REQUEST FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION ON THE ARGENTINE GOVERNMENT'S PROGRESS IN ITS INTERNATIONAL COMMITMENTS ON CLIMATE CHANGE
- Juan Bautista López (Professor of Natural Resources and Environmental Law, Faculty of Law, National University of Córdoba)
REPORT
INTRODUCTION
The Argentine Republic has enacted and ratified various national and international instruments related to the fight against the effects of climate change. Thus, it could be said that, from a legal standpoint, the State has a regulatory microsystem related to the phenomenon. In this regard, it is integrated with highly relevant international treaties such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (1), the Kyoto Protocol (2), and the Paris Agreement (3). Domestically, it has enacted laws related to various sectoral environmental issues and, in particular, a minimum budget law (4) designed to govern and set guidelines for public policy and actions to adapt to and mitigate climate change.
In this regard, the State has made significant climate action commitments to the international community. These are reflected in specific instruments that must be drawn up and submitted to multilateral bodies. These include the submission of: National Communications, National Mitigation and Adaptation Plans, Nationally Determined Contributions (hereinafter NDCs), biennial update reports, biennial inventory reports, and biennial transparency reports, among others.
In this context, this report originates from a request for access to public environmental information submitted on October 14, 2024, to the Office of the Chief of Staff of Ministers. The purpose of the request is based on the need to understand the progress and development of climate actions and, in this way, evaluate said performance and other associated variables such as climate financing, budget allocation, institutional structure, etc.
The following paragraphs analyze and evaluate the responses provided. First, the regulatory framework in which the question was asked will be developed. Then, the response will be detailed. Next, the substantive content of the action will be evaluated in light of the regulatory framework, the local and international context, and other variables obtained after the information was reported. The particular characteristics of the phenomenon of climate change and its projection in the measure examined will be considered across the board. Finally, a comprehensive conclusion of the points discussed will be presented.
The context from the government narrative
On December 10, 2023, Javier Milei assumed the presidency of the Argentine Republic. From the outset and throughout his term, the executive branch presented society with a clear narrative regarding the phenomenon of anthropogenic climate change.
In his various speeches, the president took a critical approach to the climate action agenda. In various local and international forums, he presented policies and actions against climate change as a reflection of the "neo-Marxist" agenda that threatens individual freedom, which his government staunchly protects. Along these lines, he described climate change as a phenomenon unrelated to human action and inherent to the course of nature itself (5).
Likewise, within these ideas, he posited nature as a resource intended to serve humanity. He also attributed the "insane" nature of the "environmentalist agenda" to the idea of not polluting the planet. This idea, according to his own arguments, would imply eliminating human life (6).
The president has so far avoided any reference to the prevailing scientific consensus. While he implicitly made it clear that this was a cyclical and natural phenomenon, he did not explicitly discredit the studies on the causes, consequences, and effects agreed upon by the international scientific community.
On the other hand, he has also expressed his rejection of the 2030 Agenda and the sustainable development goals. This is because the agenda is also seen as a "socialist" program that violates the sovereignty of states and individual rights. He stated, for example, that this agenda has led humanity down a tragic path (7).
Beyond rhetoric, some concrete actions have reflected this thinking in a practical sense. It is worth mentioning, for example, the disengagement from the so-called "Future Pact" approved by consensus at the United Nations Assembly during its sessions in 2024 (8). Another example is the reduction in the national budget allocation for research, with clear repercussions on the duty of states to implement policies that strengthen scientific climate research.
In this context, it is necessary to assess whether this has an impact on the institutional development of the climate agenda. It is also necessary to consider whether certain government actions create barriers and challenges to the full implementation of international commitments.
Access to public information from a procedural perspective
The Escazú Agreement (9) and internal minimum budget laws establish certain procedural standards that the administration must respect when responding to requests for public information of an environmental nature. These include the lack of proof of legitimacy; indication and referral to the authority that possesses the information if the requested authority does not have it; free access; delivery in the required format; access to information on policies, plans, programs, and actions related to environmental management; among others. Similarly, a period of 30 working days is established for responding (10). In the event of non-compliance, the law itself provides for possible sanctions for the officials responsible.
The request for access was made on October 14, 2024. The response was provided on December 3 of the same year. Taking into account the official calendar for that year, it took 35 business days to respond. In other words, the delay was five business days beyond the deadline set by law. This delay is not significant.
This aspect is somewhat positive in a comparative sense. It is common in provincial or municipal jurisdictions for deadlines to be exceeded by far beyond the legally established time limits. It is even possible to note that in some jurisdictions, requests are not answered until after recourse to the justice system to demand a response.
