240: Two Years to Save The World?

Simon Stiell: [00:04:00] Well, thank you, Tom, and it's certainly great to be here at Chatham House and all those that have been here before me. I know I'm in very, very good company, but I think on the geopolitical front, I think there are two narratives at play, one is the heavy headwinds that we see before us this year, half of the world will be going to the polls. And how that translates into any policy shifts, with regard to climate, I think everyone should be kind of concerned, but it also provides a space where voices can and should be heard. You know, there is, climate is up there on the agenda. It is on the global agenda. We have seen over the in recent periods this sliding down the political agenda where in reality amongst the populations I spoke of the recent Gallup survey, 130,000 people in 125 countries surveyed and 89%, expressed their concerns for climate impacts and what we are seeing, region by region, country by country are climate impacts impacting everybody, affecting everybody. And with each year that passes within the public sphere, that awareness is there.

Simon Stiell: [00:05:43] But we're not seeing that translate into some of the decisions that are being made. So that's one narrative. The other narrative that I think is equally important, and where I do have hope is the robustness of the Paris Agreement. And we are seeing in these very, very difficult times, we are seeing multilateralism working within the climate sphere. Certainly as far as the outcomes we saw from Dubai, with a sufficiently strong outcome of the global stocktake and the pathways forward for closing both the ambition and the implementation gap. In addition to, you know, coming out of Dubai, transitioning away from fossil fuels, two years, just two years ago did we think, you know, let alone in Paris, that we would be seeing this text, in a COP outcome. So we are seeing progress, and a level of resilience within the process that despite what is happening externally, parties can come together and eke out at least a baseline of progress that is sufficient to keep the process going. Is it enough, absolutely not, but that is what I see the challenge, the challenges before us.

Tom: [00:07:19] No, it's fascinating. And, I mean, and what you're pointing to there and I think, you know, your the process that you have responsibility for rests upon the fact that in each of the member States, individual citizens will make the connection between the weather getting worse and the impacts on their lives, the economic benefits of regulation and legislation that make their lives better. And we're not, we're not yet seeing that connection being made. That's what you're talking about, right. And that's very frustrating because we're seeing these super high numbers of people who are concerned. You then speak to their leaders at the international level, and they're not responding with the requisite urgency, that kind of necessity of bringing domestic populations with you for a collective global agenda that's going to be particularly important when it comes to finance, right. Because you've got to persuade or national leaders have to persuade domestic populations to really step up on climate finance. You were super clear today. That's the prerequisite to getting to where we need to go. So, I mean, how do we, I realize you're looking at the international stage, but these things are so connected. What pathways do you see for making that connection more tightly? What should national leaders do?

Simon Stiell: [00:08:25] Well, the agenda certainly for this year and next year is clearly laid out within the process. So this year, in Baku, parties need to agree on what that new collective quantified goal for finance will be how the billions transform to the trillions. So that is firmly on the agenda, as is countries coming up with their new their third generation, climate plans, which will speak to how they are going to enact what came out of Dubai, reflecting what came out of the global stocktake. So the agenda is ripe for a focused discussion within the process. But what is also clear is that delivery on that is wholly dependent or certainly significantly dependent on what's happening outside of the process. So in a few days time, we'll all convene in Washington, DC for the spring meetings, where climate finance will be on the agenda, where the discussion about all of those elements outside of the process, whether it's the reform of the, the MDBs, whether it is a reform of the wider global financial architecture and all of those discussions that have been taking place over the last few years. What has impressed me, and that is from attending the springs and the annuals with a different hat on as a government minister is seeing the alignment of language and a focus in on what needs to be done to make the global financial architecture more fit for purpose, and how that directly supports, climate action and development. What we haven't seen is that alignment of language and action translate into concrete actions, and that is the opportunity that's been presented, whether it is at the springs and the annuals, whether it is the G7, the G20 and the need for us to start connecting, the themes there, but also and more importantly, the outputs from these other fora and the clear political signals that are needed to feed back into the climate process and the finance and climate plan discussions that are taking place this year.

