As I am writing this piece, if someone wants to follow the latest developments on climate negotiations governance, Nepal is far from where high level discussions are happening. This week, the global hub for climate discussions is not going to be found in the Himalayan region but rather in tropical Central America.
While there is no doubt that Nepal tried very hard and to some extent succeeded to earn the global attention and turn itself into an international outpost for the fight against climate warming, these days, the attention for anyone interested in climate governance and action must be turned to Panama.
The recently concluded Sagarmatha Sambad offered a unique opportunity for Nepal to showcase its commitment towards the implementation of the Paris Agreement but also a space to discuss its own challenges. But now it is Panama City that is truly the epicenter of climate governance as it hosts the first ever edition of the Climate Week where, from 19 to 23 May, multiple technical negotiations related to different aspects of the Paris Agreement, are unfolding.
While there have been similar initiatives, especially on occasion of the convening of the General Assembly in New York during the month of September, ClimateWeek in Panama is a huge and special one. It is so because, first of all, it is an official gathering mandated by the Secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change more simply known as UN Climate Change. More practically speaking, the discussions unfolding in Panama that were also preceded by a Nature Summit that linked the biodiversity and climate agendas, can be seen as a bridge towards the June Climate Meetings in Bonn.
In climate jargon referred to as the SB 62, we are talking about the most crucial event to prepare the ground for the COP 30 to be held in Brazil this coming November. In relation to the Sambaad, there have been a few criticisms.
First, no Head of State or Head of Government nor Foreign Minister attended the Summit. Second, the most appropriate dates were poorly chosen, considering the overlapping with the Climate Week in Panama whose location is more than 15.000 km apart from Nepal. Despite the shortcomings, the Federal government put together an ambitious program. Technical workshops held during the Sagarmatha Sambad were of a high level and a high number of experts and technical persons from all over the world participated. This is undoubtedly a success.
Moreover, and this cannot be emphasized enough, on the eve of the summit, Nepal approved its 3rd Nationally Determined Contribution or NDC and its First Biennial Transparency Report (BRT). The former offers the Government of Nepal an ambitious path towards net zero.
The latter, instead, a new tool being introduced by UNFCCC, is an essential tool to bring in accountability in the “government as a whole” process of reducing greenhouse emissions and stepping up on its adaptation commitment and overall efforts to fight climate warming. And yet as the country is marching on through what is undoubtedly the bumpy road towards becoming a low middle income nation, can Nepal do more in terms of organizing big events related to climate change? In other words, could the nation dare to imagine organizing something like what Panama is doing these days? Before trying to answer this question, allow me a few observations.
Remit of the initiative
The Sambaad must unequivocally remain focused on climate action and climate governance. Over the last few months, by following the news related to its preparation, I did struggle to understand that it would have been organized as a forum exclusively centered on climate. Actually, my confusion seems justified.
“The Sagarmatha Sambaad is a multi-stakeholder dialogue forum committed to deliberate on the most prominent issues of global, regional and national significance” explains the web site of the conference. By design, the Sambaad has been conceived with broader aims, so it could be possible that the future editions might tackle different issues and areas of discussion. Probably climate would always remain a central and crosscutting issue but who knows, perhaps the theme on the next editions might shift towards geopolitics or ethical AI.
Instead I do believe that the Sambaad should be exclusively focused on climate action and possibly be built in a way that it can better enable linkages with the biodiversity agenda. It is not that other issues are less important or do not deserve attention but if you think about any major global forum that Sambaad is inspired to, they all have a very clear laser focused agenda. The IISS Shangri-La Dialogue is all about defense and geopolitics. The Raisina Dialogue has perhaps a broader remit but it is held at the intersections of foreign policies, geopolitics and defense, each of which are clearly interlinked with each other. The Munich Conference is also on defense and security
Ideally the Federal Government should set the ambition of turning the Sambaad into the premier discussion forum on climate, biodiversity with a distinctive perspective on mountains’ resilience. I do hope that the officials behind the Sambaad have conducted a comparative analysis of similar initiatives. Such benchmarking would be very useful also in future in such a way that would help give the Sambaad an identity of its own. For this, a partnership with ICIMOD could be indispensable to elevate the levels of the talks. At the same time Nepal’s unique topography and diversity in climates, with its South belt in Madhesh, also offers a unique chance to talk about forest preservation and conservation efforts in general.
Doing it every year
I do believe that announcing the next Sambaad for 2027 is an enormous mistake. I do understand the efforts needed to run it and the various implications. But, as some outlets have already underscored, this first edition was entirely a Federal Government’s endeavor with the Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers taking the lead and with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs playing an important supporting role.
There are certainly venues to strengthen the organizational governance of the whole initiative by involving and engaging also other entities without the Federal Government losing ownership over it. But if Nepal wants to play the “big game”, then the Sambaad should be organized every year. A more decentralized “governance” of the conference could help make the initiative less cumbersome even if the planning for the next edition should start from tomorrow. The most important similar initiatives do happen annually and become a key fixture in the calendar of all the world thought leaders and ministers.
Such forums are a priority for them, occasions that they cannot miss out because these are agenda setting talks. The discussions stemming from it could help setting the process for the next edition.
Think big
Probably an open review process with the involvement of different stakeholders will take place in the days ahead. The Sambaad must be strengthened and perhaps it will evolve in a yearly event that cannot be missed by the big names involved in climate negotiations. Hopefully as a compromise, a mini Sambaad could be held in 2026, maybe less ambitious than this year’s but still something remarkable at least for the Himalayan Region and the whole of South Asia. Can Nepal envision a Climate Week initiative in a few years down the line? But what about 2027 or 2028? Can the Sambaad be associated with one future edition of Climate Week? Can Nepal replicate what Panama achieved?
Panama has a population of less than 5 million people. But its GDP is 83.32 billion USD according to the World Bank and it is double the one of Nepal. Still Nepal could dare to think big in matters of climate and biodiversity action. The Federal Government could initiate a conversation with the Secretariat of UN Climate Change and with the Secretariat of the UN Biodiversity Convention to host smaller technical events in one of the many mandated bodies within the Paris Agreement’s architecture and within the Kunming Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Such smaller but official meetings would be totally doable for Nepal and they could be seen as intermediate stepping stones towards a full Climate Week.
So I do imagine in 2027 a bigger Sambaat led by the Federal Government through better partnerships and division of work, to be immediately followed by an event mandated either by the UNFCCC or by the UN Biodiversity Conference Secretariat.
But climate and biodiversity ambition cannot be driven only by bold gatherings. The country needs to have a clear and multifaceted plan with new ideas and proposals. Reading reporting news about the Sambaad, I did not find any new ideas or propositions coming from the Government of Nepal. It is always about the same “talking” points, mostly complaints (that are unequivocally correct and legitimate) about the lack of adequate support on the part of the international community in partnering with vulnerable nations like Nepal. Smaller countries like Marshall Islands, Vanuatu, and Barbados were able to lead the climate debate from the frontbench. Why can’t Nepal do likewise? So let’s have an ambitious plan ahead to have Nepal hosting some major climate and biodiversity gatherings. But also let’s enable the best minds of the nation to brainstorm and identify some innovative and out of the box solutions that could help the fight against climate warming and biodiversity loss.
Nepal can become a hub for innovative climate and biodiversity policies. The capacities and know-how are there. Still there is a central question to be answered. After successfully organizing the Sambaad, will the Federal Government prove that it can further rise to the occasion and make Nepal an indispensable global partner to ensure the viability and sustainability of our planet?
Simone Galimberti is the co-founder of The Good Leadership and writes about youths, development, democracy and politics. Views are personal.
Comment