 Hello everyone. Our next guest will be here any moment now. If you don't know her, her name is Laurence Tubiana. She's the executive director of the European climate foundation. And she also played huge role in the Paris agreement in 2015. She was one of the key architects of the agreement. So she she's really, really interesting guest. And she will also share her perspective on gender issues in the climate space, climate diplomacy. So stay tuned. Here she is. I've already introduced you and given your credentials. Of course, the fact that you are the executive director of the European climate foundation, but also of course, one of the key architects of the Paris agreement. And you are here to talk about gender. I mean, we will talk about, you know, climate as well, but from a gender perspective. So the, the first question that I do want to ask you is gender equality and clean energy transition. You don't necessarily think that they're connected, but how are they connected. In fact, they are. First, we have to consider that the energy issues and energy matters. You know, the business sector, the public sector as well. Even the investors are very, very men dominated. And that was a case for climate. Many, many years ago when I started, many years ago, just to deal with that. And really, we have very few women taking the floor or being in the room even in the delegations. There was very, very few women because because of the energy is very central to the climate and to energy transition by definition. And, and so that was a very sort of because of all the engineer element. And that's very little women represented. And still it's a case when you look at the energy companies, for example, I think at the head level, it's less than two or 3% at global levels that are head of utilities or energy companies. In France, I think it's only one. And G, I know one who is a CEO of a big oil company in US, but really, there are few people different a little bit better in the renewable energy sector. Globally, there is a little bit more employment, again, not be a big difference, but still 20% a little bit more than that on the oil and gas sector, 30, and something on the renewable sector. So it's a little bit more women investment and careers, but still at not the head level. So I think there is an issue there about, and with when you look at finally the studies and the academia there is a lot of women in the master program or beyond that looking and doing energy, a lot of them. I, for example, in the sort of famous, most famous school in France, a high school, after of course universities. What we call a political technique, which is normally where all the engineers are coming from in the energy sector. There are a lot of women and massively more women than men are now doing the studies because they are just better at mass and, but so there is a disconnect between the profession and the training. It's a very good thing that we are dealing with that issues it seems not connected but they are the other element is that in the energy crisis it was a very interesting study of, you know, your stat that in Europe after the invasion of Ukraine by Russia. You know, we had this energy crisis, a price of energy, the bills were up. And there was a huge difference into how it has affected the households. And when of course there was a classical case of sort of only women with children with their own system, well that has to sustain themselves on a one person family. They were really, really more affected and the indicator was they could not pay the bill. So there was more women unable to pay the bills than the equivalent in the men's sector. So for all this reason poverty inequality in general, and that affect of course energy transition because it's not like because energy will be particularly anti women. But the reality is that because it's so central to the household to the basic needs. You see that poverty of course we know affect more women and that the consequence so if energy transition could be a factor of more equality I think we should rejoice that and I think there is a true possibility now for that. In other words, if, if I want to say that the energy transition goes wrong because we're not hoping for that but if, if we do see, you know hurdles along the way that could potentially impact women in households because they are usually on the front lines of, of, you know, taking care of families of health. And could that be a possibility? Is that what you're saying? Yeah, there's two two dimensional that there is a sort of the household level and then there is a, of course, the sector, the business sector on the household level, of course, to to have access to cleaner energy depends very much of how the electricity market is organized, but as well when you see the access for example to more autonomous decentralized in a way production of electricity for example. The problem was a major problem is access to capital to fund that even if now of course in our countries in France in particular and some Germany there is a huge subsidization of these installations. But, but really, if that for the forest household is very difficult to bridge, you know, the difference between the subsidy and the, and the capital you have to invest to do that so that's a very serious issue when we want the energy transition to, in a way as a citizen to be part of, then it's really important to see how the gap for the lower income households, how they can, you know, we feel that gap that for the moment it's not only a subsidy but you need some, some time to have zero cost, at least as a start. So, the second element which I think is a little bit worrying is because electricity market as what they are. It's difficult to show the result for the household that the bills will be much cheaper, because of the renewable energy and the clean energy transition. And that for the moment doesn't appear very much. It is different