"In less than a month’s time, the 2022 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP 27) will take place at the Sharm el-Sheikh Climate Change Conference in Egypt. During the two-week conference, government and non-party stakeholders will deliberate about delivering greenhouse gas emission reductions and helping ensure a transition to a net-zero global economy. This open letter addressed to the COP 27 African delegates offers suggestions on negotiating with your counterparts, especially those from the Global North. As representatives of over a billion Africans, I need not remind you that your people's future depends on what you agree with your colleagues."

In less than a month’s time, the 2022 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP 27) will take place at the Sharm el-Sheikh Climate Change Conference in Egypt. During the two-week conference, government and non-party stakeholders will deliberate about delivering greenhouse gas emission reductions and helping ensure a transition to a net-zero global economy. This open letter addressed to the COP 27 African delegates offers suggestions on negotiating with your counterparts, especially those from the Global North. As representatives of over a billion Africans, I need not remind you that your people's future depends on what you agree with your colleagues. From history, we learn how western colonial powers used blank treaty forms to strip Africa of its resources - we should not allow history to repeat itself. Irrespective of all the talk you will hear about how this is a global initiative to protect the environment, rest assured that each regional bloc will enter the conference to protect its self-interest. So I urge you to be strategic in your negotiations.

Before applying your strategy, it is essential to be aware of the tactics likely to be used by the Global North. Mark Carney, the former Governor of the Bank of England and Bank of Canada, said the shift toward net-zero emissions would be the 

"Greatest commercial opportunity of our time."

 However, the question that should be at the back of your mind is: What is the regional distribution of these economic gains? Suppose previous summits and discussions on climate change are to serve as a guide. In that case, the conference will once again be dominated by white economists, white NGOs, white politicians, white media, white philanthropists, white billionaires, white investors, white royalty, white think tanks, white academics, white activists and white celebrities making the critical decisions that affect the rest of the world. You will see the likes of Al Gore, Greta Thunberg, Larry Fink and David Attenborough, the patron saint of conservationism, take centre stage while you would be relegated to the supporting cast role. The west's strategy will be to pontificate on the scale of climate change and the need for the world to transition to Net-Zero. They will not take responsibility for their complicity in causing the climate disaster and would suggest that all hands on deck are required to avert a climate catastrophe. Though they will acknowledge the astronomical cost of the transition to Net Zero as a manifestation of the white saviour industrial complex, they will offer to help you by giving you loans or aid, which will not compensate Africa for suspending her current economic and industrial model.

Before entering into any commitment, you must be intentional and strategic. I strongly advise that you work towards decolonising the climate change narrative by amplifying your black and brown voices. It would be best if you don't commit to a target without fully costing its impact on present and future generations of Africans. Please do not buy into every suggestion coming from the west, as it has a track record of changing the goalposts when things don't favour them. Africa must present a united front by embracing the spirit of pan-Africanism to negotiate from a position of strength. Individually, we might be small, but when we combine our 54 voices, the world will have no choice but to sit up and listen. We should have African Union representatives from the 54 member states to represent and negotiate on behalf of the continent.

Africa's starting point should be from the premise that the Global North started the crisis and should bear the responsibility for resolving the problem with zero cost to Africa and other countries in the Global South. The west has had over a two-hundred-year head start ahead of the rest of the world by reaching an advanced stage of development by exploiting the earth's resources. Between 1750 and 1850, the west contributed 100% of cumulative Co2 emissions. By 1950, it had contributed to 92.71% of cumulative Co2 emissions. Today, the USA has emitted over 400 billion tonnes since 1751, while Africa's cumulative Co2 emissions as of 1750 and 2020 were 0% and 2.88%, respectively. If you bring up the role the west played in the current crisis, they could attempt to shift attention to the scale of the current problem and the need for countries to move to Net -Zero targets. It would help if you asked them who bears the cost of this transition.

Rather than taking instructions from the Global North, Africa should let the west know that contrary to popular opinion spewed by the western media, the greatest conservationists are not the white NGOs and white environmentalists but people of the Global South. For centuries, we have protected our lands, so we don't need to hear the Global North pontificate about how we are misusing our land.

The current discussion regarding financing climate adaptation and mitigation in the Global South is the form of climate finance and aid from the Global North. The most prominent is the $100bn annual commitment made at COP 16 in Cancun in 2010 and at COP21 in Paris in 2015, where developed countries agreed to provide $100bn yearly up to 2025 to developing countries. As of the time of writing, this commitment is yet to be fulfilled. However, this pledge, of which $20bn has been earmarked for Africa, is grossly inadequate, and Africa and the Global South should reject it.

