Thread by @mattadamw

Building on this superb (and fast!) analysis by my colleague, important to note that these new texts also contain critical mentions of role of nature.

https://twitter.com/_richardblack/status/1459067930164052015

1/CMA.3 mentions the importance of "nature and ecosystems" to "achieve the Paris Agreement temperature goal", i.e. limiting temp rises to 1.5C

It also mentions the adverse impacts on people and nature of climate and weather extremes, thereby implicitly recognising that restoring biodiversity and stopping climate change are interconnected.

While in 1.CP/26 nature and ecosystems are mentioned not just as sinks for greenhouse gases but also that it is important to "protect[ing] biodiversity" while ensuring human rights and environmental safeguards

unfccc.int/sites/default/…

Restoring ecosystems can:
- be "net carbon sinks"
- reduce climate vulnerability
- support sustainable livelihoods
- including *for indigenous peoples and local communities*

And elsewhere this text recognises the importance of protecting ecosystems & biodiversity, which are "recognized by some cultures as Mother Earth".

NB (there are other references to indigenous peoples, local communities, youth, and women elsewhere in these texts, separate to the refs to nature).

Some observers concerned about greenwashing may view ecosystems' role as "net carbon sinks" as opening door for it, and harm to nature, while others will see this, with strong rules, as critical for funnelling finance towards nature restoration.

Para 54 encourages Parties to take account of the different roles of ecosystems (para 53) in national and local policies, which could include countries' NDCs (2030 climate plans), LTSs (long-term climate plans), national adaptation plans.

/ENDS (probably... still reading)