when you have for example in certain countries totally decentralized power sector, where there is relatively cheap access anyway access to electricity when there is no. And there you see that in some African countries are so really a positive element of decentralized electricity, women's training to be in a weather provider for the village for example it's a good example that has been done in the past. You see that there is really a possibility of green transition being a sort of support for gender equality. So, but of course this problem of the access affordable access to energy is really really central for in particular women's development and in particular in countries where there is no access but even even in where there is full access to electricity or energy. If there is not, we don't solve the problem of the deep income inequality in countries that has increased so much since COVID. I think we will face that problem. You are one of the key architects of the Paris Agreement. You served as Francis special representative for COP 21 in 2015 here in Paris and also a lead negotiator. The preamble of the Paris Agreement highlights that parties must promote gender equality the empowerment of women. Have we lived up to to, you know, that element of the Paris Agreement. Well, I think all this preamble was a very interesting discussion by the way because people were saying why do we need a preamble know why we have climate justice, for example, or what why we we have elements on, you know, the recognition of the, you know, the way the weather, some delegation from Latin America wanted the recognition of the existence of nature as a sort of a subject of legal element legal existence. So, all this was like oh they are there but it's not important, but in reality, we look at climate justice discussion it's now everywhere. There are issues of course of the loss and damage in particular. There is of course these ideas that nature has to have a legal status in many countries. And now this empowerment of women is something interesting enough. You see the evolution in the delegation at the UNF triple C there is more and more women that was famous delegation where almost everyone is from the women side. The Spanish one is a very famous one where you don't have only the top but of course most of the team is is from is women are women. And as you may have seen, because the committee preparation preparing the COP 29 in Baku was only composed with men there was a letter that I signed together with many other women to say look you can't do that now. In 2024 you can't do that anymore. And they reacted at least they named a champion that is a woman and they try to put to put, you know, a space so now it's considered that you can't do that which is a big progress, because before it was all maybe things to have. And now, oh, you can't do that. And that's good because the perspective the way of negotiating. You know in Paris, I made a lot a lot of the success with women. Remember, I remember very well, how the Minister of Brazil, the environment minister, Isabella to share help me in the last, in the last hours. The office of South African Minister who played a very, very big role, like the ambassador was my counterpart, and was leading the g 77 and China, you know, these women were there and have many have kept relation with most of them. And it was sort of a trust building that has happened, of course, with Christiana figures as well, and Mary Robinson on the other side and, and so there was a network that has, you know, we built trust and you know at the last moment of the last you have to trust each other. And if not, you never know, you know, in agreement is so complex. And you need to finally find that you are not cheated because there is really recognition of what you need or what you would accept and it's a recognition of the constraint of everyone. And that's where I see the women in Paris in particular play the big role, and you see them now coming more and more on the on the scene of the leading roles in many, many places and I think that's such a good thing. Several things that I want to unpack from what you just said. You mentioned, first of all, Cup 29 committee in Azerbaijan, they initially nominated a an all male panel. Since then, the president has added 12 women to the to the original 29 men in that panel. It came as a shock for obvious reasons for gender equality reasons but beyond that why do we need gender equality in the negotiations in these international processes. Of course, it's not a simple way to to respond to that question. But again, if you look at how we should deal with climate. You know, there is of course a certain way of in a way playing the big powers. And in particular in this particular moment we have really as we decided in Dubai to transition away from fossil fuels. It's a, you know, we have to represent the different perspective and the different interest in a better way. What we need women is that, first of all, they were always more sensitive because of their role in the family about the health issues, for example. I can say, and my foundation in particular, but many others, and in the past, have seen that air pollution, and of course connected with fossil fuels, whatever it is through car pollution or thermal plant with coal or just a pollution of gas and oil which is really heavy when you look at the impact on the air that that the women were more, much more sensitive to the quality, the health element. And that an important discussion on climate and it was not before it was all the cost or the benefit of that solution or not. And so many of you know abstract words like CO2 quantity in the atmosphere, even if of course on the IPCC side you see a lot of women who are very good at physics and modeling, absolutely. But the element on how it connects with everyday life is really really important. The second element is a poverty element and the social