Dear Prof Towe 

Thanks for your quick comments. I hope others will also reflect on the issue and contribute to the discussion. The "how" question is very critical for Africa to both contribute to reducing or stabilizing 'glocal'  warming. I am looking forward to seeing more answers and inputs.

This will help sustainable development in the region. 

Prof. Indeed, population growth is ONE of the driving factors for atmospheric co2 emissions. However, rising population alone could not have produced catastrophic level carbon concentration in the atmosphere if it was not for the rapid and heavy industrialization as is in the case of the three countries you cited plus Europe and Russia.

As you know, the population issue is very controversial. Intervention aimed at controlling fertility and population growth has been the bone of contention in  both the south and the north; and now family planning, reproductive health and related issues seem to be sidelined in the global development dialogue compared to 20 -25 years ago. 

Kebede

Thanks Prof for this thought provoking and great way to seeking solutions facing mankind globally and more so Africa. To add my voice to this, the COP21 Agreement has Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDC) which were 'it is presumed' arrived at after lots of consultation  of all stakeholders. Today I was privileged to  participate in a forum in Kenya that was looking at the sectors priority adaptation actions and it was eye opener to me. In the light of the above, if each African country could map out all stakeholders, engage all the relevant stakeholders at all level, such that virtually every player conceptualizes the impacts of climate change, their role in mitigation and even adaptation and therefore commits to within their jurisdictions to do the bare minimum then these collective targeted and coordinated efforts will be impact-full.

Regardless of Africa's  contribution to global warming in terms of GHG emission,  we are not spared  the impacts; besides often times we are adversely affected. It is for this reason that I perceive we need to be clear with the INDC's, map out available resources and ensure proper and optimal utilization of the 'meager' resources to get bigger impacts. I liken this with an 'individual' that will have to cut their dress according to the size of material/cloth they have at times not according to their size, literally. We can redesign our strategies to ensure that the 'cloth read resources' available are able to fit our size of challenges. Besides, employing 'traditional' methods, culturally appropriate since there is no 'one size fits all' for Africa. This of course includes reaching out to partners to mobilize resources available for climate finance globally. 

Big challenge right there .. I agree. My view of this is that, inclusiveness in drafting/developing plans is vital. In the global forum representatives, who will always include politicians, take the ideas of the populace for debates where directions are arrived at ( if you allow me to say that).  We cannot wish any of the groups away, Africa only needs to step her best foot forward i.e have her( her people) posterity in view. It is progressively though....we need to challenge ourselves truly in many aspects. There are areas we have done well (we need to upscale), and others we need genuinely to re-frame. 

I thank both of you for your contributions. Prof, I started writing my reflections on the population issue three days ago. However, lost the draft while in a hurry to board on a plane. You made interesting observations on that subject, but not many policy/decision-makers seem to be concerned so much with the demographic dynamics of climate change.

Surely, scientists, notably the IPCC, have underscored the magnitude of the human factors. However, the emphasis seems to tilt on the economic side of the equation and less on the numbers. How can we explain this in the context of a world which will soon have to put food into 9 billion mouths? How can we plan for the population of tomorrow while we are not even able to meet the needs of the present generation even with the existing level of industrialization, agricultural intensification and increase exploitation of resources, particularly water and forest resources? 

As someone having been involved in the population and development agenda (including RH, FP, etc) at regional and international levels, I always argue that these questions remain unaddressed, despite sporadic efforts by some of the UN agencies, NGOs, CSOs and IGOs. I therefore want the discussion to also revolve around these.

Kebede

Kenneth:  Your statement about the IPCC is inaccurate.  It is not a 'political group'.  It is a United Nations organization that carries out assessments of scientific literature, and has been doing this since 1988.  It does not have a mandate to recommend policy.

Here is the IPCC website:

http://www.ipcc.ch/index.htm

IPCC assessments are prepared and reviewed by researchers from around the world. These people contribute their time voluntarily to this effort. Here is a list of authors and reviewers for the 5th Assessment Report, Working Group II -- Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability:

https://ipcc-wg2.gov/AR5/images/uploads/WGIIAR5-AnnexI_FINAL.pdf

There are around 2000 names on this list.

Besides its various publications, there is also a scholarship programme:

http://www.ipcc.ch/ipcc-scholarship-programme/ipcc_scholarshipprogramme.shtml

Several graduate students from Africa were among the winners of last year's awards.

Prof, I can support your views. UN is one of the biggest international political organization in a sense that is formed by member states represented by their political leadership. True, the IPCC is a scientific body and may not be a political entity but its recommendations are intended to inform policies and the policies are made not by scientists but politicians be it at national, regional or international level. 

Remember, the just concluded Paris Agreement is not an agreement among scientists, but by politicians representing their respective countries or national interests. It was for this latter reason so many conferences failed to lead to such conclusions; note, for example, what happened in Copenhagen because politicians could not find common grounds due to diverging national or political interests.

