Is the COP27 'Global Shield Insurance' a diversion from 'Loss and Damage' finance?

On Monday, November 14, 2022, the ‘Global Shield’ Initiative was announced at the COP27 summit in Egypt. The Global Shield Financing Facility (GS-FF), coordinated by G7 president Germany, is established to provide rapid access to insurance and disaster protection funding. Pakistan, Ghana and Bangladesh will be among the first recipients of the funding aimed at countries suffering climate disasters. But, is this a replacement for loss and damage? And…, will it serve climate justice?
This year at COP27, Pakistan and other climate-vulnerable countries demanded that the international community mobilize "loss and damage" funds for disaster-hit nations. Some say rich nations are responsible for paying these costs as their historical emissions are the root cause of global warming today. As a response, Germany announced the GS-FF in collaboration with the 'V20', a group of 58 climate-vulnerable economies. Germany has pitched in with an initial contribution of $200mn to the initiative at Cop27. Ireland's Taoiseach Micheal Martin also committed $11.7mn and said "once exceptional events are now occurrying with increased frequency and ferocity.” Denmark and Canada too, have pledged respectively $5.4mn and $7mn. US President Joe Biden has also backed the plan. Unlike loss and damage, whose funding is expected to stem exclusively from industrialized countries, the Berlin-led initiative would allow for so-called “South-South cooperation,” meaning that countries like China, Qatar and Saudi Arabia could be among the potential donors.
But hang on! Even if we sum up the pledged contributions, it is nowhere near the actual loss and damage costs. Initial estimates peg Pakistan’s flood loss and damage this year at around $30bn. Vanuatu’s economic losses from the 2015 storm were estimated at some $700mn. According to the Spain-based Basque Centre for Climate Change, by 2030, developing countries would require $290 to $580bn to cope with climate-related loss and damage. Civil society groups, are thus, skeptical! They warn that the programme should not be used as a distraction from the much broader effort to get big polluters to pay for the loss and damage they have already caused with their emissions.
‪@D2E‬ ‪@caninternational‬ ‪@UNClimateChange‬ ‪@CarbonBriefUK‬ ‪@unitednations‬ ‪@wef‬ ‪@worldmetorg‬ ‪@unionconcernedscientists‬
Down to Earth is Science and Environment fortnightly published by the Society for Environmental Communication, New Delhi. We publish news and analysis on issues that deal with sustainable development, which we scan through the eyes of science and environment.

[@gramsingh8939]

please avoid too much of heavy sound between speech, keep it calm maybe.

[@harshitpatel8167]

Global shield insurance is one another gimmick to shy away from paying up in loss and damage saga...

[@manishjangid6885]

Thankyou.

[@shekharsiddharth7827]

Please limit the volume

[@vthilton]

Save Our Planet - Share

[@patriciarussell1177]

So are you saying that the United States did not propose any money? Put only our president that what everyone’s doing?

[@patriciarussell1177]

I agree on the big polluters paying and changing you know just like the past president of USA,If you don’t have consequences for your behavior how can you ever really understand your behavior is acceptable and you are not beyond approach!!!

[@Dd_12348]

Control population and stop consumerism and materialism.

[@ambiencelectronica]

Why hasn’t the sea level risen in my local harbour in the last 40years? The same level marks are hit each year. There’s definitely no increase in the uk.

[@emotionalIntelligence2078]

There was fire this summer.

[@jitendrasharma4020]

I'm sure you missed the geography classes