Every year since 1994, the United Nations has organized the world's most important conference on climate change, called COP (Conference of the Parties), where leaders from all countries meet to establish measures against the effects of climate change.
This is how, for example, in 2015, the famous Paris Agreement emerged, which initially set the objective of keeping the global average temperature below 2 degrees Celsius and which was later adjusted to a target of 1.5 degrees. In order to avoid the most severe effects.
Therefore, these meetings are crucial for efforts to stop or at least slow down global warming. Because there are always negotiations, limits are re-established, plans to follow, and promises are made, depending on how things evolve.
At the last COP, number 27, held in November 2022, in Egypt, there was a big scandal, which began even before the event itself, when Coca-Cola was announced as the main sponsor.
Thousands of people signed a petition demanding the cancellation of this partnership, challenged by environmental activists for two reasons:
1 - It is greenwashing. Coca-Cola unfairly benefited from a good market position as a sustainable brand, while the company is also the largest plastic polluter in the world. Plastic is produced from oil, a fossil fuel, the direct cause of the climate changes we are experiencing. And the issue discussed at the summit.
2 - The actual outcome of the negotiations could be affected, due to potential lobbying by the company. And any potential measures that would lead to tougher laws for plastic polluters, for example, were at risk of not being taken.
What do specialists say about such partnerships? Should they be made or not?
Vasile Lazăr, sustainability consultant: "I believe it would have been prudent for the conference organizers not to accept such a partnership. But this does not mean, by definition, that someone else who would have been a beverage supplier at that conference would not have an impact on the environment. That is, I don't want us to see Coca-Cola now as if it were a demon that we must flee from in whatever form it appears, anywhere. No, I don't think we should demonize a company. Coca-Cola will exist, it also has product lines that are more eco than the conventional ones we know.
It does not mean that everything they do is to be condemned, but such associations are inappropriate. They do not contribute to the confidence of consumers and clients and civil society in these types of bodies. (editor's note: COP)
That is, next time they organize a conference, they (editor's note: the United Nations organizers) will probably be more careful about who they select as a partner.
But, indeed, we cannot ignore in all this discussion the strong lobby that consumer goods manufacturers' organizations exert on legislators, on civil society."
At the end of COP 27, a document was signed, which you can see here.