Kebede

To get back to the orginal question ..... I think that Africa can benefit from global concern that development in Africa may blow the global carbon budget. Basically, African development is not factored in to the present emission projections: the big concerns are China and then India, but Africa's population is growing much faster. If Africa was to achieve China's current upper-middle income status by the same route - i.e. fossil fuels - then all climate bets are off. The US, EU and China - the major current emitters - know this and will support alternative energy projects: solar and wind particularly. China would probably also support nuclear power but you may not want that yet. In summary, Africa needs to develop in a way that does not harm us all. The rest of the world has a huge interest in aiding this. The World Bank and other multilaterlal agencies have funds for this and China will back renewable energy projects.

As an African and as a climate change policy expert, I wish to make the following observations:

First, Africa's population has surpassed one billion following China and India in that order. This population has to be provided with jobs and incomes for a decent living. Lack of opportunities in Africa has resulted in frequent, often protracted, conflicts and forced out-migration. Both of these social phenomena have impacted significantly negatively both Africa and the rest of the world. Just one example: the two and a half decade's conflict in Somalia has cost both Africa and the world dearly; it still costs us all and no one knows how long it will take us to get that country stabilized. 

Second, Africa is making certain notable progress, at least in economic growth, though most of this growth is externally induced, because of investments by companies and states outside the continent. Surely, this growth will likely continue, and will entail intensive as well as extensive use of resources (raw materials from within; finances technologies and refined fossil fuel from without). The impact of rapid economic growth in Africa may have considerable impact on the environmental and climate situations. 

Third, Africa's development is to the best of world development and stability. To make this development happen, therefore, is a duty and responsibility for both Africans and the international community. Discharging this responsibility would mean supporting the continent in the promotion of science, technology, innovation and sustainable development through the use of renewable and carbon-free production.

Therefore, though we cannot stop the growth and transformation wheel of the continent, we (academics, politicians, scientists, and policy-experts) can make that transformation smooth, healthy, climate-responsive and population-sensitive , employment-oriented and equitable growth. 

Remember, whether or not we like it, we are ALL Africans, and whatever happens or does not happen in Africa will affect the rest of us, one way or another. 

Kebede

Cant agree more

Dr. Kebede, thanks for your continuous advocacy for Africans on the issues of Climate Change and how Africa can benefit from the COP 21 Agreement.

I am concerned with the continuous Atmospheric Air pollution in Africa and more so when imperial data base are not available to help plan, monitor and control air pollution.

I have started generating data on GHG and outdoor air pollution. Though, it is a financial burden yet worth the trouble for proper planning, monitoring and control.

I agree with you on the economic development but sustainability on the economic development with the various environmental challenges were do we stand? As scientist and Environmental Experts, we have to build capacity in data generation and inventory on Environmental issues relating to Climate Change and share ideas on mitigation (Monitoring and Control).

It is no scientific discussion, when carbon budget hysteria is accused while promoting population growth hysteria.

Certainly there are different point of views, and both aspects are not independent from each other.

Basically Europe and european ideas influenced the whole world, in exploitation now continued by the US, China and other big polluters.

The ideas of freedom and human development were less successfull and were subordinated to economic success.

I find the discussion here necessary to clear, where the emphasis is of the contributors.

Moreover, own thinking should not be replaced by following prevalent trends of the powerful. - If people emigrate in large numbers to Europe or the US, they are forced to accomodate to overconsumption, using fossil energy for every step and losing selfconfidence and capacity to handle many aspects of their life.

The INDCs include measures for adaptation and mitigation of climate change. Among the mitigation actions, enhancing carbon sinks holds a prominent place. Africa has a huge potential to enhance these sinks through the preservation and extension of its forests.

The preservation of African forests, in addition to contributing to the mitigation of climate change, will provide multiple benefits to the inhabitants of the continent, being an important source of resources. In the context of combating climate change, African countries can obtain international support for forest conservation. Even increasing emissions, as a result of development, Africa can (and must) make a negative net contribution to atmospheric CO2.

Intentional or accidental forest fires are largely responsible for destroying African forests. Fighting them should be a priority for African governments. Slash and burn agriculture should be replaced by a settled agriculture, with sustainable land management and increased agricultural inputs. These inputs, particularly fertilizers and agricultural amendments, do not necessarily have to come from imports from foreign countries. The use of local resources, such as phosphate rock, limestone, organic residues, should be enhanced.

Another cause of destruction of the African forest is hardwood traffic, usually by foreign companies. Massive amounts of timber come out of various African harbours, causing great harm and no benefit to the African people and the global environment. Ending this practice is an urgent priority.

