South Africa’s climate change commitments are due for an overhaul:
The time is upon us to update the country’s climate change commitments, known as the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC).
According to the schedule that was agreed at the multilateral negotiations under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, parties to the Paris Agreement must submit their NDCs by 2025.
Next year, South Africa will submit the second update of its NDC. The first was submitted in 2016 and that was updated in 2021. The first update covered the years 2025 to 2030 and the second will cover 2030 to 2035.
Global climate governance is a critical determinant of the well-being of people, their livelihoods and nature.
Failure to curb greenhouse gas emissions will lead to increased climate impacts — flooding, drought, severe storms, fires — which affect the poor the most, potentially causing hunger, displacement and increasing poverty.
Despite, and because of, its significance, global climate governance is a strongly contested policy arena, as is the nature of the outcomes of multilateral agreements.
The Paris Agreement and the outcomes of subsequent Conference of Parties managed to circumvent, without avoiding or resolving, key areas of divergence in global climate politics.
As a response to what some writers refer to as a “fragmented”, “decentralised” or “polycentric” global climate governance landscape, the Paris Agreement adopted a hybrid pledge-and-review approach that placed emphasis on coordination and goal setting.
Importantly, this hybrid approach placed the responsibility for climate action at country level and did so without explicitly dealing with the thorny issue of what would constitute an equitable global response to climate change.
NDCs are the cornerstone upon which the pledge-and-review approach of the Paris Agreement is built. There is tacit agreement on two issues — first, that the primary purpose of the NDCs is the achievement of the global temperature goal of the Paris Agreement (mitigation).
Second, that existing governance instruments are inadequate to realise the other two goals of the Paris Agreement, namely adaptation to climate change and making financial flows consistent with low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development.
In the absence of suitable governance instruments for finance and adaptation, the NDCs submitted by developing countries provide varied formats and perspectives on adaptation, finance, trade, capacity building, technology transfer and other important areas of climate commitments.
This structure of NDCs points to thinly coded messages on how climate action should be allocated among countries in an equitable and fair manner.
The NDCs could be understood as serving a dual purpose. First, they have an outward looking purpose, that is, to serve as a policy instrument that outlines national climate commitments to the UNFCCC.
For this purpose, the NDCs serve as instruments for governing global climate conduct as they become catalysts of global cooperation towards ambitious global climate action.
Second, the NDCs have an inward-looking purpose, that is, to serve as a domestic instrument for aligning expectations of state and non-state actors on the prospect of a low-carbon and climate-resilient future.
In this role, the NDCs serve as social-political documents that convey the underlying national political positions, values, needs and priorities in responding to climate change.
It is in this context that NDCs are often recognised as more than national pledges for climate action but also as instruments for expressing national positions that could influence shifts in the multilateral negotiations on global climate governance towards their national interests.
A more subtle, but intentional, purpose of the NDCs among developing countries is to use them to demonstrate their readiness to receive international financial support.
As we enter the era of the second revision of our national NDC, the adequacy, transparency and equity of the process for its review comes into focus.
In South Africa, an NDC revision culminates in cabinet approval. In the past, the process has played a critical role in advancing the national climate agenda.
It has helped to raise the level of awareness about climate change within and beyond the “climate change community”.
It has provided opportunities for tangible cooperative governance across ministries by fostering coordination across diverse policy areas.
It has provided platforms for meaningful engagement on climate issues with non-state actors and tested the breadth and depth of the analytical capabilities that exist in the country.
Furthermore, it is worth noting that access to funding for NDC preparation is a far less onerous exercise than access to funding for action to implement the NDCs — at the scale that is required to have a transformative effect.
Also, it is possible for the NDC preparation process to include the participation of international think-tanks and partners to South Africa’s climate agenda.
Power relations are front and centre during NDC preparations. The preparations necessitate governing through networks made up of a variety of actors — the state is not the sole determinant of the substance and framing of the NDCs.
Role players go beyond relying on the formal stakeholder consultation sessions and use other levers available to them to influence the substance and framing of the NDCs.