The west often implements policies with little consideration of their impact on low-income countries in the Global South. A typical example is a call by western governments and standard setters to 

 If this policy is implemented, countries like Nigeria, which generates 40% of its GDP, and 95% of its foreign exchange earnings from the oil and gas sector, will be economically castrated. We should also be cautious of increasing our debt load to transition to Net-Zero. 

, around $24 billion of the climate finance loans granted to developing countries were offered on strict terms requiring higher repayments from low-income countries.

I suggest that climate wealth distribution should be the anchor of your negotiating strategy at COP27. It would be best if you let the west know that Africa does not need their aid and loans but wants environmental and economic justice in the form of compensation for the harm the west has done to the environment for 250 years and for the opportunity cost of abandoning a growth model which the west enjoyed via its use of fossil fuel. Therefore, I propose a climate wealth distribution scheme that accounts for the 250-year head start western countries enjoyed while exploiting the environment. Here is how it will work: If Africa is expected to decarbonise in 30 years by forgoing fossil fuels, in that case, it will be at a competitive disadvantage relative to western countries. Therefore, an option to consider would be implementing a scheme that will compensate the Global South for pursuing a net-zero policy through a climate wealth transfer from the Global North to the Global South. You could calculate the wealth transfer by subtracting the per capita of each developing country from the average GDP per capita for the west (currently $44,107 per capita) and multiplying the differential by the total population.

(Avg per capita West - Avg per capita Developing) *Population Developing

In this way, Nigeria, a country reliant on fossil fuel with an average per capita of $1,969 relative to the west's average per capita of $44,107, would receive an $8 trillion transfer from the Global North as compensation for decarbonising. Other countries on the continent will receive the following based on the model:

As a collective, Africa would receive a $57.8 trillion wealth transfer from the Global North. In response to this suggestion, they may tell you that the proposal is unreasonable as the total global economic output is around $100 trillion. However, you could say to them the suggestion is not as ludicrous as telling Africa to engage in self-immolation in the quest for a Net Zero transition. It is also not unreasonable considering the gains the west made during the post-industrial revolution at the expense of the environment and the profits it stands to make from the move to a green economy. Moreover, if the Federal Reserve and Bank of England could implement the economic miracle of quantitative easing to increase its balance sheet by trillions of dollars in response to the subprime crisis and Covid, finding $57.8 trillion to compensate Africa should not be a big deal.

As explained earlier, the west has an uncanny ability to exploit and destroy the earth's environmental resources and then tell the rest of the world to bear the cost and pain. Africa must use the conference as an opportunity to address the issue of climate geoengineering, which is the deliberate intervention in the earth's natural systems to counteract climate change. Several countries are 

 into sun-dimming technology to reflect the sun's rays away from the planet. Others are investigating the possibility of spraying calcium carbonate into the atmosphere to cool the earth's surface. "Playing God" with the climate could lead to famine and extreme weather patterns, likely impacting countries in the Global South. In addition, Africa should call for an end to solar space mining. Western governments and billionaires are currently engaged in an arms race to exploit the solar system for valuable mineral resources. 

The USA and Luxembourg have instituted regulations allowing private companies to exploit space

 and profit from extracted resources. You could inform western governments that the solar system is not the exclusive preserve of wealthy nations and that attempts to colonise the solar system needs to stop.

According to the High Ambition Coalition for Nature and People, half of the planet must be kept in a natural state to address the biodiversity and climate crises. To make this a reality, there is a proposal to protect 30% of the planet's land and ocean by 2030 at the forthcoming United Nations Biodiversity Conference in Montreal in December 2022. At face value, the 30x 30 concept seems to be an intergovernmental initiative involving over one hundred countries working towards curbing climate change. However, since most of the biodiversity hotspots are situated in the Global South, the protected land scheme could lead to a large-scale land grab in the Global South. According to Land Matrix, Africa is the most targeted region for large-scale land acquisitions in the Global South. Survival International, the London-based charity that campaigns for indigenous rights, argues that the 30X 30 plan will be the "

biggest land grab in history, destroying the lives and livelihoods of those least responsible for environmental destruction

Carbon offset schemes give large western organisations a licence to pollute while offsetting their carbon emissions with reforestation and conservation projects mainly located in the Global South. This could lead to a race to the bottom to use the protected lands of the global South to fortify their green credentials. According to 

, Shell's plan to reach net zero emissions by 2050 by offsetting 120 million tonnes of CO2 from its polluting activities would amount to the acquisition of 12 million hectares of land by 2030, leading to aggressive land grabs in the Global South. Eni, the Italian oil major, announced in 2019 that it planned a 

 spread across South Africa, Zimbabwe, Mozambique and Ghana to offset its emission. African delegates could tell the Global North that rather than using our land for its carbon offsets scheme, it should convert its 4.3 million hectares of western lands to forests and allow the rest of the world to use western land and forests for carbon offsets.

