Commission's work has shown that the choices New Zealanders have been making and the actions they're taking are starting to show through in our data and make a difference - but we really need to keep pushing and building #momentum. This July we published our first monitoring report on #EmissionsReduction. We'll be producing these annually to provide an evidence-based, impartial view of whether the country is on course to reach its goals. These sit alongside our #ClimateAdaptation progress report, which we also delivered for the first time this year and will be producing every two years. We're also starting to gear up to deliver the next National Climate Change Risk Assessment in 2026, which will provide a national picture of how Aotearoa New Zealand may be affected by climate hazards, identifying the most significant risks and opportunities for us as a country. This a complex and exciting piece of work, and I'm looking forward to sharing more about this in the months ahead. Looking forward to many more insightful presentations and conversations over the next few days! #CCBC2024 #CCBC24 #ClimateAndBusiness #ClimateChange

72