G20 china_web

ADVOCACY
Sudan’s institutional structure for environmental
governance is very weak in the light of the
environmental challenges. An Environmental
Framework Act (2001) and sector legislation with
environmental components exist, as well as a federal
structure for environmental governance.
There are several laws, acts or ordinances that
deal with the environment, either for protection
or conservation. What characterises the current
environmental legislation in Sudan is that it is
sector-based. We have environmental legislation
dealing with land tenure, health, forestry, wildlife,
fisheries, agriculture, livestock, public health, etc.
The sectoral legislation is closely connected to the
structure of the government ministries, departments
and parastatal corporations.
Natural ecosystems in Sudan have undergone
serious ecological degradation with potentially
significant impacts on biodiversity. Many constraints
have affected the implementation of biodiversity
management plans: namely the lack of clear
policy for the conservation of the local genetic
resources of both animals and plants, absence of a
specialised full-time programme to manage these
genetic resources, poor understanding of the role of
ecosystem values and services leading to ineffective
management. There are also problems with
inadequate legislation and poor law enforcement,
lack of a national framework with legislative and
institutional instrument to cater for matters related to
access to the genetic resources, and the information
related to biodiversity is not quite extensively
published or easily accessed.
Ambitious adaptation
Sudan has successfully pushed-back on a
mitigation-centric agreement, to include adaptation
to adverse effects of climate change, and is
continuously leading the charge for a stronger
finance component in the agreement.
A balanced agreement must be an ambitious
in terms its emission reduction and adaptation
commitments to ensure that we are in track to
achieving the two or one-and-a-half degree celsius
target. We will be able to adapt with the associated
climate risks to the achievable temperature scenarios.
Ambitious mitigation and adaptation actions
cannot be achieved and maintain without adequate
support for developing countries in terms of means
of implementation, specially for Africa, Least
Developed Countries (LDCs), and Small Island
Developing States.
A lack of ambition in the Paris outcome means
increasing climate risks, devastating impacts and
further undermining the development prospects of
the African countries, more cost for adaptation and
loss and damage, which vulnerable countries can
not afford to meet alone without adequate provision
of international support.
The gaps in ambitions require a result-based
approach in defining the commitments and
Ecosystems in
Sudan have
undergone
serious
ecological
degradation
Sudan Higher
Council for
Environment and
Natural Resources
shamboulbio@
yahoo.com
obligations of Parties under the 2015 agreement and
political leadership from developed countries in both
pre and post 2020 periods.
In Copenhagen in 2009 and in Cancún in
2010, developed countries committed to raising
$100 billion by 2020 to help developing countries
cope with climate change. This promise is linked
to the historic responsibility of developed countries
with regard to global warming.
The $100 billion scheme is an important aspect of
the negotiations: guaranteeing developing countries
that developed countries will uphold this commitment
is essential in order to build the confidence needed to
negotiate an agreement in Paris.
Minimum obligations
The post-2020 finance provisions should take into
consideration the need for adequacy and predictability
in flows of funds and the clarity of appropriate burden
sharing among developed countries.
The objective of financial support is to enable
developing countries to enhance action in the post-
2020 period. It should further provide for scaling
up the delivery of financial resources from the floor
of $100 billion per year, current levels based on a
percentage of GDP, based on the needs and priorities
of developing countries, with a 50-50 balance for
mitigation and adaptation.
We call for the minimum obligations for developed
countries to be consistent with the Convention and
voluntary contributions by developing countries and
recognition of south-south cooperation.
The agreement should ensure a balance between
mitigation and adaptation through the establishment
of a Global Goal for Adaptation, which recognise
adaptation as a global responsibility, and the fact that
insufficient mitigation action increases the burden of
adaptation in developing countries.
The agreement should define minimum
information adaptation ‘undertakings’ –
differentiated to include support by developed
countries-needs to developing countries; should be
country driven, flexible, transparency of support.
It should not replace the Framework Convention
on Climate Change, be under the Convention and
in accordance with its principles and provisions,
particularly equity and Common but Differentiated
Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities.
Being classified as a LDC, Sudan is not obliged to
pursue a greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction
target. Nevertheless, Sudan views the planning
process to reduce GHG emissions, or rather pursue
low-carbon development, as an opportunity to
strengthen national capacity, promote sustainable
resource management, facilitate technology transfer,
and identify synergies between national economic
objectives and sustainable development.
To meet the main goal of 25 per cent forest
coverage from the total area of the Sudan by 2030, an
area of 790795 hectares needs to be planted annually
if international financial support is provided.