dimension of it. And even in the climate movement, I must say, before that, it was still in a way a community that was really interested in technological fixes, technological targets, but less on the social element of that. And we can't ignore that. So I think it's really good to have this perspective. And anyway, just because of the reality, half of the population is women. So there is no sense of saying they should not be part of this discussion. So, but I am happy that the Azerbaijan government recognize that even if it was a little late. From what you were saying, do you think over the years this is not something that you can point a finger and say, you know, this, you know, female activists or this one person changed the way that we perceived climate issues but do you think that women have added a more human element perhaps to these issues in the sense that, as you were saying, it's not just about energy, it's not just about CO2, it's also human lives and have maybe made it a bit more real for people. I do think so, even in my own job, I think I was recognized not only because I knew the topic and I had experience, which is a sort of normal base, you know, for you to do that job. But because I have a style where I was not trying to impose a view but to begin to listen and to see where we could find a compromise. And I do think that that's a problem of the type of behavior is important and we know that gender roles produce different behavior styles that very evident, of course. So in this particular case on diplomacy, I think it's super useful because people feel always that their interests are under attack, so they are defensive. So the first step is to try to make them more comfortable about yes, their interests are well taken, and there is no, there is room to discuss. So that's really important and I'm sure I have a lot of masculine diplomats colleagues that are very good at that, but that's something in our role in society. We are more trained to do that because that's just the way we have been educated. The second element is exactly the sensitivity about the human dimension of it. We saw that on and, and, and again, you have seen that in the youth movement, you have seen that in the adaptation issues were really as they were conducted by women thinking that was the resilience is really important. So this human factor was certainly brought by women mostly. And that's interesting. Another element which I think was interesting is initially, you know, people didn't see that they could make a career in climate. That's not was very exciting when you went to government, but not a promising element. And so you see very, very, at least long time negotiators that were not normally in any, any time or all the time on the top of their delegation, but they were there for very, very, very long, because they believe in the issue. And they didn't have such a career plan that they should stay two years and then go on another job. And I saw I witnessed that that there is a sort of constant attention to these problems that has paid off finally, and you have very experienced women now in the, in the, in the field, whether it is in business, whether it is in, in the diplomacy, or in the NGO community as well. And I think that I am absolutely fascinated to see how many women's network, we have a round climate now. I think there are four or five global networks that are talking to each other to try to, in a way, bridge the differences of perspective. So that was not existing before. So something is happening. Yes. All these sites. I, that resonates with me because as, as a journalist, I am an environmental reporter and an editor and it's, you know, it's been a few years now and when I started working, I took an internship for a show on the environment and they only had girls I mean we've only had only girls and for the past two years we've had male candidates who actually want to work on the environment show. And that to me I was like something's changed. I mean something changed, and that actually having a career, a meaningful career and important career, you know, working on climate issues is something that you know young men are also interested in. So it is really interesting that you say that from, you know, what you were saying during COP 21, you talked about other women you worked with. Do you think it changed maybe the course of, you know, the historic moment of the Paris Agreement, the fact that you, you had, you know, the Brazilian environment minister working with you, I mean, without kind of blowing things out of proportion but No, of course, we should not, but maybe I think that was sort of not totally at the end but, but probably after the first week, end of the first week, we had a lot of tension, of course, the normal one between G77 and and, you know, coming from France, a developed country, a country that has a colonial past was not that easy to deal with many developing countries that could have legitimate in a way concern about the attitude and sometimes France is not can be patronizing as well in the diplomacy that's not always a case but it can happen. And so I knew that I had that handicap. And at one point in time I had a very nice tough but nice encounter was the one who was leading the G77 at Ambassador level so the South African ambassador. And we had a very interesting conversation and I show, I show her that I was really concerned about that, that I felt the handicap, and, and that I wanted her to trust me. And it happened some something happened between us, something emotional, I can, I can tell. And from that point, she trusted me. And so that makes a whole difference, even at the end where the end was particularly rocky on the last minutes of the of the negotiation and the approval of the of the text. Another example was, that was the last I, and sorry for those who have heard me telling that anecdote but at the end of the second week just a Saturday and very