EDITORIAL

Climate Week, held in New York last month, focused on protecting nature. Perhaps as a failure of its ability to advance the climate cause in an American environment totally divided on the issue. If it's so complicated to get all Americans to agree on the importance of climate change, let's bet that the preservation of nature - closer, more concrete and perhaps more consensual - will be able to bring people together better? 

In this regard, it is helpful to see how Al Gore and John Kerry, whose commitment to the climate cause is not in question, now offer notably different opinions. While the former sees the holding of COP 28 in the United Arab Emirates as a blatant conflict of interest, the latter sees the importance of bringing "everyone to the table" to make progress on a subject that concerns everyone. While the former observes that the emphasis at COP 28 on carbon capture technologies is distracting attention from the main issue, which must be the elimination of carbon emissions, the latter points out that, once again, the urgency of the situation requires progress to be made on all options concurrently. Where the former understands the growing boycotts proposed by climate activists around the world, the latter encourages dialogue and values the efforts made by Gulf countries on climate issues. Admittedly, Al Gore is now mainly an activist, while John Kerry is a diplomat. Such divergent positions animated much of the Climate Week discussion in New York, among an audience that seemingly shares a common commitment to the climate cause.

The International Energy Agency has closed these debates by publishing an update of its 1.5 degree report, which is essential to know. It would appear that we might already be on a trajectory to 1.4 degree trajectory. But the IEA remains optimistic suggesting that a 1.5C trajectory is still achievable! The main reason for this is the record growth in the deployment of decarbonizing technologies - solar in particular - and in investment. The IEA has also brought everyone to the same conclusion, including business circles divided on the climate issue, that fossil fuel assets will irretrievably depreciate beyond 2030, and that this should be taken into account now in medium- and long-term investment assessments. This should subsequently reinforce the growth of "greener" investments.

And what about nature? To put it bluntly: the official launch of the TNFD will certainly help companies and investors to report on, and thus explore, how to better control the impact of their activities on nature conservation. This is a good thing, and the TNFD has the merit of providing a consensual, actionable framework on a complex subject. But if Net Zero approaches have their share of controversy, we must not use the TNFD to create another controversial lever where, by hiding behind yet another reporting tool, we end up forgetting the essential point: to protect nature, we need to get in touch with the people on the ground and stop building, contaminating the soil, and engaging in deforestation.

It is in response to this need for concrete approaches on the ground that Ksapa operates, together with its international networks and 150+ experts, and its digital tools, to work with those on the frontline: farmers, workers, local and national authorities, local and global stakeholders. Our programs are designed to provide concrete answers at scale to a three-variable equation:

1. Take into account the concerns of stakeholders on the ground, often the most vulnerable and farthest removed from abstract concepts such as Net Zero or TNFD, to design and develop programs for decarbonization and advancing biodiversity while taking their interests into account. Often, it is by fighting poverty and improving access to knowledge that coalitions are built to advance the causes of climate and nature.

2. Rely on digital tools adapted to even the most complex terrains to manage complexity, scale up, and align companies and investors on concrete operational trajectories - "zero deforestation for example", serving predetermined strategic objectives "TNFD commitment for example".

3. Measuring the impact of our programs, in a transparent way, in alignment with relevant international standards, and of course auditable. It is because we measure the impact of our programs that we can concretely demonstrate our ability to advance the promoting and respecting human rights for as many people as possible, while at the same time making progress on environmental issues.

The fact that so many customers around the world place their trust in Ksapa is due to our ability to follow and take part in the discussions held at Climate Week, which remains a useful stimulus to keep abreast of the topical debates and continue to have a macroeconomic vision of the issues at stake. But Ksapa also has the capacity to commit itself in the field, to deploy concrete, high-impact programs that have decarbonization and the just transition at their core. Ksapa derives its credibility from its ability to understand and interact on a global scale, while acting by understanding local dynamics.  Get in touch and let's talk!        
 
Farid Baddache, CEO