Many thanks for taking the time to read my letter. I trust you will take on board the suggestions highlighted above. Hopefully, future generations will remember COP 27 as the climate conference where Africa straightened its back and said, 

Illuminem Voices is a democratic space presenting the thoughts and opinions of leading Sustainability & Energy writers, their opinions do not necessarily represent those of illuminem.

On Our Terms: An Open Letter to the 2022 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP 27) African Delegates

The regions that least contributed to the climate crisis are likely to suffer the largest consequences, but their voices are not being heard in the ESG debate.

As the world grapples with changes in the atmosphere's composition, pressures on natural resources, pollution, inequality, digital disruption, urbanisation and misgovernance, environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing has grown exponentially. According to Bloomberg,

 global ESG assets will exceed $53 trillion by 2025.

 As ESG moves from the fringes to the mainstream, ESG factors become an integral part of business decision-making. Among the three ESG factors, the environmental element related to climate change, biodiversity loss, and natural resource inefficiencies is considered the principal factor by many investors. Suppose one looks at global C02 emissions per capita and overlays it with climate vulnerability. In that case, one will notice a paradox whereby the regions that least contributed to the current climate crisis are the most likely to suffer the consequences. Yet, despite this asymmetric distribution of pain and gain, the west has the loudest say in ESG conversations and decisions. There needs to be decolonisation of the prevalence of western voices in sustainable finance. In its present form, the conversations around sustainability can be likened to a neo-colonial talking shop dominated by western economists, politicians, media, philanthropists, billionaires, investors, royalty, think tanks, academics, activists, celebrities and standard setters making the critical decisions that affect the rest of the world. Because of the disparity of black and brown voices in the ESG conversation, it should be no surprise that there has been a one-size fit western-centric ESG analysis. If we are to create a more sustainable world, the Global South should lead the move. Due to the overrepresentation of western voices in sustainability discussions, policies and decisions are made with little consideration of its impact on low-income countries predominately located in the Global South. A typical example is a call by predominately western governments to 

 If this policy is implemented, countries like Nigeria, which generates 40% of its GDP, and 95% of its foreign exchange earnings from the oil and gas sector, will be economically castrated.

We also need to decolonise the distribution of gains and losses resulting from the transition towards a global green economy. According to Mark Carney, the UN Special Envoy for Climate Action and Finance, the shift toward net-zero emissions will be the 

 However, if the current trajectory continues, these gains could be tilted to western investors in western companies registered in western countries. In contrast, developing countries which are already heavily indebted are receiving additional climate-financed loans from western countries to tackle the ever-increasing cost of climate change. 

The underrepresentation of non-western players in setting up ESG taxonomies and other forms of standard-setting has led to situations whereby policies are made and changed to suit western interests. For example, there was zero tolerance for financing fossil fuel investments before Russia's invasion. However, after the attack, Europe's energy security was threatened as Russia indicated that it could cut supply to the region. As a result, the European Commission recently stated that the EU bloc could 

increase its coal usage by 5% over the next 5 to 10

 years to replace Russian imports. Another instance of the west's shifting goalposts is the case of nuclear energy. Nuclear energy has generally been considered not sustainable due to its toxic waste. However, under pressure from France, which has 58 nuclear power plants, the European Union plans to 

update the EU taxonomy to accommodate nuclear energy as a green investment

Under ESG investing principles, financing organisations that produce military weapons and ammunition is discouraged. However, with the ongoing war in Russia, there are calls for military stocks to be included as socially responsible investments. According to two Citi Bank analysts, because the war has contributed to increased NATO spending, which will be positive for military stocks, the 

EU taxonomy should be tweaked to label investments in military contractors as ESG compliant.

 reversed its policy of investing in the defence sector

 to capture the investment gains arising from the outperformance of military stocks due to the war. We can't continue a situation whereby global ESG rules are anchored to western interests. ESG standard setting should be reconstituted so that the Global South has a more significant say in standard-setting to avoid the development of taxonomies that favour the west to the detriment of others.

