4. Finance: Enabling the world`s poor to cope with the effects of climate change and develop in a less polluting way can be the problem of the Paris climate agreement. The EU must provide its fair share of the $100 billion in climate finance per year until 2020 and ensure that it is significantly increased after 2020. Climate finance commitments cannot simply distract existing aid from key development programmes. Finally, a consensus was reached after two more days of negotiations. None of the major countries wanted to be seen as the redeemer of such a close agreement. Everyone agreed that he wanted an agreement and to make all the compromises. The EU has voted in favour of legally binding legislation on carbon emission reductions that have been agreed at national level; The language accepted by the United States about «loss and harm»; China and India agreed that the goal of keeping warming at 1.5 degrees Celsius could be included. There was also the absurd informal «informal» in which a small group of delegates from different countries was tasked with addressing a small part of the controversial text, which was often as little as a paragraph at the time. Their task was to remove the so-called «square staples» that refer to areas of disagreement over the text, and they met in small nurseries around the conference center, crouching on the floor in corridors or standing around a smartphone. The answer, I hope, leans towards optimists, but for reasons that go beyond their optimism.

There is no doubt that the Paris Agreement alone will not enable human society to cope with climate change. The objectives are too weak and the governance too uncertain. In this way, critics are right to fear that the mere appearance of the agreement will lead to the perception that the problem is being solved. As philanthropists, we need to invest more resources in these marginalized people to ensure that they are no longer penalized if climate change worsens. One organization that does an excellent job in this area is the Meso-American Alliance of People`s and Forests. This alliance has succeeded in securing land rights for indigenous and forest-dependent peoples and is working to increase their voice and participation in international policy-making. Strong science, combined with the consideration of fundamental human and environmental rights, is a compelling argument that protecting indigenous lands and forests puts an end to deforestation and mitigates climate change. Philanthropists need to strengthen their support for indigenous groups, youth and women who advocate and pursue such solutions to climate change. We need to increase our investments to strengthen their voices to policy makers around the world and to ensure that their voices are heard above the reputation of the «First World» on oil, coal and jobs and the economy. Yes, there is broad consensus within the scientific community, although some deny that climate change is a problem, including politicians in the United States. When negotiating teams meet for international climate talks, «there is less skepticism about science and more disagreement about how to set priorities,» said David Victor, professor of international relations at the University of California, San Diego.

The basic science is this: 2. Closing the ambition gap before 2020: the EU must narrow the gap between what is needed to stay below 2oC and what countries will have to do in the next five years before the Paris Agreement comes into force. It could do this by removing its surplus permits to pollute, removing fossil fuel subsidies, dismantling the use of coal and accelerating the implementation of existing energy efficiency and renewable energy measures.