R.Tumaševičiūtė: COP26 lessons for Lithuania – lack of stronger political will and financial power
A conference organized by the United Nations in Glasgow is a good school of diplomacy. What surprised me the most was the fact that Lithuania’s problems are the same as in Uganda or Japan, only the level and scale of the problem is different. In addition to the most famous, the conference raised issues of democratic ideas, which allowed everyone to “try different” within the framework of sustainability topics.
Financial (in) powers
The saying that came out of COP26, at the moment we are not living according to the ideology of liberalism, but rather of capitalism, reminded me the most. Investing in sustainable processes dictates the needs of measures and possible developments, so it is critical to direct money in the right direction.
Although we belong to the European Union, Lithuania has still not reached a certain level, for example, with decisions on human rights, transition to a green economy or green democracy. For these reasons, we seem to be classified as a subset of intermediate countries, which has an impact on the country’s underfunding.
The main problem for many intermediate countries is that the budget is allocated to us in exactly the same way as to developed countries, and that, as you know, it is not enough to find functional and more ambitious solutions. I noticed the latter problem at the conference and was more convinced that no one was talking about it. On the contrary, as beginners, we sit in silence and helplessly trying to scramble alone, while in the meantime we can finally take the lead in establishing cooperative relations with other states.
Lack of political will
Lithuania is a small country, but we have a clean enough environment – this may be one way to attract investment from other, richer, countries. One very real strategic goal of Lithuania may be the creation of a completely green state.
However, decisions at government level are needed to achieve this. We can pay attention to ourselves – we make only too few demands. We seem to lack the political will.
Our authorities are not yet in a position to adapt to crisis situations, and this has been a very good example of a coronavirus pandemic. The demonstrated inability to address the challenges quickly is also reflected in tackling climate change. As an expert on agricultural matters, I see how slow decision-making is and how quickly one gets stuck in an equal, unanimous place.
I think more ambitious plans are possible. Scotland has made an excellent move of 10% over a 10-year period. Renewable energy – why can’t we do it?
We are such a flexible country, we just don’t have to wait for miracles, not be afraid to implement the already existing technology and take the lead in fighting for our sustainable future and strengthening democracy in Lithuania.
Systems need to be improved – not demolished
Lithuania’s demographic problem and the distances between cities that can be overcome by car are closely related to the search for solutions to climate change. We were not rich during the Soviet era, so the country does not have a sufficiently well-developed dense railway infrastructure, and the architectural problems of urban planning these days are due to the increased CO2 figures.
However, it is very gratifying that we are already making changes in the infrastructure and transport sector, because in Lithuania it is one of the biggest components of pollution. Narrowing down the streets and landscaping, changing the energy mix – all decisions are commended. It is still too expensive for us to build new infrastructure, so it is wise to upgrade rather than demolish our systems at the moment.