Copenhagen – a lost last chance?

It will not have escaped even the most cynical of the population on environmental issues that there has been a meeting going on in Copenhagen over the last two weeks regarding the future of the worlds climate.

As Copenhagen ends, the question is whether it brought the beginning of hope, or the end. What “hope” meant was clear; to secure a deal that would put our global society on course to prevent “dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system”.

These are not my words but the words of the UN climate convention (UNFCCC) – agreed at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro way back in 1992. At a time when a global agreement appeared to be achievable. The final mandate to reach a new agreement was agreed in Bali two years ago after the last report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) appeared to convince governments that dangerous “anthropogenic interference with the climate system” was not being prevented.

There were various key commitments from Bali up for agreement including:

“A shared vision for long-term co-operative action, including a long-term global goal for emission reductions.”

Did they agree it? No.

“Measurable, reportable and verifiable nationally appropriate mitigation commitments or actions… by all developed country parties.”

Did they agree it? Yes, except for the US  – no surprise there.

“Nationally appropriate mitigation actions by developing country parties… in a measurable, reportable and verifiable manner.”

No; unless “verifying” means “believing what a country tells you it is doing” (perhaps what they were actually after?).

“Improved access to adequate, predictable and sustainable financial resources… and the provision of new and additional resources.”

Yes – Partially. There is money pledged, and a fund to run it. Whether it’s “predictable and sustainable” is debateable. The short-term “fast-start” finance should be, as it’s mainly from the pockets of Japan, the EU and US; the longer-term stuff depends on mechanisms that don’t yet exist and might encounter political obstacles (particularly in the US).

Where things go from here isn’t clear at the moment; and even people who have followed this issue for years don’t appear to have ready answers. What appears to have happened is that the UN process was effectively ambushed by countries that perhaps don’t want there to be a UN process?

Which countries they might be doesn’t take a genius to work out; look for ones that haven’t signed up to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea or ratified the UN biodiversity convention, and another that does not on principle allow international interference of anything.

If  the deal had been adopted, it would be a UN issue. But it wasn’t, because there was no consensus; instead the governments only decided to “take note” of the accord. So if it turns out not to be a UN agreement (not clear yet), then  the UN climate convention could effectively be dead in the water as the  world’s instrument for controlling emissions. 

So this in effect could be a free-standing arrangement effectively decided by the 26 countries involved in the drafting. It could therefore mean that a select group of countries – the G20, will basically decide what they want to do, and then do it. In effect therefore the smaller nations have been “hung out to dry”, there has been no real negotiation on targets for developed nations.  Poor countries therefore lose out from a transition away from the UNFCCC, because its mechanisms are supposed to bring them access to clean technology and money for forests and climate protection.

There has therefore been a massive change of direction over the last two weeks.

Approaching the summit, it had appeared that all countries wanted a new global climate deal under the UNFCCC umbrella. However the conclusion of this summit has left many people stunned. As Chinese and US leaders and their entourages flew in, took over the agenda and emerged with what was basically their own private deal!

Does Copenhagen, therefore mark the beginning of a new global climate regime as was hoped? No, in effect it is  the end of the vision of a global, negotiated climate control!

Also are we now seeing the Worlds two largest economies now starting to work together to protect their own interests?