Tom: [00:11:05] No, I think that's very smart, because, I mean, what's clear is that the agenda is so broad, it can't all be delivered through one process right. You need to leverage the other international fora. Can I ask you in your speech, you gave a very clear call to citizens. You said this is not just about those who are sort of leading countries. It's about every single person on the planet. What do you want citizens to do?

Simon Stiell: [00:11:25] Well, the first is recognizing that this climate crisis, who does it impact most. It is the global population. It's us as individuals, us as citizens. So both as victims, and the awareness of those actions that are impacting us, lives, livelihoods. But it's also the role that they play, they're constituents, they're consumers, so recognizing, the difficult circumstances we are all feeling. This used to be an issue that was centered around, you know, the climate vulnerable, those in small island developing states, those in low lying coastal areas, but now this is impacting everybody. And the opportunity is there to articulate that and the choices that one makes.

Tom: [00:12:32] Great, okay, just one more question. Thank you very much for taking the time. So obviously you're in this unique situation now where you have this two year period with three governments who are working collaboratively the UAE, the COP last year, Azerbaijan and Brazil. Having seen some of that process, I can imagine that brings enormous opportunities and some complexities as well in terms of how you're actually going to drive your way to the outcome. I'd love to just hear any high level reflections on how that's going, working with the troika. And do you think that's a useful formulation for governments to come together in that way? And is it enough to deliver the diplomatic outcome that we need? Is the muscle of those three countries coming together in an effective way to be more than the sum of the parts?

Simon Stiell: [00:13:15] I think the bottom, you know enough, you know what is enough? Everything that we're doing right now is insufficient. But this is an innovation that has the potential to bring, to bring value to the process. You have the continued involvement of very active UAE presidency, which is determined to see that the outcomes of Dubai are implemented. And that's absolutely how it should be. You have the incoming presidency, Azerbaijan, who have a heavy lift this year with that finance agenda and, and all of the other mandate items that need to be delivered this year, and you have the energy of Brazil, the incoming presidency for COP30, who are bringing a lot of energy, a lot of vision also to the table. So there is a lot of impatience wrapped in that, which I think is extraordinarily healthy and constructive once it's channelled to a single objective. And that's been set out Brazil, coming out of Dubai, and as a key focus for the troika is mission 1.5 and giving context to precisely what mission 1.5 is. And that is, in a nutshell, keeping 1.5 firmly alive based on the finances that need to be generated over the course of this next period, but also those climate plans that must be Paris aligned, 1.5 aligned. So elevating the political capital, having the three presidencies working in concert absolutely adds to the possibility of greater success and stronger outcomes. So it's certainly something that is, that certainly has the potential to make a mark as we move forward.

Tom: [00:15:24] Simon, thank you so much. Really appreciate you taking the time. Great speech. I'm sure our paths will cross again soon.

Simon Stiell: [00:15:30] Thank you Tom, thank you.

Tom: [00:15:32] Thank you.

Christiana: [00:15:39] All right, Tom, so I assume that you are back at home now. So thanks very much for going into London to that speech. I'm wondering, before we get into the content of the speech, Tom, what did you perceive in the audience? How do you think that went over? What was the feeling that you got in the room?

Paul: [00:15:58] The mood in the room.

Tom: [00:16:00] Yeah, no, it's a great question. So it was in that that basement room that you know very well, Christiana in Chatham House. Few hundred people, lots of media there. I mean, there was, you know, people like Fiona Harvey and Justin Rowlatt and others, all the people who would normally cover these different things. It was a combination of kind of old faces, people who've been following this, these trends for, for many, many years and kind of, you know, newer, younger people. And I would say because I talked to a few people afterwards, about 45 minutes after the speech, I went in to see Simon. So I spent the time sort of standing in the lobby and talking to people and kind of asking them what they thought, and there was a bit of a split, to be honest with you. I think that younger people, came in and they said we really liked the passion, we liked the clarity, we liked the no nonsense approach, we like the connection to a range of other things. And I think people who'd been around in the process a bit more, wanted to hear a bit more substance around how we were going to actually move from the stuck position we're in, because I think and we'll get into this, much of what I took from the speech is that he's really worried about the politics, and that he's actually feeling behind the scenes, that governments don't have the level of political support necessary in their countries to enable them to do what they need to do on the international stage to move us forward. And that, of course, is not Simon's job. His job is the international piece. But I think that they would have liked to have seen a bit more delving in to how some of those tough issues were going to be addressed.

