Oil, Debt, and Climate Chaos: What’s at Stake in Santa Marta.

One distinctive feature of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) negotiations is that it is a consensus-based process. Any one country can block an agreement from moving forward, which means that countries that are deeply opposed to certain types of change can slow or even stop progress on coordinated climate action for the entire world.

This has resulted in some strange outcomes, like fossil fuels not being mentioned in any formal UNFCCC text until 2023. Many developing countries that are economically dependent on fossil fuels have not received assurances that support will be forthcoming to enable a just transition away from fossil fuels. This should be a core function of the UNFCCC – to deliver that support and enable a global transition – but rich countries have consistently shirked their responsibility on this cornerstone aspect of the global climate regime. As a result, it has been difficult to reach a consensus on ambitious language on phasing out fossil fuels in the UN climate negotiations.

Frustrated with this structural problem, a group of countries led by Colombia and the Netherlands is convening a new process, outside the UNFCCC, to discuss how the world can move forward on phasing out fossil fuels as quickly as possible. This brings us to the first “Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels”, which takes place from April 24-29 in Santa Marta, Colombia. This is a “coalition of the willing” type of convening where governments are only invited if they are, at least in principle, committed to fossil fuel phaseout.

There is an undeniable element of hypocrisy in the participant list; many governments attending the conference are from the very same rich countries that have themselves benefited from fossil fuel-intensive development, yet have refused to provide the finance and technology transfer needed for most developing countries to transition away from fossil fuels. However, if governments are indeed committed to taking this process seriously, it could be a major milestone in the transition to a just and sustainable global economy that we so desperately need.

The conference takes place in the context of U.S. wars of aggression that are at least partly fueled (so to speak) by a misguided desire to control the world’s oil resources. Our colleague Mohamed Adow has written eloquently on fossil fuels, not just as a driver of the climate crisis, but also as a “security curse.” Meanwhile, structural dependence on fossil fuels is already resulting in massive price shocks that threaten livelihoods across the world, in particular the Global South.

Thanks to this deeply embedded dependency, a just transition away from fossil fuels will be extremely complex. Different countries will need to transition at different speeds, with differing levels of international support (see our Civil Society Equity Review report on equity in the fossil fuel phaseout process from 2023 for a specific analysis on what this might look like). The transition will have to be done in such a way that ensures no one is left behind, even as we fundamentally transform the basis of the global economy.

None of this is easy, and all of it requires a deep level of cooperation. The Santa Marta process is therefore of paramount importance, at least unless and until that spirit of cooperation can be established under the UNFCCC. It is promising that the conference conveners are including a specific focus on structural barriers to fossil fuel phaseout, including barriers presented by the global economic world order.

ActionAid sent a submission to the Santa Marta conference, emphasizing the way that one of these barriers – sovereign debt crises in the Global South – is not only hindering fossil fuel phaseout but is actually actively deepening dependence on fossil fuels. As we detail in our 2023 report “The Vicious Cycle,” highly indebted countries are often forced into extractive activities – frequently fossil fuel extraction – in order to generate foreign currency for debt service payments. And as our 2024 report, “Climate Finance for Just Transition,” shows, far too much of the supposed support for climate action in developing countries is coming as debt-creating loans – exacerbating rather than helping to solve the problem.

In our submission, we outline three systemic solutions that the Santa Marta process should consider:

1. Debt cancellation and a fair global debt architecture: to ensure governments have the necessary fiscal space to implement a transition away from fossil fuels.
2. A focus on just transition: ensuring that fossil fuel phaseout is guided by four key principles:
   1. Inclusive and participatory processes so that workers, women, and communities can voice concerns and shape their futures.Comprehensive plans and policy frameworks to support people to make transitions and cope with potential impacts.Addressing and not exacerbating inequality by securing decent jobs, affordable energy, and human rights.
   1. Holistic and transformative system change for people, nature, and the climate that goes beyond narrow carbon-counting logic and corporate greenwashing.
3. A fossil fuel treaty: an international legal instrument that would complement the UNFCCC’s Paris Agreement to raise the bar for global action and ambition on fossil fuel phaseout.

At a time when global fossil fuel dependency is driving climate chaos, unprovoked wars of aggression, unsustainable price shocks for everyday people, and more, we need processes like the UNFCCC and the Santa Marta conference to succeed. We’re looking to governments in Santa Marta to back a comprehensive debt cancellation and relief framework, robust just transition plans, and a fossil fuel treaty.