That the COP26 was destined to be an exceptional event, it had long been clear.
From a negotiating point of view, this meeting was expected to be crucial already from the Paris Agreement because the purpose of the COP26 was to collect the adjusted Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC), to close the gap between the global goal of the Paris Agreement and the temperature rise expected by the end of the century, based on the sum of current NDCs.
Its uniqueness, however, also lies in the necessity to delay the event, planned for 2020, by one year, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, whose repercussions are mitigating despite being far from extinguishing.
However, the basic dilemma is now how to manage these two conditions, as exceptional as they are antithetical.
How is it possible, indeed, to ensure the high participation that the COP would deserve, for its utmost negotiating relevance, with the need for “social distancing”, crucial to prevent the spread of the virus, that started to grow again in the UK right a few weeks before the start of work?
From a COVID-19 point of view, the hosting country has revealed an impeccable approach, starting from requesting a vaccination certificate to enter the country, combined with the obligation to autonomously take a COVID-19 test within two days of arrival – and later conveniently post it by priority mail. It takes slightly longer than a day to receive the PCR results per email: Glasgow is the main centre in Great Britain for this kind of analysis, counting more than 800 people capable of performing up to 70’000 PCR tests per day.
Furthermore, to guarantee that the work of the COP is carried out safely, all participants are daily required to self-administer a rapid test, whose negative result must be registered online, to obtain a day pass indispensable to access the venue.
From the perspective of the monitoring system, everything works just fine.
Nevertheless, the problem arises when more than 10’000 people per day need to enter the site, through perhaps the most underpowered control system that I have had the chance to experience at COPs since 2006. And if you must control the results of daily tests, in addition to the authorized badges… the damage is done.
It is therefore inevitable to deal every day with queues that last longer than an hour. Besides making any prediction of the time of entry impossible, they make thousands of people hoarding and crowding without any space left between one another. The request to respect 1.5m of social distancing, clearly visible within the COP, gets here swept under the rug.
But the paradox is not over. COVID-19 rules led to restricting the number of people who have access to the COP – the same people that, moments before, were intimately sharing the queue at the entrance gates, inside the negotiation rooms and side events, witnessing the absurd situation that the available chairs are fewer than the UNFCCC member countries. Excluding in advance the possibility to take part in the work with more than one person per country.
Let alone NGOs and other economic observers, acting since ever as watchdogs on the real positions of countries at roundtables. Positions that do not always coincide with the nice words spent to communication media outside those same rooms. This inconsistency leads to legitimate complaints from NGOs that lament a lack in the transparency of negotiations. It is unreasonable how openness at the COP – which should have a crucial role – is, on the contrary, left behind and neglected. This condition inevitably leads to widening the gap between politicians, discussing behind closed doors, and the real world, waiting on the outside, asking for a quicker and wider action.
The presence of heads of states and governments during the first two days of COP26 added another burden to an already delicate situation, restricting access to more than one-third of the venue and further assembling those out of the negotiates in the remaining space. The structure’s load capacity has reached its limit so quickly that yesterday the entrances were inevitably blocked at lunchtime. All of this with the current presence of “only” 12’000 people, when the issued accreditations should be about 35’000. A sort of collapse already at the starting blocks.
Despite the situation, the UNFCCC Secretariat did not lose the sense of irony. Given the inevitable need to spend hours outdoors, it provides the classic tip from a good family man, reminding participants to equip themselves with appropriate gear in the case of rain.
A range of difficulties that, for now, do not seem to affect in any way the people who have come from all over the world with undoubtedly very strong motivations. However, the real underlying problem is that the long queues and the limited accessible spaces lead to amassing people and inevitably increasing the risk of spreading the virus, despite all the prevention measures implemented.
Suppose nothing changes in the next few days. Should we, therefore, expect a possible spread of COVID-19 next week – when an even greater number of people is expected?
A thorny issue, together with finding the right balance between the need for participation and transparency and COVID-19 prevention measures.
In all this, the only real hope is that the negotiations will produce truly significant progress in countering the current climate shift, which would at least partially justify having decided to take these risks.
We take this opportunity to remind you that the next Tea Corner, scheduled for Tuesday, 9th November at 17:00 CET, will be dedicated to the latest updates from the COP26.