Western organisations tend to emphasise the environmental component of ESG investing while downplaying the social factor component, which is just as important for the Global South. When addressing the social element of ESG investing, western organisations often focus on the easy wins and address the symptoms of inequality instead of the causes. While the emphasis is placed on impact investing, diversity and inclusion, little attention is paid to an economic model that has long created winners in the Global North and losers in the Global South. In decolonising ESG, there should be a move to close the loopholes that lead to the illicit transfer of funds. Investors focusing on the social component of ESG should address how western financial institutions have enabled illicit financial flow from the Global South. The offshore centres, many of which are non-self-governing territories of Western countries, need to be restructured so they don't serve as a haven for illicit funds from the Global South. An economic system that creates a concentration of wealth whereby the 

22 wealthiest men in the world earn more than all the women in Africa

 combined needs to be addressed with the same passion as ending the financing of fossil fuels. Furthermore, an uneven global trade arrangement favouring the west to the detriment of the rest of the world in terms of intellectual property protection, weaker workers' rights and subsidies for the western agricultural sector needs to be reconstructed.

The governance component of ESG investing is often analysed from a western perspective, which could have the unintended consequences of penalising emerging markets. For instance, under the ESG framework, corruption is often viewed as the exclusive preserve of emerging economies. When corruption is discussed under ESG themes, it is usually about payments made to government officials for activities that influence decisions in emerging markets. Moreover, metrics for governance do little to track practices prevalent in the west, such as lobbying and revolving doors. Therefore, when one looks at governance indicators such as the 

, it is not surprising that western countries have a higher rating than their global south counterparts.

The approach to helping low-income countries in the Global South adapt to climate change needs to be decolonised as well. The current narrative is that the rich countries of the Global North need to "help" the Global South decarbonise. The wealthy nations of the Global North have 

 annually from 2020 to help vulnerable countries to deal with the effects of climate change. However, the $100 billion commitment is grossly inadequate to compensate for the harm wrecked on the planet due to the Global North's industrialisation.

I propose a climate reparation scheme that accounts for the head start western countries enjoyed while exploiting the environment. Here is how it will work: If the Global South is expected to decarbonise in 30 years by forgoing fossil fuels, in that case, it will be at a competitive disadvantage relative to western countries, which have enjoyed a 250-year head start since the commencement of the industrial revolution. Therefore, an option to consider would be implementing a scheme that will compensate the Global South for pursuing a net-zero policy by a climate wealth transfer from the Global North to the Global South. The wealth transfer could be calculated by subtracting the per capita of each developing country from the average per GDP capita for the west (currently $44,107 per capita) and multiplying the differential by the total population.

In this way, Nigeria, a country reliant on fossil fuel with an average per capita of $1,969 relative to the west's average per capita of $44,107, would receive $8 trillion from the Global North as compensation for decarbonising. On a regional basis, the west would transfer $15.8 trillion and $57.8 trillion to South America and the African continent, respectively. This should not be a small ask, considering the gains the west made during the post-industrial revolution at the expense of the environment and the profits it stands to make from the move to a green economy.

The transition toward a net-zero world will require access to certain raw materials such as cobalt, neodymium and copper. Many of these raw materials are in the Global South and Africa in particular. Furthermore, in the quest to offset carbon emissions, some western companies have engaged in massive reforestation programmes has the potential to lead to land grabs. For example, 

 in 2021 that Shell's reforestation plan to offset its carbon emission would amount to the acquisition of 12 million hectares of land by 2030, leading to aggressive land grabs in the Global South. Therefore, the west should avoid another scramble for African resources in the name of decarbonisation to the detriment of Africa.

If ESG investing continues its trajectory, the Global South could realise that it has become a tool for Western hegemony rather than being a force for good.

. Illuminem Voices is a democratic space presenting the thoughts and opinions of leading Energy & Sustainability writers, their opinions do not necessarily represent those of illuminem.

Decolonising the ESG Narrative

Ahmed Olayinka Sule is a London-based Financial Analyst, social critic and a freelance journalist.

You can’t miss it!

Ahmed Olayinka Sule

Ahmed Olayinka Sule

Decolonising the ESG Narrative

Recent publications

Readers also like

Want to know more about illuminem Voices?