COPENHAGEN SUMMIT - A STEP AHEAD OR BEHIND?
Introduction
The summit of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Copenhagen, Denmark, from 7- 18 December 2009, was the largest gathering on global climate[1]. The UN global climate conference, the biggest in the history of mankind for the cause of the environment, it witnessed the participation of over 130 heads of government and states from around the world[2] .The global climate summit had created remarkable media hype around the world. But is this all the summit would be remembered for? It was the biggest platform set for the whole world to unite as one and fight the battle but the failure of world leaders to concur on the decisive points of the conference has diminished its status. Initially everyone said the important summit that took place after two years of preparation must not fail. But the series of negotiations and discussions proved that the division between the developed and developing countries remained. The developed countries, which are responsible for the greenhouse gas emission and that way for the global warming and climate change expressed their readiness to reduce their carbon use. But at the same time, they were compelling developing countries like India to reduce their use of carbon to a greater extent.
The summit
Copenhagen summit was an opportunity for collective amends. The summit which took place from 7th December to 18th December was on the brink of collapse soon after it started. Among many factors, the continued difference of opinion between the United States and China emerged as a major cause of concern. The commanding attitude of the host country to formulate a declaration ignoring the poor and developed nations did not help the summit either.
Among the biggest hurdles in the way of the climate change agreement was how to achieve adequate cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, in particular from big polluters like the United States and China. It was equally difficult to secure commitments from wealthy countries to pledge hundreds of billions of Dollars in financing to poor countries[3]. The negotiations at Copenhagen were so litigious because of the very real impact the proposals will have, not only for the environment, but also on national economies. The four emerging economies – Brazil, South Africa, India and China, constituting the informal BASIC group – unlike at earlier UN conferences played an absolute key role in Copenhagen.
During the summit US pledged to help build a 100 billion dollar annual fund by 2020, to bail out the poor countries coping with the impacts of climate change. This gesture of US was appreciated by all. A demand for bailout packages for poor countries by developed countries was also raised at the summit.US further urged all the participating countries to compromise on key demands in order to seal an international accord in Copenhagen, but didn't commit to anything other than the global fund .India appealed the developed countries to deliver with the guidelines of Kyoto Protocol. It was stressed that any new global accord announced at Copenhagen would go against international opinion if it dilutes the Kyoto Protocol. India advocated for continued negotiations until 2010 for a globally acceptable climate agreement. The African nations also advocated for the extension of Kyoto Protocol, which is expiring in the next two years. The Burmese Foreign Minister Nyan Win also supported the continuation of the Kyoto Protocol. He claimed that Burma was one of the most climate affected countries in the globe.
The accord
The proposal for an accord in pursuit of the ultimate objective of the summit was presented in Copenhagen. The Copenhagen Accord which is operational immediately, in brief states as follows[4]:
1. To achieve the ultimate objective of the Convention to stabilize greenhouse gas concentration in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. It sets the goal of limiting global temperature increases to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit)
2. Cooperate with each other in achieving the peaking of global and national emissions as soon as possible, recognizing that the time frame for peaking and bearing in mind that social and economic development and poverty eradication are the first and overriding priorities of developing countries and that a low-emission development strategy is indispensable to sustainable development.
2. Cooperate with each other in achieving the peaking of global and national emissions as soon as possible, recognizing that the time frame for peaking and bearing in mind that social and economic development and poverty eradication are the first and overriding priorities of developing countries and that a low-emission development strategy is indispensable to sustainable development.
3. Developed countries shall provide adequate, predictable and sustainable financial resources, technology and capacity-building to support the implementation of adaptation action in developing countries.
4. Certain nations to commit to implementation of individually or jointly the quantified economy-wide emissions targets for 2020 and thereby further strengthen the emissions reductions initiated by the Kyoto Protocol. Delivery of reductions and financing by developed countries will be measured, reported and verified in accordance with existing and any further guidelines adopted by the Conference of the Parties, and will ensure that accounting of such targets and finance is rigorous, robust and transparent.