As for the information requested, the request included eight different topics with a total of 21 questions. The response identifies each question and then provides the associated information. It demonstrates a clear structure of the content, which makes it easy to read and follow. In addition, it contains hyperlinks to different functioning websites that, in turn, contain digitized documents related to the requested item.
It should be noted that the aforementioned standards were partially verified in this request for information. Thus, the request complied with the guidelines of free access, broad standing to sue, and delivery in the required format (digital). However, in two of the questions asked, the information requested was not within the scope of the requested authority's powers. The competent authority was indicated without the request being automatically forwarded to that agency. This constitutes a minor non-compliance with the aforementioned standards. On the other hand, in prospective terms, it provided answers to actions, plans, and policies even though these were still in the process of being developed.
From a general assessment, considering the guidelines outlined above, it can be said that the requested agency satisfactorily fulfilled its obligations regarding access to public environmental information. This conclusion is based on the specific request for information and the area that provided the response. There is insufficient evidence to evaluate the functioning of the public environmental information access system as a whole.
About the Nationally Determined Contribution
Brief contextualization
The Paris Agreement requires States Parties to submit their Nationally Determined Contributions every five years. These must set out mitigation and adaptation actions aimed at fulfilling the objectives of the treaty (11). Although no objective parameters are established regarding their content, the contributions must represent progressive, not regressive, progress. In the words of the agreement itself, these must reflect a "higher level of ambition" and not a step backward in relation to previously submitted contributions.
The decision on which the text of the treaty was adopted set the date for the first NDC as 2020 (12). Then, taking into account the five-year period, the next deadline for submission will be in 2025. Argentina, within these obligations, submitted its 2nd Nationally Determined Contribution in 2020 (updated in 2021). In other words, like the rest of the States Parties, it must submit its 3rd NDC in 2025.
Question asked and information provided
Given this situation, the request for information inquired about progress in the preparation of the NDC. In addition, information was requested on the integration of the health axis into this instrument.
The authority reported that the process of preparing the third contribution had not begun at the time of the response. In this regard, it stated that at the First Meeting of Ministers of the National Cabinet, held on September 23, 2024, it had been agreed to begin the preparation process. Thus, the minutes of that meeting required the "Focal Points Table," together with the Technical Administrative Coordination, to implement the necessary actions to plan and work jointly and in a coordinated manner on the preparation for its presentation during 2025. It also urged the so-called "Focal Points" to actively participate in the NDC to reflect more ambitious and updated actions in the area of mitigation and adaptation (13).
With regard to the goals included in the National Adaptation Plan and the National Adaptation Plan for the health sector, the public body referred to the National Health and Climate Change Strategy approved in 2023. It did not specify whether this strategy was referenced as input for the NDC. Regarding the latter instrument, it only specified that the guiding principle of "health" had been incorporated into its second version. Finally, it specified that this principle was reflected in the second National Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation Plan. Regarding the third point, which requested information on the drafting process, the authority referred to the response provided in the first place.
Evaluation of responses
At the time of responding to the request for information, it was pointed out that, by cabinet agreement, the process of preparing the 3rd NDC should begin. It can be said that, at that time, there was still no coordination between the various institutional agencies involved in preparing the contribution. The initiative and request to these agencies constitutes at least an intention to comply with the obligation to submit this instrument in 2025.
In relation to the information provided, the following questions can be asked. Do the authorities responsible for preparing the NDC have the resources and technical capacity to carry out smooth coordination to meet the 2025 target? Secondly, even in a favorable context, is it possible for the State to carry out the necessary actions (diagnoses, studies, and technical evaluations on climate variables in all their aspects) during the remaining time? It should be noted that the five-year period provided for in the Paris Agreement is not arbitrary. It is a reasonable and necessary amount of time to carry out the thorough and robust development of each NDC.
This question is revitalized when considering the obligations that the State must fulfill after ratifying the so-called Escazú Agreement. According to this instrument, in cases such as the construction of an NDC, the State is obliged to implement effective mechanisms and instances of public participation.
Added to this are additional contextual challenges. Government actions associated with budget cuts, human resource reductions, and the de-hierarchization of ministerial portfolios, among other factors, are variables that make it even more difficult to consider an institutional environment favorable to the development of the NDC in a timely manner.
In this sense, the third contribution must crystallize a higher level of ambition and not stagnation or regression. This, of course, requires a thorough analysis of the commitments made in the second contribution, an evaluation of their degree of compliance/efficiency, and the effective possibility of committing to more ambitious climate actions.