early in the morning. I was talking to the different groups to not to show them the tech because it has to happen a little in the general assembly of the of the Paris Agreement members or the ones who would have to approve it. And so warn them about what was in it, not for them to be surprised because that was one of the lines of the French diplomacy that we should not surprise anybody so people have to understand it has to be transparent. And you have to understand what is happening and not be surprised. And so because of course that was the last closure of the last decision that have been taken over the days. So they didn't know the final final, you know, a cut if I'm SSO. So I spent time in very early in the morning, haven't slept for many, many hours, days, maybe, and that was, I talked with a more countries were more difficult to oil exporting countries mostly. And what that's what we call the like minded developing countries. And I told them what was in the text will what they would like and I would hate, and that the best thing I could provide for them. And after a moment, that was a very, very big silent, the terrible silence, I must say. And then I said, look, I can't do better. So I think it's the best balance I can find. And if it's not that. So we cannot do the agreement we can't do it. And so, again, very long silence and at that time I was so exhausted. I said, well, it's over. I cannot do anymore. And I began to be so emotional. I've been crying just out of exhaustion. And then a woman, the ambassador for Venezuela, Claudia, get up and said, and she came to me. She took me in her arms, followed by all the ambassadors were there. And they told me, we will trust you. That has made the difference on the final day. I don't think she has not done that. And I haven't that emotional moment with them. And I had the proof afterwards, we should not have finalized this. So, yes, some time personal relation matters enormously. And that was the case. You've were hugely influential person, you know, during Cup 21, the signing of this agreement. What are the main lessons you take away from that experience, and, and you hope could inform, you know, future negotiations, which are bound to be as crucial as as you know, the agreement. So, and I'm flying to Brazil next week to work with Brazilian colleagues. I think they're very simple lessons if we don't want to have this acrimony of some groups being feeling that they have been left on the side. And so, I do think we have the, all the means to be transparent in the way and I know it's, there is a tendency to say, oh, it's good to have a text at the end of the day and say, take it or leave it. I don't think it's the best way for the resilience of the agreement. And I take the resilience of Paris agreement, even with strong decision to withdraw, even with pushback from many actors that finally nobody and even from the youth movement, the business, the IMF everybody is related to that agreement, because it has been constructed with everybody with everyone. And one after that, just at the end, when we were always, you know, people were jumping and dancing, it was just an extraordinary atmosphere on the, on the, after the approval. One young woman from Latin America, she was from Columbia told me, I didn't believe we will recognize our work in that text. And they say, we see that we see the paragraph we drafted. It's not something you have taken out of your pocket. It's a result of long hours and long effort of everybody. So my first recommendation is being on the transparent mode. And that's why we, at least that was our strategy to go along the transformation of the text each day to show that people know what was happening, no closed door discussion. I don't see that they can be useful on the day one at the last minute. Yes. But after that, everybody would read the agreement differently. They would say, no, that's, and, and, and I can say that that the danger. The good thing is a Paris argument, you see many people saying I did it. And that's fine. That's extraordinary from, you know, the president of US or Barack Obama to whoever you have many authors, you have many owners, and that, that's a success. That's really the recipe of success. So that's why I think it's very good. So listening transparency, taking in account all the interest in the most transparent way you can. And in particular, giving the, you know, the one who are most vulnerable, the lead is really important. If it's a negotiation between big powers. I don't think we have, we will have had a good ambitious enough agreement. If you can really put their these vulnerable countries at the lead which was finally what happened for the 1.5 in a way target was exactly the production of their action. I think then you make a total difference on on what you can do so that I think these elements I think are important. I don't know what the people would like to follow that. So one final question. We've been asking the same question. Every single guest. So, here's a question if you had a magic wand and could change one thing in the world for a more sustainable planet. What would you do what would it be. I would not take the beyond says things like women's leads the world, but I think it improves things. Of course, there is no magic wand. But I think if there is a, I think we have to rely on rely on the agency of people. I think that because of the politics of political economy of many decisions, we have to rely on the good information and then on the agency of the citizen all over the world. I think we have to have citizen pressing for the solutions as a safe solution for us for the planet for the humanity. And so empowerment of citizen for me is a magic wand. Thank you so much. Thank you so much for being here today and sharing your, your expertise and your story. That's been, you know, as all we all know so so influential in the climate space so thank you so much. Thank you.