Just an additional point to Maria Luisa´s wishes: The traditional collecting of firewood for cooking and warming in the evening could be limited with more rational use of the energy needed for such purposes and using more solar energy in daytime, if no storage and insulating devices are available.

Dr Kebede, thank you for initiating the conversation on this timely issue.  I think the starting point should be understanding  the gravity of  the climate change problem and  its potential consequences and risks. Human activities are destabilizing the climate (one of our life sport system). It is essential to note that climate change is a global problem which needs a global  solution which implies that  everyone (big and small)  has to contribute to address the problem by taking into account the CBDR principle.

 It is true that  Africa's  emission is small though  growing over time.  African countries have put pre conditions to implement their  INDCs. They need clean technology transfer, financial support,  technical assistance and capacity building to implement INDCs.  The Paris Agreement  has put provisions for these support. The challenge  is how far we are  well organized  n terms developing appropriate laws, policies, strategies, action  plans and institutions  to tap those opportunities?  

 I also believe  that the best insurance  for reducing risks  from climate change for all of us (developing  and developed parties)  is  by avoiding dangerous climate change (limiting global warming below 2 Degree Celsius). This requires  implementing the Paris Agreement by reducing greenhouse gas emissions by all parties ( reason to submit INDCs) and by doing more reductions.  It is also essential  to prepare  for unavoidable  climate change (Adaptation)

 We should not also forget the sustainable development agenda (SDGs- Access to clean energy and climate change goals).  

 So to answer your  question how Africa  can benefit from the Agreement and take active role in its realization of the Paris Agreement in the coming 15 years is  by understanding  the seriousness of the climate problem and by getting well organized nationally and regionally in terms developing appropriate laws, police, strategies, action  plans and institutions to exploit  opportunities of clean technology transfer, financial support,  technical assistance and capacity building that are being made available  under the agreement.  It will also be very important for Africa  to play  a proactive  role  in implementing the Pairs Agreement and putting demands  on the developed countries to  honor their commitments.    

Kenneth 

The debate and the complexity of the issue aside, how do you think can Africa benefit from the Paris Agreement? We can also reverse the question, as you tend to do that often, "How can the world be saved from increased carbonization (GHG emission) by preventing this to happen in Africa whose population is rapidly growing, whose demand for food and other commodities is increasing, and which is bent-upon achieving economic growth to meet the demands of its population. This question implies that making growth carbon-neutral or Clean and Green Growth is keeping the globe safer for the next and subsequent generations. Therefore, answering the question requires a holistic and realistic assessment of the costs and benefits of positive action in Africa to the rest of the world. 

Kebede

Kenneth, I could agree with you that we might not 'save the world' only by reducing CO2. That's is one of the problems. Population growth, too, is the major factor. It seems, however, that we are dwelling much on the sources of the problem, not on the solution. I don't think there is disagreement that climate change is real, that we are living in a less hospitable world today than 350 years ago because of cumulative changes in the environment and that there are a host of interrelated social problems owing to these changes as a result of human action or inaction (please check one of my paper on this subject). How are we going to resolve these problems so that we leave a healthy living environment for the next generations? In other worlds, how can we pay particular attention to Africa before it joins the major global emitters in its quest for survival?

Kebede

Do not the plains of the US ( as well India´s ) suffer from drought ?

Are not the arctic and antarctic and mountain regions getting warmer more than in average, did not eastafrican countries suffer from inundations ?

Apart from the world meteorogists material the evidence is strong . .

If the house is burning, should we listen to somebody explaining that he found a little corner with less hot temperature ?

Why should the oil and other industries act worldwide, but the more cautious people stay apart or be content with hindsight ?

Instead, start self-thinking,do not follow anymore and "Divest" ( see that website)

Kenneth, as someone who kicked start the ball, my role could have been to stand aside and watch the discussion as it unfolds. However, your point of view seems one-sided at best and confusing at worst; hence my reaction to your confusing position. On the one hand you tend to argue that the science of climate change is 'politically charged' and that it is unfounded. To talk about this after last December  appears to me irrelevant since the science has been justified by the signing of the Paris Agreement. In my language there is a saying that "the dogs starts barking after the hyena left". I think this is a very good example of a losing argument that climate science is no science after it has been vindicated by all nations of the world with so diverse national and political interests.

On the other hand, you talk about climate change to be 'regional', but when it comes to the question of what should be done to address this regional (I hope you also understood it to be global) existential threat, your answer is fraught with ambiguities, full of quotations and excerpts from renegade sources.

 The specific question being 'How Africa can benefit from the Paris Agreement?", my feeling is that you want to distract attention from the main subject and jump to issues that are either not relevant to the question under consideration or not clear enough to contribute to the debate.

I am sorry if you consider this observation as annoying; I cannot help it but to tell you that you are missing my target, if not yours. 

Kebede