This aspect is not unique to South Africa. However, because we are one of the most unequal societies in the world, and have low levels of trust in our government, power relations take on a significant meaning in our domestic context.
The South African government has a strong culture of public consultation on policy matters. The increasing emphasis placed on a just transition in South Africa’s climate discourse has expanded the diversity of voices contributing to co-production of climate policy.
This broad diversity has created a need for more innovation in fostering meaningful participation.
While a recent report commissioned by the Presidential Climate Commission confirmed that climate change in South Africa has shifted from being a fringe issue for environmentalists to the mainstream, the medium of messaging climate change in the country remains dominated by analysis and scientific method — inadvertently privileging those that can master the mediums.
In pursuance of social partner consensus building on the national position on climate change, innovation is needed to ensure meaningful interaction with society.
The NDC preparation process must balance prevailing competing stakeholder interests; seek societal legitimacy and ownership; ensure diversity in engagements and gather political support — and this must be done in the sterilising presence of public scrutiny.
It is clear, therefore, that the design and the undertaking of the NDC preparation process requires a keen understanding of multiple processes and activities of governance (beyond climate governance), as opposed to assuming that authority lies with conventional institutions.
Dr Brian Mantlana is the manager of Holistic Climate Change Impact Area in the Smart Places Cluster at the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research. Steve Nicholls is head of mitigation at South Africa’s Presidential Climate Commission.
Tiger cub kept as a pet in KZN yard is confiscated, moved to Pretoria Zoo:
A tiger cub that was found in a Pietermaritzburg home where it was kept as a pet in a makeshift wire enclosure, has been moved to the Pretoria Zoo.
The cub was held at a property in Northern Park, Chase Valley, Ezemvelo spokesperson Musa Mntambo said.
He said that Ezemvelo’s Pietermaritzburg honorary officers visited the property to investigate the matter after they received reports of a tiger being spotted in the yard of a residential home.
“In collaboration with the South African Police Service (SAPS) Stock Theft Unit and the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA), Ezemvelo Wildlife officials visited the property to investigate. Upon arrival, they found a male tiger, estimated to be between four to six-months-old. The animal was immediately confiscated,” he said.
Mntambo said that the tiger was taken to the Free Me Wildlife Rehabilitation Centre for temporary care and rehabilitation before being transported to Pretoria.
Free Me Wildlife said the cub weighed just over 17 kilograms. It was placed under infrared light upon arrival, and given “good food” and a bed of hay.
Mntambo said that after securing the required permits, the cub was transported to the Pretoria Zoo on Thursday, September 19, “where it will receive specialised care and long-term accommodation”.
“A case of illegal possession of the tiger has been opened at Townhill SAPS. The charges fall under sections 79, 80, and 81 of the KwaZulu-Natal Nature Conservation Ordinance, as well as section 65 (clauses 1 and 2) of the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (NEMBA),” he said.
Mntambo said that Ezemvelo was committed to the enforcement of wildlife regulations and continued to work with other law enforcement agencies to ensure that such incidents were addressed swiftly and effectively.
According to Free Me Wildlife, the cub is under the direct protection of the highest conservation body in the country, the Department of Forestry, Fisheries, and the Environment, and is being kept at the highest security facility under their control, the Pretoria Zoological Gardens.
“While this cub remains evidence in an ongoing court case, it must remain in the custody of the DFFE and cannot, for its own safety, be released to a private sanctuary. The future of the cub will only be decided once the outcome of the court case is final.”
Free Me Wildlife added that it would not support the rescue of an animal from the illegal wildlife trade only to see it become part of it again.
In February last year, surveillance footage captured a young female tiger roaming the driveway of an office complex in Edenvale, Ekurhuleni.
A month prior, another female tiger, Sheba, escaped from her enclosure on a smallholding in Walkerville, Johannesburg. She severely mauled a man, William Mokoena, and killed two dogs and a pig, before she was shot dead. The tigers were privately owned pets that escaped.
The keeping of non-indigenous species and generally keeping animals as pets is regulated by provinces and by-laws, where they exist.