Christiana: [00:17:30] Yeah, I mean, it's a very good question. The answer is extremely difficult.

Tom: [00:17:34] Right yeah, no for sure.

Christiana: [00:17:35] Right. So I mean, I don't know, Tom, I feel that he obviously highlighted at least two of the important things for this year right, and on to Brazil, which is by which time we have to have new national commitments and we have to have the finance to back it up, and those are at least two, because you also have to speak about the adaptation piece, etc., etc.. But he highlighted, you know, at least two of the very important pillars, that continue to be the pillars, it's not like they're new right. And so, so part I think of the frustration of some people could be like, well, these are the pillars that we've always had, why are we not moving farther with them. So I understand that. That's why I say the answer can be very difficult. I think in part he did give an answer there, Tom, and I'd be interested in what both of you think by putting so much time and attention on to individuals choices and individuals reactions and decisions.

Christiana: [00:18:46] That I think, is a little bit new because let's remember that as the executive secretary, what he is directly supporting is government action. So for him to walk on to, you know, the adjacent field of individual choices and actions and decisions is very interesting. I think it's very helpful. And I would say it probably responds to what you were saying, he's very worried about what governments are going to or not going to do this year, especially this year with so many elections coming up, it's not exactly the year in which you're going to see a rising force, political force in each of these countries going to the polls to say, okay, now we're going to do climate action. It's just not there yet. This climate action is not a political winner yet. So I think he's concerned, right, that this is going to be a year of non-action, to put it mildly, on the part of most governments. And therefore, where can we see progress. Well, with individuals and of course, private sector. So that's the way that I would interpret that. But what did you think?

Tom: [00:19:59] After you Paul.

Paul: [00:20:02] Really?

Tom: [00:20:02] No, please go ahead, yeah. This is what it's like when Paul and I are trying to get lunch in London. Please, yeah.

Paul: [00:20:10] After you, no, after you. Governments, not having the mandate, the whatever, it's good you pick up on the kind of encouragement of the citizen. He was quite clear, the role of the private sector is absolutely essential. And I think I took that to mean not so much that, you know, we'll often talk about, like, the oil and gas industry or high fossil fuel emitting industries can be very negative. But we forget that 80, 90% of the, say, 80% of the global economy, these really huge companies are just sitting on the sidelines, right. What if they come into the match. I think that's one of the things that you two brilliantly achieved at Paris. You bought the mainstream business community right into the middle of the debate, and they said, you know what, we're part of this here and this is how it's going to be. Corporations have a lot of power, and Simon referred to the, the, you know, the spring meetings and the World Bank and the IMF. But I think we also want to think about the processes that are being hot housed by major institutional investors, asset owners, all thinking about how to sort of super accelerate and turbocharge investment in, you know, the decarbonized industries. It's worth remembering that the fossil fuel industry is like 100 years old you know, you can't just build electric infrastructure like that. You know, it takes a bit of time.

Paul: [00:21:30] But the last thing I want to leave a thought with you all that I got from a conversation which I hope she won't mind sharing with the brilliant Rachel Kyte, and she spoke about, like, the ultimate impediment here is just the wrong people are going to the money. She said, if you sit in an office with 50 billion or 100 billion or something to invest, then people just come and find you, but maybe the people who come and find you are the people who've been tapping those capital sources for the last hundred years. And the new technologies, the innovations, the new people are having some trouble getting, to access that capital. So I would just I would say that the missing chess piece on the board, the Queen, if you will, that could kind of obliterate the opposition here is all of that corporate power just sitting on the sidelines. And I reach out to anyone, and I know of at least one major corporate executive who listens regularly to our podcast, because I spoke to that person just the other day, and that person is a shining example. Leaders of businesses this is what you probably spent your career doing, putting yourself in a position of power so at a decisive moment like this, you can come forward and tip the scales on that political consensus. And that is what I hold out hope for.

