Petro-states and climate negotiations: what makes a good COP Presidency?
12/18/2024
3 min
Share
The last three editions of the Climate Negotations (COPs) have all been chaired by oil-producing states. So, why does the UN framework allow fossil-fuel producers to play such an important role year after year? In this video, Professor Hayley WALKER (IÉSEG) explains how COP Presidencies are selected, and provide some insights on what makes a good Presidency.
Professor WALKER explains that the UN was created by states to help them implement their collective will.”Far from being an all-powerful form of world government, the UN is more like a servant to its member states. Decisions are always taken by countries.”
Countries in the UN are divided into 5 regional groups, and the role of COP Presidency rotates between these groups each year. Countries can put themselves forward as a candidate, then the group decides who they will elect.
So, what makes a good Presidency?
“Based on my research, it seems that the chair’s nationality is, surprisingly, not a big issue. Although some nations might have to work harder to gain trust, the way you perform in the role is more important than your country’s national position. Impartiality is key – a Presidency needs to listen to everybody, be transparent, and have the right knowledge and expertise.”
Because of their considerable resources, the Emirati Presidency of COP28 was able to invest heavily and recruit a lot of experienced people to join their team to help them do just that. They consulted widely and didn’t favour one position over another.”
Unlike the Azerbaijani Presidency of COP29, the Emirati Presidency was able to deliver an historic outcome, with the decision to transition away from fossil fuels.
“Although it sounds obvious to us, this was the first explicit mention to fossil fuels in a COP decision! They were able to achieve this despite being a petro-state Presidency, and maybe even because they were a petro-state Presidency. This is something I plan to investigate further in my research,” she adds
The expert concludes, therefore, that for now it’s not the Presidency’s national interest that’s important, but whether they are able to put it aside and manage the negotiations in a fair and balanced manner.
