Looking forward to COP16
Wednesday, 29 September 2010
Shafiqul Alam
The endeavour being put into the Sixteenth Conference of the Parties (COP16) under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which is scheduled to be held in Mexico from November 29 to December 10, gives no guarantee of success. Connie Hedegaard, the EU's Climate Action Commissioner, has already said reaching an agreement will be tough, and sights might be more realistically set on South Africa in 2011. While Copenhagen welcomed 128 heads of state, Mexico is expected to be low key in comparison. It may lack the international standing to announce an agreement.
On the other hand, Mexico is probably in a better position to broker a deal than Denmark which brought its own strong, European views to the table. And there seems to be some movement on the problem centring the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR), with the UK and other EU nations reportedly being prepared to consider further emissions cuts -- a key request of developing nations.
It is not known how the new Secretary-General of the UNFCCC, who is yet to be named, will affect the process. It is an important position and personality could be crucial to any outcome.
Some positives of the Copenhagen Accord:
l Adoption of the global target of limiting overall temperature increase to 2oC compared to pre-industrial levels
l Commitment by Annex 1 (developed) countries to register with the UN their proposed mid-term emissions reductions targets by 31st January 2010
l Commitment by non-Annex 1 (developing) countries to register with the UN the actions proposed to help mitigate climate change
l Agreement by Annex and non-Annex 1 countries to submit their actions to a system of international Measurement, Reporting and Verification
l Recognition of the problem of deforestation (responsible for 17% of global emissions) and acceptance of REDD+ projects
l Developed countries' commitment to finance a package of $30 billion for the period of 2010-2012 and goal of $100 billion per annum by 2020
l Agreement on establishment of a country driven mechanism to accelerate
Drawbacks of the Copenhagen Accord:
l No firm measures on how the 2oC target (considered to be ambitious) will be achieved
l Registry process for emissions reductions targets and actions is yet voluntary and not legally binding; an internationally accepted compliance mechanism like the Kyoto Protocol will be needed
l Little clarity was provided in respect of new market mechanisms for Post-2012
l There was nothing that met the call from business, the financial sector and investors for long-term policy and regulatory frameworks to provide clarity on which to base investment decisions
l No deadline to reach a legally binding agreement
l The outcome of COP 15 (The Copenhagen Accord) is an 'in principle' kind of an agreement without any operational details
l UNFCCC need to set international rules for development of these operational details till COP 16 in Mexico
l We need to understand that all this takes time; after all Kyoto protocol was not born overnight
l The countries pledges by 31st January 2010 will only be a starting point for a long series of negotiations to follow
l 2010 remains a crucial year for international climate change process
Despite its many flaws, the United Nations is the only feasible venue we have for such a debate. As has often been said, democracy is inherently messy, all the more so when it goes international. It is up to the world's major polluters to put aside their national interests for a moment. If we are to have any more luck with the coming climate change negotiations, they will need to be about the real issues, not the thinly veiled assertions of power that they have been to date.
.......................................
An engineer, the writer can be reached at e-mail : shafiqul0032@yahoo.com
The endeavour being put into the Sixteenth Conference of the Parties (COP16) under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which is scheduled to be held in Mexico from November 29 to December 10, gives no guarantee of success. Connie Hedegaard, the EU's Climate Action Commissioner, has already said reaching an agreement will be tough, and sights might be more realistically set on South Africa in 2011. While Copenhagen welcomed 128 heads of state, Mexico is expected to be low key in comparison. It may lack the international standing to announce an agreement.
On the other hand, Mexico is probably in a better position to broker a deal than Denmark which brought its own strong, European views to the table. And there seems to be some movement on the problem centring the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR), with the UK and other EU nations reportedly being prepared to consider further emissions cuts -- a key request of developing nations.
It is not known how the new Secretary-General of the UNFCCC, who is yet to be named, will affect the process. It is an important position and personality could be crucial to any outcome.
Some positives of the Copenhagen Accord:
l Adoption of the global target of limiting overall temperature increase to 2oC compared to pre-industrial levels
l Commitment by Annex 1 (developed) countries to register with the UN their proposed mid-term emissions reductions targets by 31st January 2010
l Commitment by non-Annex 1 (developing) countries to register with the UN the actions proposed to help mitigate climate change
l Agreement by Annex and non-Annex 1 countries to submit their actions to a system of international Measurement, Reporting and Verification
l Recognition of the problem of deforestation (responsible for 17% of global emissions) and acceptance of REDD+ projects
l Developed countries' commitment to finance a package of $30 billion for the period of 2010-2012 and goal of $100 billion per annum by 2020
l Agreement on establishment of a country driven mechanism to accelerate
Drawbacks of the Copenhagen Accord:
l No firm measures on how the 2oC target (considered to be ambitious) will be achieved
l Registry process for emissions reductions targets and actions is yet voluntary and not legally binding; an internationally accepted compliance mechanism like the Kyoto Protocol will be needed
l Little clarity was provided in respect of new market mechanisms for Post-2012
l There was nothing that met the call from business, the financial sector and investors for long-term policy and regulatory frameworks to provide clarity on which to base investment decisions
l No deadline to reach a legally binding agreement
l The outcome of COP 15 (The Copenhagen Accord) is an 'in principle' kind of an agreement without any operational details
l UNFCCC need to set international rules for development of these operational details till COP 16 in Mexico
l We need to understand that all this takes time; after all Kyoto protocol was not born overnight
l The countries pledges by 31st January 2010 will only be a starting point for a long series of negotiations to follow
l 2010 remains a crucial year for international climate change process
Despite its many flaws, the United Nations is the only feasible venue we have for such a debate. As has often been said, democracy is inherently messy, all the more so when it goes international. It is up to the world's major polluters to put aside their national interests for a moment. If we are to have any more luck with the coming climate change negotiations, they will need to be about the real issues, not the thinly veiled assertions of power that they have been to date.
.......................................
An engineer, the writer can be reached at e-mail : shafiqul0032@yahoo.com