Tom: [00:22:45] So, I mean, I'm with you Paul, and, you know, we've been waiting for the cavalry on that for a long time. And the cavalry only comes when the economic incentives are aligned with it. And that's proving difficult to shift. So that cavalry shows up in pursuit of its economic advantage is what we know about this system. And it's difficult to invest against potential future profits. It's very easy to invest in lobbying to protect current profits and avoid them being removed by.

Paul: [00:23:13] There's definitely a business case for protecting existing cash flows. But to be honest with you, yeah, yeah.

Tom: [00:23:17] Exactly. Well, let's not go too far down this rabbit hole because I want to also turn it back, unless there is one last point you want to make before we go back to Simon's speech?

Paul: [00:23:23] No, no, go. 

Tom: [00:23:23] Okay. So Christiana, you made the point about first of all, him being worried about the citizen engagement outreach. And I think both of those were right. And in a way, some of the things he hinted at I think, you know, speak to his strategy. So the amount of time he spent connecting what was happening on climate with a whole range of other quality of life things. I mean, talking about the cancer of inequality, NDCs are a jobs jackpot, bolder action in farmer adaptation, cutting emissions to improve health, gender equality, don't achieve any SDGs. To me, that whole thing was a government pitch to reprioritize climate inside their various different cabinet meetings, because at the moment I think we see and we feel and he, you know, he didn't say this, but, I would imagine he feels a sense of alarm at how at the moment when you need to have that high level of political engagement, it is slipping down the radar because geopolitical concerns, he said that directly right. So, that's good that he's giving those speeches and calling for those things. And it's good he's doing it in that kind of direct way. And also interesting that he brings in the citizen in this year of the election. I mean, what he didn't say, and we don't know if he meant but, you know, he made the point that many, many citizens, significant percentages want to see their governments actually doing something significant on climate, but also that governments aren't doing what they need to do, there's a disconnect there in a big year of elections. I wonder if that was partly him saying, look, if you citizens are serious about this, you've got to vote for the parties that are actually going to make it happen, because at the moment there's a disconnect in the system. I mean, that we're all saying that, right. That's where we need to be.

Christiana: [00:25:03] But that's exactly the disconnect, right. That's exactly the disconnect. And how do we weave those two things together, because, yes, if you poll people, most people are concerned and they want action. Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. But would they vote for that, probably not.

Tom: [00:25:21] It's harder, yeah.

Christiana: [00:25:22] Probably not. And that's, you know, that's the difficulty. So I think that's why his pitch was not, go vote but go do something in your own life.

Tom: [00:25:34] Well it also can't be go vote right, given the position.

Christiana: [00:25:37] No it can't be.

Tom: [00:25:37] Yeah, yeah.

Christiana: [00:25:38] No.

Paul: [00:25:39] And also will they vote for it or not is a little bit to do with how you construct the manifestos. I remember years ago I was a market researcher and I can promise you if you ask most people, you know, do you want kind of higher energy prices and, you know, an unreliable power, everyone will say no. If you say to people, do you want free energy and energy independence, everyone will say, yes, right. So it just depends on how the the political story comes forward. Just to remind you about the voting. Yes, it's true everyone's going to the ballot box once every 4 or 5 years. This year is an important year. Everyone goes and ticks a box in a polling station. People also spend their money every single day. They invest their money every single day. I would you know, you've heard me say this a thousand times, the biggest democracy in the world is, in fact, how our economies work. And there are numerous companies with both investment products and, and food and vehicles and all the rest of it that are low and zero carbon alternatives. And they are constantly building, we are, you know, kind of beyond various tipping points. I think that the, you know, renewable energy investment exceeded the fossil fuel investment in about 2019. You know, that's a long time ago. So lots of things are moving in the right direction. And I just, you know, I don't think we can hang the whole story on this political outcome. Although clearly we know from Donald Trump, for example, that, you know, if it goes one way or another way, it makes a huge difference.

