We are in the last few days of the crucial negotiations at the 28th Conference of the Parties of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. And this is where we must begin to chart the course for turning commitments into action.
Once the dust settles on COP-28, governments, industry, and think tanks will need to tackle some critical questions about the tangible policy, technology, market, and finance shifts that will genuinely transform the lives and livelihoods of people on the ground. Will the green transition be just and inclusive, or will it widen disparities? Will capital markets drive climate risk management, or will the real value of natural and social capital be incorporated into accounting processes? And who will be involved in this valuation?
These questions matter not just globally but also at national and local levels where people and nature are most impacted by climate change.
India ranked 7th among the countries most affected by climate change-induced extreme weather events in 2019, according to the latest Global Climate Risk Index, released in 2021. According to a 2023 report by the Cross Dependency Initiative, nine Indian states, including Maharashtra, Kerala, and Uttar Pradesh rank among the top 50 global areas at high risk for severe climate impacts on infrastructure by 2050.
Capping global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees seems unlikely, which is why integrating adaptation strategies into local and sub-national economic development agendas is critical.
India must develop a national strategy to not only deal with domestic loss, damage issues, and internal displacements but also with climate refugees from other nations. This will need to be managed with political sensitivity, humane compassion, and a spirit of regional solidarity.
Also Read: Not all emitters are equal. Top 10% in US, Canada, EU emit 2-8 times more than India’s richest
A case for ‘south-south’ cooperation
Despite the challenges of adaptation and anticipated loss and damage, there are opportunities for innovative solutions through south-south cooperation.
Such a collaboration would not only enable complementary financial and technological capacities more suited to our contexts, but also strengthen the collective voice of the so-called Global South in international negotiations. This includes tracking, monitoring, and evaluating financial and technical capacity-building needs, advocating for patent-free green technology transfers, and ensuring that commitments made by developed countries are met. In this context, regional cooperation among South Asian countries would need to be re-energised and strengthened.
The Loss and Damage Fund (L&D) commitment in the first few days of the COP set the tone for an optimistic outcome that could potentially support the climate impact management of the most vulnerable nations. However, scepticism remains regarding the continued build-up and operationalisation of this fund.
It would be useful to learn from the less-than-stellar experiences of the Adaptation Fund and the Green Climate Fund— both in terms of the complexity of processes to access the fund and the practical quantum available to nations and communities that need it the most.
It’s important to recognise that it will be impossible to cover and compensate for all losses due to climate change. These impacts include extreme natural events as well as slow or rapid changes in ecological, infrastructure, economic, socio-cultural and knowledge systems within a community or region.
Therefore, the L&D fund should focus on resilience-building along with risk coverage. It should fund interventions that systemically address these to enhance capacities for adaptive governance, societal agency, and endogenous innovation. Let the fund not merely be a band-aid but a catalyst for transformative change.
Also Read: Why India abstained from renewable energy pledge signed by 118 countries at COP28
A leadership opportunity for India
India has the potential to lead the ‘Global South’ on a green, low-carbon, and climate-resilient development trajectory. But financing the green climate transition remains a sticky point at COP28. We continue to press the ‘Global North’ to fulfill their finance and technology commitments, while also advocating for carbon-intensive economies like the United States, Australia, Canada, and the European Union to downscale their carbon footprints and consumption levels.
However, we must ensure that our own decarbonisation and resource circularity targets are operationalised at the individual, business, industry, and settlement levels. Our growth story mustn’t take the same trajectory as that of the rich nations. We need to lead from the front with innovative green and circular industrialisation policies, low-carbon agriculture, and nature-based infrastructure solutions for human settlements.
In the medium to long term, we must establish appropriate sectoral and individual caps on carbon, material, and water footprints, along with setting acceptable quality-of-life standards for all our people. These measures must be pushed through fiscal and regulatory instruments and institutional capacities to enable technology and market shifts. At the same time, our pathways for Sustainable Consumption and Production (SCP) must create jobs, regenerate natural ecosystems, and put people and communities at the centre of resource governance.
India’s refusal to sign the pledge to triple global renewable energy capacity by 2030 made headlines. However, post COP28, India must evaluate whether its current energy transition pathways ensure energy security for its 1.4 billion people in the short term and avoid ecological damage and inequity in the long term.
Similarly, India’s energy and material efficiency strategies must adhere to the principles of intergenerational social and ecological equity. The rhetoric of ‘development without damage’ and ‘ecology with economy’ will need to be tested against evidence of a just and equitable transition.
Our development strategies must prioritise sectors and solutions that address both mitigation and adaptation goals. Investing in green and local initiatives is the need of the hour. The building and construction sector, for example, contributes over 20 per cent of emissions. Innovations such as low-carbon cement, green steel, and waste-based aggregate and masonry solutions can reportedly cut these emissions by up to 50 per cent while meeting the housing and infrastructure needs of our growing urban population.
To reduce carbon and methane emissions substantially, we need to concentrate on improved land and water management, along with changes in agricultural and animal husbandry practices. National policy strategies, such as those for millets, flood and drought-resistant agricultural practices, and inland fisheries, must be supported by social and ecological approaches that enhance local capabilities in resource management, seed sovereignty, and agro-biodiversity.
Transforming waste management in cities to resource recovery and circular economy models will reduce carbon and resource footprints in urban areas. Nature-based solutions that provide infrastructure solutions for cities and villages, while also prioritising the regeneration and health of wetlands, forests, and river systems, will build resilience to climate change impacts, de-risking development investments.
This can be India’s moment of genuine leadership in building self-reliance and demonstrating a Lifestyle for Environment (LiFE) beyond a global showcase.
Zeenat Niazi is senior vice-president and chief knowledge officer of the Development Alternatives Group, and a member of the Climate Action Network-South Asia. Swayam Prabha Das is associate vice-president and lead, policy studies and planning support domain, at Development Alternatives. Views are personal.
(Edited by Asavari Singh)