The Mail & Guardian previously reported that according to Douglas Wolhuter, manager of the NSPCA’s wildlife protection unit, in its last inspection listing in 2021, the unit located at least 16 premises in residential areas that housed tigers.
On average, there are five to six complaints about tigers annually, “however these are on the rise as people become more aware of the tiger problem,” said Wolhuter.
Kelly Marnewick, a senior lecturer in the department of nature conservation at the Tshwane University of Technology, said: “Tigers are exotic. You don’t need any permits to keep them, the same as you wouldn’t need any permits to keep a goldfish or an African grey parrot. Anyone can own a tiger … It’s problematic because not only is it a human safety risk, particularly in urban areas, but it also becomes a welfare risk to the animals.”
A version of this article was first published by The Witness.
Disability rights: Ramaphosa’s delay on Copyright Amendment Bill angers Blind SA:
President Cyril Ramaphosa’s failure to sign the Copyright Amendment Bill by the 21 September deadline given by the constitutional court shows that the government is not concerned about the plight and rights of blind or visually impaired people, non-profit organisation Blind SA has said.
“This is more than a devastating blow to us. We have a sense that the government, including the president, just does not care,” Blind SA’s president, Christo de Klerk, told the Mail & Guardian.
The bill, which aims to ensure a fairer balance between the commercial rights of copyright owners and the right to access works by users, including the blind, has struggled to see the light of day since it was introduced to parliament in 2017. This included Ramaphosa declining to sign it into law and sending it back to the national assembly in 2020 amid concerns about the constitutionality of some of its provisions.
Earlier this year, both houses of parliament approved the bill — the first comprehensive effort to modernise South Africa’s copyright laws in over 50 years — and sent it to the president for assent.
This was after Blind SA, which advocates for the independence of the blind and visually impaired, and public interest law centre rights group Section27 took the trade, industry and competition minister to the constitutional court in 2022 to challenge the constitutionality of the current Copyright Act, which they said discriminates against those without, or with limited sight.
The court ruled that the Act is unconstitutional to the extent that it required people who are blind or visually impaired “to obtain the consent of the copyright holder before being able to convert books and other published works into accessible formats, such as braille or large print”.
It ordered that parliament should make amendments to the Copyright Act before the end of September 2024, so that blind people could get hold of books in accessible formats.
The amendment bill would introduce changes to the Act such as allowing people with disabilities to convert published work into accessible formats without requiring the permission of the copyright holder.
The government has previously said once the Copyright Amendment Bill is enacted, South Africa will ratify the Marrakesh Treaty which was adopted by member states of the World Intellectual Property Organisation in 2013.
The treaty makes the production and international transfer of specially-adapted books for people with blindness or visual impairments easier, by establishing a set of limitations and exceptions to traditional copyright law.
“Ratifying this international treaty will allow persons who are blind or visually impaired in South Africa to engage in the cross-border exchange of accessibly-formatted reading materials and will make hundreds and thousands of titles in accessible formats available to them,” Section27 told the M&G.
According to the amendment bill, South Africa’s Copyright Act is based on the United Kingdom’s legislation with an open interpretation of the concept of “fair dealing” to determine whether the use or copying of copyrighted material without a licence is permissible or not.
However, based on the amendments, South Africa will have to work with the concept of “fair use” adopted by the United States, which allows the reproduction or use of copyright-protected material without the author’s or publisher’s prior consent or permission.
The Bill enables creators like photographers to negotiate a contract for copyright ownership, rather than paying a party to automatically become the sole copyright owner for the full copyright term.
The Bill has been the subject of extensive public hearings and deliberations in both the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces and was rejected by the International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers, the world’s leading network of authors’ societies.
“The Bill is a positive initiative that fails to serve the intended purpose – to protect creators and ensure that South Africa has a modern, fair and fit-for-purpose copyright environment,” the confederation’s director general, Gadi Oron, said in a statement in February.
Ramaphosa’s spokesperson, Vincent Magwenya, told the M&G on Monday that the presidency cannot confirm when the bill will be signed.
“We will announce once signed as we always do,” he said.
Submit and get free exposure here: Showcase Your Business | Advertise Your Special Offers.
