Scientific Research Can Play a Key Role in Unlocking Climate Finance — Global Issues
CARACAS, Oct 29 (IPS) – Climate finance will be heavily scrutinized during COP29, and its distribution should be accompanied by a scientific analysis of the impacts of climate change, but the methodology ignores the imbalance in research networks in the Global South. at the UN Climate Change Conference 2024 (COP29). The focus will be on strengthening the fund and defining the conditions under which South African countries will be able to access this money. However, little is said about the scientific research needed to gather evidence and data to prove the loss and damage caused by the impact of climate change in developing countries.
One of the points of discussion is the need for countries in the Global South to provide full, scientifically based reports on how they are directly affected by the impacts of climate change. This requirement ensures that funds will flow to the most affected countries, but ignores the existing inequalities in scientific research networks in the Global South.
Floods and the effects of storms or hurricanes are not the only topics we discuss. For example, will Latin American countries, such as Brazil or Argentina, be ready to provide data and evidence of how global warming has caused an increase in dengue infections among their citizens in 2024?
Dengue cases in Latin America tripled compared to the same period in 2023. The Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) compiled reports of more than 12 million cases of dengue fever in the region until mid-October and, without a doubt, this additional health burden is a part. of the less talked about effects of climate change.
Research centers in Brazil or Argentina, two countries with the best scientific networks in the region, can deliver studies to support the financial request to cover this health-related damage. But the situation is very different if we look at the scientific network of other Latin American countries such as Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Paraguay, or our own Venezuela.
More than 3,000 Venezuelan scientists have left the country due to lack of support and financial problems in their research facilities since 2009, according to a follow-up by researcher Jaime Requena, a member of the Academy of Physical, Mathematical and Natural Sciences (Acfiman, its acronym in Spanish). This is equivalent to half of Venezuela’s scientific power, considering that Venezuela has 6,831 active researchers in the Researcher Promotion Program (PPI) in 2009.
Only 11 Venezuelan scientists participated as authors in all reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). In AR6, the latest IPCC report, only three authors were Venezuelan.
Colombia, Peru, and Uruguay are also represented by three researchers in AR6, while other countries such as Paraguay and Bolivia could not even add a scientist to the group of more than 700 authors.
Meteorologist Paola Andrea Arias was part of the Colombian delegation. He is one of those advocating that the IPCC increase the diversity of authors in the next report on the effects of global climate change.
“We all do science with different perspectives; we will follow the same methods and the same standards, but we have different perspectives. We ask different questions and have different priorities. We see in science whether it is possible to answer or solve different problems and, obviously, that will focus more on your reality, the world you live in, the country or the city you are in,” said Arias when I asked him about his participation in AR6.
The low participation of Latin American scientists in global research on climate change, such as that of the IPCC, also means a small area and distribution of those studies that try to track the impact of climate change in the region. This pattern is repeated in Africa and Asia.
Promoting more research on the damage and impact of climate change in the Global South is, ultimately, not something that can be separated from climate finance. A clear example is that the Development Bank of Latin America (CAF) recently created a scientific committee for its biodiversity fund, as announced during COP16 on biodiversity in Cali, Colombia.
CAF explained that the new organic committee will have a “key role” with recommendations based on scientific evidence for investments in ecological systems. The first tasks of this scientific committee will focus on providing recommendations for conservation, restoration, and sustainable use of the environment in the Amazon, Cerrado, and Chocó, a program that will be able to reach 300 million dollars.
The creation of a scientific committee to deliver climate finance could be a first step, as shown by CAF’s experience in biodiversity. However, in order to move forward in this direction, it is necessary to encourage more funding for scientists in Latin America, Africa, and Asia to conduct more local research on the effects of climate change. It is the only way to gather scientific evidence that supports the argument that the climate crisis represents an obstacle to development in those countries with the highest population and the highest number of evils.
This opinion document is published with the support of the Open Society Foundations. IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram
© Inter Press Service (2024) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service
