Monday November 9, 2009

Conflict deepens before Copenhagen

Global Trends by MARTIN KHOR

There is a continued attempt to shift the burden of responsibility to developing countries, and in violation of principles of the UNFCCC and Bali Action plan.

THE United Nations climate talks in Barcelona last week ended disappointingly as there was little progress on the key political issues, and a few dramatic events that showed the depth of the impasse.

It was the last session before the Copenhagen conference in December, and it lost the last chance to close the gaps on the many outstanding issues.

But it was not all doom and gloom. There was advance in clarifying certain matters as for example, some new texts were discussed in finance and technology issues.

They did not bridge the differences, but helped countries clarify their positions and thus enabled deci-sions on key issues to be made in Copenhagen such as the setting up of a fund inside the UN climate convention, and the setting up of a new executive body to decide on technology transfer issues within the United Nations Framework on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

However, differences on some key issues remained and in some cases deepened, which is not a positive sign for Copenhagen.

First, is the future of the Kyoto Protocol. What was signalled in Bangkok in early October was confirmed in Barcelona that almost all the developed countries have decided to abandon the Protocol.

They apparently want to establish a new agreement, which is likely to be a climb down from the internationally legally binding regime that was Kyoto, to a collection of national efforts and peer review of performance, in the new agreement.

The developing countries made clear in Barcelona that they would not accept this climb-down and that the developed countries have to make clear they will remain in the Kyoto Protocol and seriously negotiate a second commitment period starting in 2013 in Copenhagen.

Second, is the very low level of ambition of developed countries in emission reduction. Developing countries have called for an aggregate cut of at least 40% by 2020 compared to 1990.

The latest figures revealed at Bar-celona is that the national announcements amount to only 16% to 23% (excluding the US, Secretariat data) and 11% to17% (including the US, according to an estimate of the small island states).

The developing countries are aghast at such low levels of commitment, which do not form a basis of an environmentally ambitious outcome in Copenhagen.

Third, is the continued attempt to shift the burden of responsibility to developing countries, and in violation of the principles and provisions of the UNFCCC and the Bali Action Plan.

Developed countries at Barcelona proposed to blur the distinction between the differentiated responsibilities of developed countries (mitigation commitments that are legally binding) and developing countries (mitigation actions enabled and supported by finance and technology).

The attempts included getting developing countries to adhere to new and broad reporting and verification procedures similar to developed countries, to get some “ad-vanced developing countries” to adhere to reduction emission targets, and to get developing countries in general to have emissions “deviation from business as usual by 15% to 30%”.

These were not agreed to in Bali nor are they in the Convention’s provisions.

Fourth, the adequate means to enable developing countries to take actions are still not forthcoming.

On finance, the developed countries have yet as a group to respond to the finance proposals of the developing countries which rage from 1% to 5% of the GNP.

On technology transfer, there is a reluctance by developed countries to agree to the setting up of an executive body to decide on technology issues and to effect technology transfer.

An advisory group is not good enough, especially since there has been very little tech-transfer achieved under the Convention for the past decade and a half.

Fifth, there is a difference over the shared vision and a long-term global goal for emission reduction.

Some developed countries confirmed their proposal for a global 50% emissions cut by 2050 compared to 1990, and a 80% cut for themselves.

However, what was not stated is that this requires developing countries to also cut by 20% in absolute terms and 60% in per capita terms. Some developing countries have to cut by significantly more than 60% from the 2009 level.

Thus, the “burden” in percentage terms is almost the same. Yet the massive finance and technology transfers that may enable developing countries to take on a part of this challenge is not forthcoming.

The figures have to be discussed more, the developed countries have to undertake “negative emissions” (achieve net emissions reduction, below zero) and the finance and technology issues have to be resolved beforehand.

The above are some of the issues to be resolved if Copenhagen is to be a success.

Whatever the nature or form of the outcome (whether a full deal or a framework of a deal, or a decision to continue the talks), the aspects of environment, equity and North-South balance have to be taken care of.

At the closing plenary in Barcelona, China’s delegation chief Su Wei gave a direct message. “To those developed countries who are standing there waiting for developing countries to act, please look ahead,” he said.

“We, the developing countries, have already left you behind, you cannot use developing countries as an excuse for your inaction any more.

“Please wake up and see that Copenhagen is just miles away, you have to get running in order to catch up. Otherwise, you will fail in the race to Copenhagen and beyond.”

India’s special envoy on climate change Shyam Saran rejected attempts to already declare failure at Barcelona and downgrade expectations from Copenhagen.

“To talk about a political agreement instead of a legally binding outcome, to suggest that we may be able to achieve some results only by the end of 2010, these are prophecies which we must dismiss,” he said.

The warnings from the two largest developing countries indicate that the Copenhagen conference will see a major battle, unless informal meetings and talks among some countries help to bridge the gaps.

News

Monday November 9, 2009

Conflict deepens before Copenhagen

Global Trends by MARTIN KHOR

Latest Jobs from Star-Jobs