Carbon trade: Much talk and little action

ENVIRONMENT

GREEN Climate Fund (GCF) application seems to be of less value to carbon trade projects, especially voluntary carbon trade projects in Papua New Guinea.
It is also seemingly true that other climate changes funds made available through other sources are of the same stature. So where are all those funds that the politicians/ministers and climate change bureaucrats preach about in every available newspaper after attending international climate change meeting such as the UNFCCC Climate Change Conference of the Parties. What is Green Climate Fund and its purpose?
GCF mandate
GCF is the world’s largest climate fund that was the outcome of the Paris Agreement. It is mandated to support developing countries (PNG included) raise and realise their National Determination Contributions (NDC) ambitions towards low-emissions, climate resilient pathways. So what are those NDCs and who contributes to them? The Government, civil society, NGOs, landowners, who?
Main impact areas
The main impacts areas of GCF are:
a) Low emission transport
b) Low emission energy access and power generation
c) Energy efficient buildings, cities and industries
d) Sustainable land use and forest management
e) Enhanced livelihoods of the most vulnerable people, communities and regions
It would be interesting to know how much has the Government of Papa New Guinea have invested in these areas using the funds made available through Green Climate Fund. What tangible results has the Government archived utilising this fund?
The main aim of the GCF is to expand collective human action to respond to climate change. The fund aims to mobilise funding at a scale to invest in low-emissions and climate – resilient development on the planet. Sounds very good but to what extent has the Government of Papua New Guinea made available funds across all sectors of the communities, especially landowners who owns all forested land who are struggling to participate in climate change projects in forestry and land use sectors especially carbon trade projects at the voluntary carbon trade market? In how many tangible projects have the Government invested some of these so much talked about funds? Corporate private companies are utilising their own funds in most cases or if not in all cases to participate in these emission reduction projects. What is the situation with those marginalszed small communities of landowners who are willing and volunteering to put themselves on the line to save this planet?
Sadly, this is the same story with the donor funding agencies and the foreign missions who preach so much about the availability of climate change funds to invest in these projects. The likes of European Union, Asian Development Bank (ADB), US Embassy, French Embassy and others in that sector. How many tangible projects have they invested the climate funds they always preach about?
The Green Climate Fund is the largest climate fund; it accelerates transformative climate action in developing countries through a country-owned partnership approach and use. This is an over statement of the real situation in Papua New Guinea. Who or where are these partnerships in Papua New Guinea. In PNG, the partnerships for the use of funds are with other international organizations, donor agencies, donor countries and other United Nations Agencies.
The partnerships are supposed to be with industries, NGOs, landowners and civil societies that work on tangible projects to deal with carbon emission reduction. The GCF is supposed to provide funds in these areas.

Green climate fund and PNG
What is the evidence of tangible carbon emission reduction projects that have been funded by the Government of Papua New Guinea with this fund? The current trend is this, the Government in the company of these partners (partnerships) mentioned earlier is so much carried away in policy formulation and reviews, developing frameworks, developing additional implementing institutions, conducting workshops, hiring consultants and attending endless meetings both at the country level as well at the international level. So it seems there are no real investments in emissions reduction projects with this fund.
Climate Change Development Authority (CCDA) which is the Papua New Guinea mandated authority responsible for these climatic issues is a bottle neck in itself.
CCDA is supposed to be staffed by qualified experts who can formulate project proposal to access these funds and assist funding tangible emission reduction projects. CCDA is also pre-occupied with formulating and re-formulating their never ending policy frameworks, institutional developments, organising policy development workshops, hiring of consultants and attending international meetings.
How many tangible emission reduction projects have they delivered to the people of Papua New Guinea?
Funds are also available from the recently committed US 100 million dollars (K372 million) by European Union (EU) and the French Government to finance these types of projects. There are so much climate change funds being made available but why are they not serving its intended purpose in Papua New Guinea?
Voluntary carbon trade market and employment
Designing and developing a carbon project takes a long time, requires a lot of technical experts and requires considerable financial resources for the initial set-up. This is where the Government of Papua New Guinea should invest some of this money from Green Climate Fund. This is where the donor agencies and foreign missions should assist as these are tangle projects. The carbon trade projects have other advantages especially in creating job opportunities and reducing unemployment.
In a recent newspaper article, Nalau Bingeding discussed how climate change projects can create employment and assist in reducing the ever increasing unemployment issue. Every year learning institutions such as the universities, technical colleges and schools produce more and more graduates that make it more and more difficult to find employment as there are fewer industries to absorb them into the workforce. There is less job creating opportunities to effectively absorb these graduates into effective employment.
Climate change projects hold employment opportunities at the country level and at the same time assist in reducing climate change issues at a global level.
So the Government of Papua New Guinea being the biggest employer needs to create job opportunities by investing in these projects, not with the funds from its national development budget but funds such as the Green Climate Fund and others.
The most effective is the carbon trade project opportunities as a form of employment to engage part of this workforce. Papua New Guinea has abundance of natural resources which are largely or wholly owned by the people, the landowners.
The landowners can be engaged in carbon trade projects as they have natural forests, forest plantations, and coral reefs, other marine resources, biodiversity and energy development opportunities.
The Government should invest, support and create carbon trade opportunities, especially voluntary carbon trade projects and thereby creating jobs and investing their widely publicised GCF and other climate change funds available to it.
Yuat Carbon Trade Project
The Yuat Carbon Trade Project involves 203,650.52 hectares (ha) voluntary carbon trade under REDD+ GHG emissions.
It is the initiative of the landowners numbering some 30,000 individuals from a several clan groups of upper Yuat LLG, Angoram District, East Sepik. The project is in urgent need of funds for implementation. Attempts and approaches were made to relevant PNG Government ministries, foreign missions and aid agencies for assistance in funding and no response has been forthcoming.
Funding requests were delivered to Climate Change Development Authority (CCDA), the Ministry for International Trade and Investment, the Ministry of Forestry, the office of the East Sepik Governor, US Embassy, French Embassy and Asian Development Bank. Sadly, to date no assistance has been provided. So where are all those climate change funds they preach about, especially the Green Climate Fund?
The Government Ministers, bureaucrats and Foreign Missions preach about climate change funds after returning to PNG from participating in international climate change meetings or other international meetings. But the problem with the Government is on how to bring these funds onshore (PNG) and how to strategise on using these funds.
If we can utilise natural resources and activities for carbon trade, and with right intentions, policies, regulations, economic goals can be archived in forestry, agriculture, fisheries energy, land, environment and eco-tourism sectors. These will create job opportunities for our young people who are roaming around aimlessly on the streets of Port Moresby and other urban centers.
Right now carbon trade projects are not encouraging at all because the Government of Papua New Guinea and its bureaucrats intentions for trading carbon credits are not right. Relevant government institutions have wrong intentions and that is why civil societies, NGOs and donor partners are keeping a tag on how carbon trade is to be implemented, consequently delaying progress.
To effectively access these global funds we must be more coordinated and strategic. Mainstream government agencies such as CCDA, Deaprtment of National Planning and Monitoring t must work with other governments departments such as International Trade and Investment, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade to ensure these funds/grants are utilised.