In a recently published article, ‘The United Nations and Global Blue Carbon Governance: A Policy and Practice Review of Frameworks, Challenges and Possible Pathways’, Jian He and Min Cao have studied the global carbon governance landscape with a focus on the United Nations System. In doing so, they have examined the interconnections between blue carbon governance and five significant international instruments: the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (‘UNFCCC’), the Convention on Biological Diversity (‘CBD’), the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (SDGs) and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction. Building on this evaluation, they have determined four impediments to efficient governance spearheaded by the UN: 1) quantitative and definitional inconsistencies between “coastal blue carbon” and novel description of “broad-sense blue carbon”; 2) low degree of reciprocity between the aforementioned instruments, resulting in piecemeal regulations and burdensome transaction costs; 3) unsatisfactory application of the common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) principle, especially for developing countries located in coastal areas and small island states; and 4) long-standing lack of access to finance and capacity during the realization of blue carbon projects. Accordingly, they have set out three actions that can be taken to rectify this situation: 1) launching a "minimum consistency standards package” enabling the institutions of the UN system to build synergies; 2) introducing “nationally integrated blue carbon policy packages” in line with Nationally Determined Contributions (‘NDCs’), National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs), Ramsar designations and national disaster reduction strategies; and 3) applying the CBDR principle by specifying courses of action for securing obligatory financial and technological support.
Key takeaways:
- Climate change is putting ever-increasing pressures on fragile systems, with the economic repercussions prevalently impacting developing countries. It is anticipated that by 2035 developing countries will have to spend between USD 310 billion and USD 365 billion annually for climate adaptation. That said, currently the funds that are allocated to adaptation are 12 to 14 times lower than the latter cost, jeopardizing the livelihood of societies.
- Within this context, blue carbon ecosystems that include mangroves, seagrass beds and seaweed restoration and cultivation have the potential to act as carbon sinks in the long-term, offering a nature-based solution. That said, there are ambiguities surrounding their climate mitigation impacts that can be quantified, such as biodiversity and coastal protection, which enjoy recognition under the SDGs.
- Apart from climate mitigation, blue carbon ecosystems considerably facilitate local mitigation of ocean acidification and offer a wide variety of services for humans in relation to fisheries, conservation, provision of living areas for certain species. In addition, they provide protection against storms and waves, thereby enhancing water quality and contributing to the maintenance of cultural heritage, moral values and recreational activities.
- There is no single UN institution tasked with governing blue carbon at the international level. Instead, blue carbon is governed under various UN regimes.
- Even though a definition for blue carbon has been put forward by the UNEP, the concrete ecosystems covered by blue carbon is still controversial and there is no agreement regarding whether ecosystems not including coasts should be included in the scope of the definition of blue carbon. As a result, there are no uniform monitoring and accounting rules, rendering blue carbon governance inadequate and unsustainable at the global level. Therefore, a ‘minimum consistency standards package’ should be introduced to provide a common denominator for multiple aspects that are relevant for blue carbon projects.
- The regimes governing blue carbon have divergent goals, measurement tools, means of application and resource coverage. In addition, while some of the regimes have binding character, other regimes are voluntary. As a result, blue carbon projects have to comply with a wide variety of rules that are not consistent, increasing transaction costs and hampering policy efficiency. To tackle this drawback, an “Integrated National Blue Carbon Policy Packages” should be introduced, to promote synergies of goals and cross-recognition of indicators used in different regimes.
- Most of the blue carbon resources are located in developing countries located in coastal areas and small island developing nations that usually lack adequate financial resources, technological know-how and data-related capabilities. The realization of blue carbon projects requires the expenditure of high costs, but countries where they take place lack direct access to funding, sufficient technological localization and frameworks enabling the participation of local communities in decision-making processes. This situation prevents the implementation of the CBRD principle whereby developed states that have greatly contributed to climate change should bear greater responsibility to tackle it compared to non-developed states with little to no impact upon the emergence of climate change. To address this pitfall, the implementation of the CBRD principle should be strengthened through the introduction of financial obligations owed by developed countries to developing countries.
Read the full article here: Frontiers | The United Nations and global blue carbon governance: a policy and practice review of frameworks, challenges, and possible pathways