Notwithstanding these questions, it should be noted that the government narrative described at the beginning of this report does not seem to have permeated the intentions of the specific areas responsible for addressing international commitments. As we have seen, the relevant agencies have been urged to begin drafting the NDC.
About the Biennial Update Report
Brief contextualization
Developing countries that are parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (including Argentina) were required to submit Biennial Update Reports (BURs) to the Convention's implementing bodies. These reports had to contain updated information on national greenhouse gas inventories, mitigation measures adopted and needs, and support received. As their name suggests, BFRs were submitted periodically every two years. This tool was required until the signing of the Paris Agreement.
Following the conclusion of the latter, the BIA were replaced by the so-called Biennial Transparency Reports [hereinafter BTR (14)]. During the 2018 COP, the deadline for their submission was set at December 31, 2024. This was therefore the deadline for the submission of these reports, without prejudice to previous BIA submissions.
The content of the BTRs to be submitted is set out in Article 13 of the Paris Agreement. In addition to reporting on the inventory of anthropogenic emissions and removals, they must provide the information necessary to facilitate monitoring of progress and assessment of compliance with their respective NDCs. In other words, they are closely linked to the latter instrument.
Question asked and information provided
In the specified context of obligations, the administration was asked about progress related to the IBA.
In this regard, the body reported that the fifth IBA had been submitted in 2023. It also stated that the first biennial transparency report would be submitted before December 31, 2024. It added that this report would contain the historical series of greenhouse gas inventories up to and including 2022.
Response evaluation
The conclusion of the aforementioned report is confirmed on the website "Argentina.gob.ar." Likewise, its effective presentation can be seen on the United Nations website on climate change (15). This demonstrates compliance with the commitment made within the specified framework and within the stipulated dates.
In this regard, the response was sufficient and complete in relation to the point requested. The administration demonstrated accurate knowledge of the modification of the report to be submitted, the deadline, and the nature of the content. One of the shortcomings that can be noted is the outdated greenhouse gas inventory (as of 2022). This is concerning given the diagnostic value of this tool for proper decision-making. In addition, the question arises as to how the challenge of updating this inventory for the years 2023 and 2024 will be addressed for its treatment and integration into the preparation of the 3rd NDC to be submitted in 2025.
- About the National Climate Change Cabinet
Brief contextualization
The National Climate Change Cabinet (hereinafter GNCC) is a body established by Chapter II of Law No. 27,520 on Minimum Requirements for Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation. This body is chaired by the person in charge of the Chief of the Cabinet of Ministers and composed of the highest authorities of the various ministerial portfolios at the national level.
Its main function is to implement the National Plan for Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation and all public policies related to the application of the law. It is also entrusted with the task of coordinating between the different areas of national government and provincial authorities. Within its structure is the Technical Administrative Coordination, responsible for preparing documents and inputs to meet institutional objectives.
- In addition, the regulatory decree of the aforementioned law provides for assistance to the GNCC through "Working Groups." Each group has different working teams. These are:
- Focal Points Working Group: Composed of a designated representative from each of the ministries that make up the GNCC.
- Provincial Coordination Working Group: composed of representatives of the Climate Change Commission of the Federal Environment Council (COFEMA) from each of the provinces.
- Expanded Working Group: composed of any other person or organization with an interest in the subject.
It is also supported in the development of public policies by an External Advisory Council (hereinafter EAC). This is a permanent, consultative body, although its contributions are mandatory. It could be said that it is a body that encourages the participation of other civil society actors, as it is composed of scientists, experts, and researchers on climate change; environmental organizations, trade unions, indigenous communities, research centers, academic and business entities; and representatives of political parties with parliamentary representation.
Question asked and information provided
The request for information asked whether the GNCC was active, which areas and officials were part of it, how often it met, and the institutional contact channel.
The administration reported that the body was active. Its first meeting took place on September 23, 2024. At that meeting, technical issues related to international obligations, such as those associated with compliance with Law 27520, and other operational issues were addressed. It then stated that on November 5, 2024, a meeting of the Provincial Cabinet Coordination Committee took place. Its objective was to present the draft Provincial Response Plans for the jurisdictions of La Pampa, Misiones, and Jujuy. On November 7 of the same year, he added, the Expanded Committee meeting was held. Although the report of that meeting was not available at the time of responding to the information request, he provided a hyperlink to the audiovisual recording (16).