Tom: [00:26:58] We are, but that's the thing we're just going to try and push on today in terms of the political outcome. So all this other stuff totally agree with you, Paul, and I think today let's just try and analyse what's in that speech and what that means for the next couple of years.

Paul: [00:27:10] I read it all and I'm leaving it to you.

Tom: [00:27:14] I have a question for Christiana, which is, you know, he set out and as you say, it's not, it's not a new formulation, but it's important, the finance is a prerequisite for ambition. And he really pushed hard on that. And he set out, you know, Baku has to be the moment of clarity for finance that will enable us to get to our NDCs at the end of the year. But there's still a tension in there, right, because the UNFCCC inevitably has to focus on what's being called the new collective quantified goal inside the UN system, because it's very politically relevant, but we all know it's the flowing of trillions of dollars that's actually going to make the difference in trying to address this, such as the things Paul is talking about. Given that this tension is so old, we had it with the 100 billion in Paris, it's been around for a long time. What would some new ways of trying to address that apparent, you know, gated process between, first of all, finance, but not really serious finance, politically sensitive finance and then ambition. How can we rethink that in the next 18 months? Is there any gaps to try to reimagine? Because it just feels very familiar going down that road again. And it's always been quite painful. And often that kind of thinking hasn't gotten us to where we need to go.

Christiana: [00:28:28] Yeah. Well, two answers to that, both of them completely unsatisfactory. The first is that probably the most sophisticated thinking on reforming the entire finance sector, especially because he's talking about the springs and the annuals. Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, is obviously the proposal put forward under, under the Bridgetown agenda. And, that is probably the one that is receiving more and more attention to see how that is could be implemented, getting a lot of political resistance, but also a lot of political push. So both sides, right. Especially political push from the most vulnerable countries. But the, and let's see if it goes any farther, last year was the first year that it was officially proposed, let's see if it goes any further this year, which would be great news. But the other part of the answer, Tom, is sadly, I just don't think that collectively, as a system, we have truly understood the importance of the shift in the financial sector. We just haven't. It's almost like we're rearranging chairs, playing dolls. I don't even know what to call it, you know, let's reform this little bit, that little bit. I mean, we are playing with fire and we're using little droplets to put the fire out and, that's the disconnect there. There's so many disconnects right. People want to address climate, but they're not willing to vote for leaders who would do that. We understand the finance needs to shift, but there is not the political will at the top of the financial sector, frankly, either from public finance or from private finance, to make the shifts in the scale and speed that is necessary. And it's not for a lack of intellectual understanding. It's for a lack of understanding in the gut, something that is actually really going to make the difference. It's not about putting out, you know, the numbers that we all have known and the data and the arguments. I mean, we, you know, we have been doing that for years. That's not what it's about anymore. It is the argument is there. It's a compelling argument, but it has not reached the gut. It stays in the head.

Paul: [00:31:12] So perfect segue to me offering a little bit of gut action, I reckon. I've been doing quite a bit of research in this area, and I'm amazed that, for example, enormous asset owners and asset managers, when they're looking to buy bonds, either from governments or from the private sector, can do what are called reverse inquiries, where they talk about the kind of investments they want to make. There is a growing competition between countries for climate finance. There's an amazing initiative called ASCOR, I'll put a link in the show notes, where a group of investors are actually ranking countries on their climate invest worthiness. Bloomberg New Energy Finance have something fantastic called Climatescope, which gives you a sense of how investable different countries are. Can we not see a narrative starting to develop between countries about which ones are the most investable, and providing that push to government from the money. That excites me.

Tom: [00:32:07] 100%, 100%, and I think that's exactly where Simon is as well. I mean, final thought from me, I mean, just, you know, you both know Simon and Joanna and the rest of the team very well. And of course the UNFCCC, they are all in for this. They really want to see the next 18 months work. They are putting everything into this and they deserve all of our help. So I mean, to listeners out there, this is a process that I mean God bless.

Christiana: [00:32:31] Yes absolutely, it's so difficult. It is so difficult. We cannot underestimate, we cannot underestimate.

