**Reportage from media in the Global North suggests recently-concluded climate talks in Egypt were one part failure and one part a success. It is not so. **

Our researchers, Radhika Chatterjee and Mrinali tracked the jargon-filled negotiations (formally called the 27th Conference of Parties or COP27). The two watched arguments made in public and they analysed the draft negotiating texts as they evolved. They talked to diplomats on and off the records and they were able to get details at times of what was being said and done behind closed doors (And, it's very different from what countries claim in public). 

They wrote several reports to share what they found. 

After speaking to several developing country diplomats they first figured out what were the important elements of the trenchant climate talks that would rake up controversy at COP27. You read it here. 

What makes the climate talks complicated is that each country comes to them from their unique economic and social contexts. They try to achieve ambitious climate results but not at the cost of their economy. So there is economic competitiveness at play. To capture this variance, our two colleagues interviewed different country group representatives. Radhika interviewed Diego Pacheco, spokesperson of the Like Minded Developing Countries or the LMDC – a grouping which includes India and China (two large emerging economies that the US and Europe want economically tamed and fronting the climate battle even if the UN climate convention does not allow so). 

Mrinali spoke to Michai Robertson, finance lead of Alliance of Small Island States or AOSIS. Along with China and India they form the umbrella G77+China group of developing countries but their priorities are different than ours. 

But this year, the G77+China group largely stayed united (like each year, the EU did try to divide and prevail, but it failed -– we will come to it later). The AOSIS was the first grouping to bring up the issue of a Loss and Damage fund, the most contentious issue this year. They explained how rich countries tried to stall the creation of the fund during negotiations. 

COP27 also saw efforts by rich countries to dilute the principles of the Paris Agreement. They tried to shift the responsibility of raising money for fighting climate change onto the private sector. 

They also tracked how rich countries opposed the inclusion of equity in the text on adaptation – which talks of support needed by poor countries for dealing with the impact of climate change. While poorer countries insisted that talks on the adaptation goals must progress, rich countries insisted that we wait another year.  

And to come back to our overall assessment. No, this COP27 was not a failure. It was a success. For the developing countries trying to fight a war of attrition. They stuck together to prevent a dilution of the Paris Agreement and cornered the developed countries into doing the right thing - set up the Loss and Damage fund. Well, at least on paper we now have one after 30 years of talking about it. 

A quick assessment report on why we think COP27 delivered surprisingly well can be read here. You will get to read how developed countries crushed hopes of greater ambitious climate targets at Egypt by trying to short circuit the principle that each country must act proportionate to their responsibility and capacity. And, some more.  

On Forest Conservation and Evictions

Our researcher Prudhviraj accessed the Environment ministry’s internal documents on the new forest conservation rules forged in June this year. The  documents revealed how the new rules will help miners and project developers circumvent stringent obligations in place.  In a story for the Frontline, Prudhviraj wrote on how the new rules allow private forests and deemed forests to be swapped for mandatory compensatory afforestation for development projects.

In his next story, Prudhviraj wrote about more than 16 lakh tribal people and forest-dwelling families facing the threat of eviction for their claims over forest land being rejected. Their fate hangs on a final hearing of a case in the Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of the Forest Rights Act (FRA). Published in The Wire Science, the story explained how claims rejections were done and its impact on forest dwellers.

And, Forest Rights Violations
Tamil Nadu ranks high on human development indicators. But on FRA, its performance is dismal.

Our researcher Jeff Joseph investigated FRA implementation in the southern state. He found that poor implementation of FRA stops the tribals from accessing their assured land rights. He travelled to Krishnagiri which has one of the worst records in FRA implementation within Tamil Nadu. In this ground report for the Scroll he uncovered how the state blocks some of its most vulnerable citizens from earning their living.

HOLDING GROUND 2022: LCW’s Annual Dialogue

Land Conflict Watch, in partnership with National Foundation for India and Queen Mary University of London Global Policy Institute, invites you to its first annual dialogue Holding Ground 2022. Our theme this year is Land Disputes: Stalled Investments and Lives.
The dialogue will host three reports and three conversations.

Our lead report ‘Land Locked’ is a comprehensive analysis of stalled investments and communities’ demands in over 600 ongoing land conflicts. We are also releasing two sub-reports Legal Terrain and (Un)Common Verdicts analyse legislations, judicial interventions, and judgments on land conflicts and common lands.

We look forward to your presence on December 12th, at India Habitat Centre, New Delhi.