Regarding the appointment of ministerial focal points, he reported that these were in the process of being appointed for the subsequent meeting of the corresponding Committee (of focal points). He emphasized that this agency was responsible for preparing the necessary inputs for the drafting of the 3rd NDC. Finally, he specified that the procedure to form the External Advisory Council had been initiated during 2025.
Regarding the areas and officials that make up the GNCC, the response referred to institutional structures without specifying specific individuals (names) and to the internal regulations of each of the agencies. Notwithstanding this, it also referred to the Minutes of the Ministers' Meeting No. 1/24, where it indicated that the people who had attended could be seen. Regarding communication channels, it only mentioned the existence of emails without specifying which ones.
Finally, it stated that the area was not responsible for reporting on the allocated budget. That this was the responsibility of the budget department of the Deputy Chief of Staff of the Interior. This information also answers the questions asked in item No. 5 regarding the External Advisory Council and its composition. Regarding its contact channel, it reported that the email address was: cae@ambiente.gob.ar.
Response evaluation
From the responses provided, it is clear that at the time of writing, only one meeting had been held between ministers to plan their future activities. As for the rest of the GNCC structure, the Provincial Coordination Committees and the Expanded Committee held only one meeting each. In contrast, the Focal Points Committee, the External Advisory Council, and the respective working groups did not hold any meetings during 2024. The External Advisory Council was not formed in accordance with the terms required by the minimum climate change budget law.
From a quantitative perspective, three of the five institutional structures that make up the GNCC met. Each of them did so only once during the year. This information must be contrasted with the robust international commitments that the Argentine State will soon have to fulfill. It is difficult to reconcile the goals set with the coordination of the areas responsible for their fulfillment.
From a qualitative perspective, the meetings held did not result in substantial or substantive progress in relation to the GNCC's mission. On the contrary, they focused on operational and prospective meetings. Undoubtedly, this raises a scenario that compromises the possibilities of fulfilling institutional responsibilities and requires the review and strengthening of the work agenda.
It may be necessary to investigate the causes of this reduced activity. In this regard, it is possible to speculate on hypothetical answers associated with periods of transition between political administrations, the restructuring of ministerial portfolios and a decrease in allocated resources, a lack of commitment to the climate agenda, among other possible variables.
- On the Technical Administrative Coordination of the GNCC and Coordination of Adaptation to Climate Change
Brief contextualization
As seen in the preceding item, the GNCC's CTA is the driving force behind and develops the inputs for the fulfillment of the latter body's mission.
Question asked and information provided
At this point, information was requested about the person responsible for this coordination. It was reported that the Coordination was in charge of the head of the Undersecretary of Environment, Dr. Ana María Vidal de Lamas. Regarding the contact method, the GNCC email address (gncc@ambiente.gob.ar) was provided.
As for the Coordination of Adaptation to Climate Change (a unit operating under the Undersecretary of Environment), it was reported that there had been no person in charge since September 5, 2024. The email address of the unit was provided: cambioclimatico@ambiente.gob.ar.
Response evaluation
As stated in the assessment of the previous responses, there is a noticeable deficiency in the formation and integration of certain institutional spaces. Among these, the resignation and vacancy of a team in charge of Climate Change Adaptation Coordination has an impact on the institutional response to the preparation of the 3rd NDC.
- On participation in the 29th Conference of the Parties in Baku, Republic of Azerbaijan
Brief contextualization
The Conference of the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is the body responsible for promoting actions aimed at fulfilling the objectives of the treaty. It is made up of all the States Parties. It meets once a year and is held in different locations around the world. In this context, the COP also serves as the Meeting of the Parties to the Paris Agreement and assesses the degree of compliance.
Participation in the COPs is a key aspect of addressing climate action, a phenomenon that, due to its multiscale, multifaceted, multidisciplinary, and transboundary nature, requires multilateral and global governance. At these meetings, the international community negotiates to implement the necessary actions, provide financing, evaluate processes and results, and set new goals. Civil society also participates in these spaces. Its involvement promotes a reconfiguration of classic multilateralism between states into a horizontal, bottom-up version, thus allowing strategies to be articulated not only at the state level.
Question asked and information provided
In this regard, questions were raised about Argentina's participation in COP 29. The administration reported that participation was led by the Argentine Foreign Ministry. The Ministry was responsible for registering Argentine representatives with the event organizers. Officials from that department also served as the "Head of Delegation" for the Argentine representation. It was recommended that this department be consulted without referral to that area of expertise.
