COP28 no breakthrough for cities, but at least a step in the right direction

Did COP28 do anything for the push towards sustainable cities? As the desert dust settles on the outcomes of the climate summit, cities likely to take the brunt of global warming impacts are working out whether the gathering has helped, hindered or just held time on their efforts towards environmental justice.

On one level, their reaction will be the same as the wider environmental community: that the pledge by political leaders at the end of the COP28 climate summit to “transition away” from fossil fuels in energy systems was good, but the lack of a timetable or finance was very disappointing.

The reaction by the joint chairs of the C40 Cities caucus, Yvonne Aki-Sawyerr, Mayor of Freetown, and Sadiq Khan, Mayor of London, as urban leaders was fairly typical. Aki-Sawyerr said it did not “go far enough”, while Khan echoed the disappointment at the failure to include a pledge to “phase out” fossil fuel use.

While the statement on the first global stocktake of progress since the 2015 Paris Agreement grabbed the headlines, COP28 also saw a “10-point plan” of outcomes unveiled after a Ministerial Meeting on Urbanization and Climate Change midway through the two-week summit.

Inevitably they seem soft. Resembling an unusual football starting line-up of 5-3-1-1, the final statement issues five pledges to “encourage” leaders to take action, “welcomes” three agreements, “recognises” one set of opportunities and “takes note” of an achievement. Hardly the Declaration of Independence.

COP28 was a gathering of heads of state and government leaders, so the urban agenda was only ever going to be a part of that. But cities are both contributors to the causes of climate change and at the same time some of its key likely victims. On the one hand, cities contribute more than 70% of the world’s CO2 emissions, but on the other hand, around one in 10 cities are threatened by rising sea levels and storms and their residents are exposed to 10 degrees higher temperatures than those in rural areas.

This means that they need to be encouraged to reduce the carbon output of their activities, whether that is manufacturing, transportation, or the heating and cooling of their commercial and residential buildings. They also need to invest in re-design their infrastructure to withstand higher floods, fiercer heatwaves and more severe droughts.

Both mitigation and adaption will require money. Wealthy countries most responsible for the climate emergency have pledged a combined total of just over $700 million (£556m) to the loss and damage fund, whose announcement on the first day on the summit was a highlight of COP28. However as the final global stocktake conceded, these financial pledges are far short of the $5.9 trillion that will be needed to support developing countries with clean energy transitions, implementing their national climate plans and adaptation efforts.

One step forward was the adoption by the COP process of the Coalition for High Ambition Multilevel Partnerships (CHAMP) for climate action to increase cooperation, where applicable and appropriate, with our subnational governments. The agreement, signed by a mix of 71 advanced, emerging an developing economies, pledged the members to consult wand collaborate with lower tiers of government and include subnational government projects in national in climate-related investment priorities.

To the extent that it bring cities more closely into their national governments’ strategies, it can only be a good thing. As Mark Watts, the executive director of C40, put as COP28 wrapped up, the CHAMP initiative created a “bigger opportunity” for mayors and governors to work with national governments to achieve the eventual phase-out of fossil fuels.