Geopolitical conflicts biggest new hurdle to climate action: Achim Steiner, UNDP

Addressing climate change is no longer a developing or developed country choice, Achim Steiner, head of the UN Development Programme (UNDP), told ET on the sidelines of the WEF Annual Meeting in Davos. "Every year that passes in which we delay decarbonisation will cost us all very dearly," said the Brazilian-born environmentalist. Edited excerpts:

Can you give us an overview of the development and climate agenda here at Davos?
Coming to Davos as the head of the UNDP is first and foremost an opportunity to meet in a very short time with many critical leaders in public policy and government and also in the private sector and civil society, areas in which UNDP has a significant role to play, whether that is in context of some of the crises, conflicts and wars, and a lot of the economic disruption we are facing, whether it is in partnerships.


We are in a period of enormous need for accelerated transitions to deal with climate change, transitional energy systems. And, yet, some of the greatest stumbling blocks today are no longer technology, no longer the economics of it. The science, certainly not. It is actually the question of equitable transition: what is fair within the country.

India energy minister Hardeep Singh Puri said at a breakfast meeting that we are going to be dependent on fossil fuels for the next 20 years.

I would say, he's right, but he's also not necessarily right on what the future may look like. Take his role as a diplomat a decade years ago. He would have been in many international fora arguing that the expectation for India to make an investment in a massive transition to clean energy would essentially have been a constraint on India's development. Fast forward 10 years and India is one of the leading actors in the energy revolution.

We underestimate the ability for change to happen quickly. We have to live with two facts: One, every year that passes in which we delay decarbonisation will cost us all very dearly. Second, our ability to essentially pivot forward is far greater than we think, especially if you remember that in 2022, the IMF estimated that the world still uses $7 trillion of taxpayers' money to subsidise fossil fuels.

The parameters for change can move very quickly, and the imperatives to act may change markets so quickly that I will predict India to be a renewable energy giant within the next 20 years. Fossil fuels may still be there, but they will be a legacy energy source. And in some particular circumstances, maybe it's simply not viable, feasible, or cheaper to replace them. But I think the backbone of India's energy economy is far more likely to be renewable.

When it comes to climate talks and climate financing, the world seems to be divided into camps. Is this making progress more difficult?
Perhaps the greatest additional difficulty or challenge we face right now is simply the level, extent and scale of conflicts around the world. We're living in an age of geopolitical disruption, polarisation and confrontation that is making it increasingly difficult to look for solutions that are rooted in a shared interest paradigm. Addressing climate change today is no longer a developing or a developed country choice. It is an imperative and the question is can we find partnerships or pathways that allow this to happen in an equitable way.

Many developing countries after Covid, and in the current economic context, are heavily indebted. Their ability to invest in more accelerated transitions towards cleaner energy, equitable transitions is severely constrained. So, if the wealthier part of the world is not willing to live up to its commitment to co-invest, and I use that term very deliberately, in an accelerated transition, we're obviously going to see a lot of slowdown. Not because people are debating about the threat of climate change or the importance of going towards net zero clean energy economies, but because the trade-offs are so brutal, in a political context, that countries simply are not able to advance.

The UN system used to be the fulcrum of all kinds of global mediation... people seem to be turning away from it. Do you feel that forums like Davos are emerging as alternative fulcrums of mediation or negotiation?
We are in a period of more pronounced frustration and scepticism towards international institutions generally. In part because the shareholders, the member states have also neglected those institutions. You can't ask an international organisation to operate in a conflict, a humanitarian crisis, an environmental disaster, and an economic period of distress, above all a pandemic, if you are actually underinvested in it.

We (UNDP) work in 170 countries, we are in as much demand as we have ever been. And, from that point of view, what we are offering countries is essentially the sort of advice that they are seeking, not because of the politics of the UN, but because the UN provides an independent, non-bilaterally influenced set of tools that help countries to make sovereign development decisions.

The WEF will never be able to have the legitimacy and the authority of a General Assembly or a Security Council, because those are inter- governmentally negotiated platforms on which countries have agreed.

I have great admiration for the WEF's journey, with all the contradictions it carries with it. Many people view this as an elitist club, sometimes removed from the reality of what is happening on the streets. In some instances, that is absolutely true.

But that does not preclude it from bringing people together to make smarter, more informed decisions.