5. To enable the mobilization of financial resources from developed countries.
6. Developing countries, especially those with low emitting economies should be provided incentives to continue to develop on a low emission pathway.
7. Scaled up, new and additional, predictable and adequate funding as well as improved access shall be provided to developing countries.
8. To pledge $30 billion between 2010 and 2012 and $100 billion a year by 2020 for developing countries to help adapt to and mitigate the effects of climate change
9.To establish a Technology Mechanism to accelerate technology development and transfer in support of action on adaptation and mitigation that will be guided by a country-driven approach and be based on national circumstances and priorities.
The accord "recognizes" the scientific case for keeping temperature rises to no more than 2C but does not contain commitments to emissions reductions to achieve that goal[5]. As widely expected, all references to 1.5C in past drafts were removed at the last minute; the earlier 2050 goal of reducing global CO2 emissions by 80% was also dropped. The agreement also set up a forestry deal which is hoped would significantly reduce deforestation in return for cash.
The accord was brokered between China, South Africa, India, Brazil and the US. It is not clear whether it would be adopted by all 192 countries in the full plenary session[6]. It disappointed African and other vulnerable countries which had been holding out for deeper emission cuts to hold the global temperature rise to 1.5C this century. It was also opposed by Cuba, Sudan, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Venezuela, Tuvalu, Costa Rica etc. Even the host country showed reservation to the deal. Japan, Norway, and European Union nations came out in support of the proposal. The British Prime Minister Gordon Brown claimed the deal as a beginning was acceptable to him.
The achievements
The balancing of interests between those who want to preserve their standards of living and the emerging economies that want to soon reach such levels of prosperity appears to be impossible. As climate change is a growing concern for most nations, a lot of hopes were tied to the summit. But to the disappointment of all, no grand promises were made at the summit. But it cannot be ruled out as a total disaster either. On certain points Copenhagen Summit marked a new way forward.
Firstly, UN’s efforts towards global climate for over a decade now have been plagued by the divide between developed and developing countries. As per Kyoto protocol, only developed countries committed themselves to cutting emissions; developing countries made no such promises. Thus being the main reason as to why Kyoto failed, because America would not accept a treaty that required nothing of countries such as China, and China insisted that the rich world should bear most of the necessary costs of constraining emissions. At Copenhagen developed countries were determined to move beyond this structure; many developing countries to hang on to it. It was the obstacle on which the conference foundered. However the Copenhagen accord made some progress towards reducing this divide. Developing and developed, countries signed up to it, and have agreed to an international role in monitoring any cuts they commit themselves to, which is a vital allowance.
The second reason for hope is that Copenhagen’s failure would now encourage the development of political structures better suited to meet the challenge. Climate change is not just a grand problem but is a complex one. It crosses the boundaries which normally define our world; from farming to forestry, shipping to sovereignty, all sorts of interests are brought together in new ways that demand new actions.
The conference has made an impact by bringing along to the negotiating table, other nations which did not sign the Kyoto Protocol agreement. “For instance, America did not sign the agreement but today, America has taken a commitment and has agreed on 17 per cent emission cut.”This definitely can be rightly said as the achievement of Copenhagen accord.
Conclusion
The Copenhagen climate change conference will no doubt go down in history as one global gathering that generated so much hope and attention from every corner of the earth but was unable to deliver on any of the key issues at stake. Copenhagen held out hopes of a done-deal on climate change. Though World leaders rose from the Copenhagen Conference with a political agreement to cooperate in reducing the emission of greenhouse gases, the deal had no binding instrument to ensure its implementation.. The only thing about Copenhagen is that there is a deal in Copenhagen and it has immediate operational effect.
By
Sneha.C.M
[1] http://en.cop15.dk/
[2] http://newsblaze.com/story/20100101164752nava.nb/topstory.html
[3] http://www.grist.org/article/2009-12-17-clinton-offers-climate-aid-to-poor-countries-with-strings/
[4] http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/20091218/climate-change-copenhagen-draft-text.html
[5] http://www.yalibnan.com/tag/climate-change/
[6] http://www.focus-fen.net/index.php?id=n203874&chain=1