Response evaluation
At this point, the referring body provided information about the state agency responsible for managing the official delegation to the COP (the Ministry of Foreign Affairs). It indicated that the request should be addressed to that agency. For reasons of jurisdiction, and based on standards of access to information, it would have been appropriate to refer the request to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Notwithstanding the response provided, what happened during COP 29 must be examined. During the event, after the delegation had arrived in Azerbaijan, the Argentine Government decided to withdraw from the event and not participate (17). This resulted in the Republic's absence from all negotiations and interventions. As a further consequence, members of civil society who were associated with the delegation as "Party Overflow" (18) during the event suddenly lost their accreditation and, with it, their access.
This decision marks a turning point in Argentina's historic commitment to participate in the COPs through active involvement in their development and to be an important spokesperson for the region. The truth is that the decision is also not in line with the nationally determined contributions committed to by the Republic for 2022. It sends a clear message to the international community about the importance of the COP and the climate phenomenon for the current government.
- About Jurisdictional Response Plans
Brief contextualization
Argentina has a federal form of government. This means that there are two spheres of power that are linked in relation to the territory. On the one hand, there is the Federal (or National) Government, and on the other, the different Provinces. These have autonomy but, at the same time, a federal unity is sought to ensure the coexistence of both orders.
In exercising this autonomy, the provinces retain all powers that have not been expressly delegated to the federal government. There are, therefore, powers reserved for the provinces; powers delegated to the federal government; and some concurrent powers, meaning that both exercise them in a spirit of cooperation.
In environmental matters, the rule is that the provinces are responsible for the environmental management of the ecosystems and resources within their territory. However, given the interrelated and interdependent nature of the environment and its transcendence of territorial political boundaries, comprehensive management based on coordination between all political orders is necessary.
In legislative matters, the federal government has the duty to enact so-called minimum environmental protection laws. These contain minimum thresholds for environmental protection that are projected and applied uniformly and mandatorily throughout the territory, including the provinces. The provinces, for their part, must enact regulatory instruments containing complementary provisions without falling below the minimum threshold set by the nation. In other words, provincial jurisdiction must set environmental protection standards equal to or higher than those set by the national entity and maximize protection.
This system, with regard to climate change, led to the enactment of the law on minimum budgets for climate change adaptation and mitigation. This requires the development of a national plan for climate change adaptation and mitigation. On the other hand, it requires the provinces to do the same but within the scope of their particular local socio-environmental context. This instrument is called the "Provincial Response Plan" (hereinafter PRP).
PRPs must be submitted to and validated by the National Enforcement Authority of the law. The latter has the obligation to accompany the provincial jurisdictions in the preparation of their plans and to require their preparation. The provinces had a period of three years from December 2020, that is, December 2023, to prepare and approve their PRP. Subsequently, it must be updated every five years.
Question asked and information provided
Information was requested regarding progress and conclusions on the PRPs. The administration responded that, as of the date of the response, no province had a PRP validated by the national enforcement authority. It stated that some provinces had published their plans, but that these had not been validated.
It added that the provinces of La Pampa, Misiones, and Jujuy had completed the pre-validation process for the drafts. These jurisdictions had submitted them to the Provincial Coordination Committee in 2024, without receiving any binding objections. It then attached a map showing the status of the situation.
Gráfico aportado
Response evaluation
Based on the information provided, it is clear that the provinces are in clear breach of the deadlines set out in the regulations. The current situation suggests that all but three provincial jurisdictions will not comply with the validation of their PRPs in the near future.
It should be noted that, according to the aforementioned regulations, it is the responsibility of the National Enforcement Authority to request response plans from each of the provinces. Given the current state of progress, it would be appropriate for the Authority to strengthen the mechanisms necessary to support the process of drawing up response plans in order to coordinate the various measures and actions for the development and implementation of instruments that, in addition to serving provincial climate management, necessarily have an impact on national instruments such as the National Adaptation and Mitigation Plan, the 3rd NDC, and periodic transparency reports.
The climate issue, due to its transboundary and interrelated nature, requires comprehensive management. The effects of climate change have a differentiated impact according to the vulnerability conditions of the natural and human systems present in each territory. The same situation arises in relation to the contributions that each productive matrix generates in relation to greenhouse gases.
In the context of a federal state, where environmental policies related to climate change depend largely on the provincial states, it is difficult for the National Agency to respond to climate challenges without local action. From a practical and legal point of view, the central government cannot intervene in the development of local issues that are known to the provincial administrations themselves. A national response that is deprived of the agreement, contribution, and coordinated effort of the provinces would marginalize local socio-environmental and climate demands, thus hindering a comprehensive approach.
- About climate finance