Tom: [00:32:37] And it's strange, I mean, how sort of isolated you can sometimes feel in those roles, just going back to how things have been in the past right. They need connection, they need support, they need partners. I mean, you know, none of this is said to me by them. But just in terms of the memory of when we used to hold those jobs and the situation that they're in the next 18 months are critical, they need all of us behind them.

Paul: [00:32:54] All right thinking people say yes.

Tom: [00:32:56] Say yes.

Paul: [00:32:57] Let's get that global team together.

Tom: [00:32:59] Lovely to see you both, we'll see you next week. Bye, everyone.

Paul: [00:33:03] Bye bye.

Christiana: [00:33:04] Bye guys.

Clay: [00:33:09] Hey everyone. Clay here back in Detroit. We've bounced around a bit this week on the show to bring you as timely of a conversation as we can. So thank you so much for listening. A little something different every week. Thank you so much to Simon Stiell for making the time to come on the show, to speak with Tom, to speak to our listeners. You can follow more from Simon and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, that's the UNFCCC acronym that you'll see online by checking the show notes for links to Simon's social accounts. We've got those ready for you. Go check them out. Thank you Simon. Okay, sadly, we have no music guests this week on the show, but I did want to bring your attention to two things. One you'll have to wait for and one you can enjoy now. So first up we have a sister podcast called The Way Out Is In that recorded their first ever live podcast last week in London at Conway Hall. It was a completely sold out event that also included a Q&A session live in the room. I just finished mixing the audio from it and you, you don't want to miss it when it gets released. I will keep you posted on that. It will be released probably in the next week or two as we finish the video portion of it. So the best way to make sure that you hear it when it drops is to subscribe to this podcast or go subscribe to The Way Out Is In.

Clay: [00:34:38] You can check the show notes or follow Outrage + Optimism on our social media channels so that you can watch and listen when it comes out. Okay, that is number one. Now, I know you have to wait for that. So I want to give you something that you can enjoy right now. So here we go. Friend of the pod, Greg Cochrane, he's the host of music and climate podcast, Sounds Like A Plan, and music interview podcast Midnight Chats. He went on the BBC news to talk about Billie Eilish's latest album release, plan for releasing her next album on recycled vinyl and BioVinyl. Her announcement for that has created quite a splash in the music and entertainment industry, so you can watch Greg's interview and read this amazing post he made about it via the link in the show notes. It's on LinkedIn. In the post, he gives a really contextual yet concise look at the state of sustainability when it comes to physical music releases. And and I want to share it with you because it's a really honest and insightful reflection on imperfectionism and ambition, in maybe outrage and optimism terms, it's a perfect extension of the Momentum and Perfection series. Again, link below to check that out. Read it and watch the interview. And if you're up for more listening, we cannot recommend his two podcasts enough. Sounds Like a Plan and Midnight Chats, both available to stream now.

Clay: [00:36:07] Sounds Like a Plan is a series that Greg co-hosts with Fay Milton, who's the co-founder of Music Declares Emergency. That podcast is dedicated to the intersection of music and climate, and Midnight Chats is my latest binge. It's a really fun podcast series where Greg and his co-host Stu talk with musicians like, you know, it's midnight, the gig has ended, everyone's gone home, and that's when they flip on the mics. You get the real connection and real conversation with artists like Future Islands, MGMT, Brittany Howard and this week's artist, King Gizzard and the Lizard Wizard, who won the first ever Environmental Music Prize. And were on our podcast back in 2022. Go check those out for continued listening. I'm subscribed to both. Go check them out. Last but certainly not least, a quick shout out to listeners who have been recommending music to have on the show via email. To me, I'm slowly getting to those so if I haven't reached out back to you, you'll hear from me soon. Thank you for those emails. This is like the third or fourth time that I've come on here to apologize for being bad at responding to emails, and at this point, I think people might just believe that emails swim themselves across the ocean to make it to my inbox. You will hear back from us. Thank you for your patience. Okay, thanks for listening. Next week we will be back on the air again for another episode. See you then.