The climate crisis is not a problem of a distant future; it is a reality we are experiencing firsthand with droughts, floods, and fires at our doorstep. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP) is a crucial stop for climate negotiations, along with many debates. This conference will take place in Antalya between November 9-20 under the UN system's rotating host mechanism.
The fact that COP 31 will be held in Antalya is an important step for Turkey’s climate policies, and civil society participation is critically important at this point. So what does the current picture tell us?
In the webinar entitled “Towards COP 31,” which we organized last week in collaboration with the Global Climate Academy, we discussed the structural problems of this process and possible solutions with Nesrin Algan and Yunus Arıkan.
Civil society should not just be a spectator, but an actor
Currently, only 19 CSOs are accredited to the conference in Turkey, and this poses the risk that the principle of “participation” may remain merely on paper. The problem is not just their small number. Nesrin Algan reminds us that real participation is not simply being physically present, but that the main role of civil society is to serve as a pressure group:
The main function of an accredited civil society organization is to propose amendments to negotiation texts, meet with government delegations, and engage in lobbying. The fact that there are so few accreditations carries the risk that Turkey’s civil society will be left out of this massive mechanism.
Blue Zone vs. Green Zone: Who makes the decisions?
The distinction between the “Blue Zone,” where negotiations are held and government delegations are present, and the “Green Zone,” where civil society and the public can participate, continues to maintain the distance between decision makers and rights advocates. Yunus Arıkan, a Board Member of the Global Climate Academy, draws attention to the importance of civil society’s technical preparation and gives the following warning:
If civil society in the host country is not prepared and is confined only to the so-called “Green Zone” of side events, it results in their exclusion from the “Blue Zone” where the real decisions are made. Yet CSOs have the power to provide technical support to governments and steer decision-making mechanisms.
Rights-based approach: Climate justice and the “Constituency” system
Another topic covered in the webinar was that the climate issue is not just a technical matter of emissions. Indeed, after the Paris Agreement, climate action shifted from a technical emissions issue to “rights-based” topics such as gender action plans and climate justice.
Climate justice advocates for the protection of the rights of the most vulnerable, including women and the youth, who are most affected by the crisis, and expects countries with higher historical responsibility (emission shares) to shoulder a greater burden. However, during the webinar, concerns were raised that these humanitarian topics might fall under the shadow of commercial and economic interests.
The webinar also discussed how civil society could participate in the “Nine Stakeholder Groups” (Constituency) system defined by the UN to raise their voices in the traffic of interests.
In the “Nine Stakeholder Groups” (Constituency) system defined by the UN, constituencies have the opportunity to advocate across a wide spectrum, from youth to women, from local governments to unions. Therefore, this “constituency” system allows for a collective voice beyond individual institutions. Yunus Arıkan emphasized that, in order for civil society to be effective in this process, it must solidify its place within the “nine stakeholder groups (constituencies),” and that participating in these structures, publishing common declarations, and intervening in the general course of negotiations is the most effective way to defend climate justice.
So what should be done?
Climate negotiations have an extremely technical language and a complex diplomatic process. However, instead of merely being spectators, there are things we can do.
First, channels for access to information should be strengthened, and we should act now for accreditation processes. Moreover, we must work to ensure that, in this process, we are not only information seekers but also build networks and take our place within stakeholder groups (constituencies).
The UN Conference of the Parties is not limited to the summit to be held in Antalya this November; this is a long-term struggle, and the fight against the climate crisis can succeed only through an inclusive process involving every segment of society, not just governments.