Climate change: in Durban, no obligation for China, India or anyone else
For the first time, all major polluters, United States, China and India reach an agreement, but without any ceiling. A binding agreement is put off to 2015. For CIDSE, an alliance of Catholic development agencies, “Much more needs to be done”.
Durban (AsiaNews) – The United Nations conference on climate ended yesterday in Durban, South Africa, with an agreement that lays down the groundwork for a new global accord that will involve the major polluting nations, including China and India, by 2020. The decision by the two Asian nations to move towards an agreement with “legal force” is important because China and India have become two of the three most polluting nations in the world since the signing of the Kyoto Protocol in 1997, which Beijing nor New Delhi ratified in 2002 and entered into force in 2005. Delegates in Durban have agreed to a process leading to a treaty in 2015 that would come into force in 2020.
“How do I give a blank check and give a legally binding agreement to sign away the rights of 1.2 billion people and many other people in the developing world? Is that equity?” said India’s Environment Minister Jayanthi Natarajan who refused a compulsory ceiling on green house gases.
“This is a new arrangement, and we all support the serious decisions made at this conference which demonstrated that a multinational mechanism is functioning to address climate change,” Chinese envoy Xie Zhenhua said.
Greenpeace China campaigner Li Yan spoke about China's role at Durban. “China should play a bigger role in breaking the deadlocks in climate talks and China has to be prepared domestically for accepting a global binding deal in a few years' time.”
Environmentalists and many poor nations vulnerable to global warming criticised the outcome, an opinion shared by Catholic environmentalists. For the latter, the new deal in Durban represents a small step in the right direction, but does not protect the poor.
For CIDSE, an international alliance of Catholic development agencies, the Durban agreement does not deliver enough to prevent dangerous climate change and its impacts on developing countries, such as drought, flooding, cyclones and the social consequences for people, like food shortages and mass migration.
At the Conference of the Parties (COP), exhausted government representatives finally agreed a document more than 24 hours into extra time. The incremental gains of the new package move the negotiations forward but are not sufficient to safeguard the most vulnerable countries already feeling some of the negative effects of climate change, or ensure global average temperatures stay below the crucial consensus safety limit of 2 degrees Celsius.
The CIDSE sees the final Durban agreement as a step towards building a global climate regime that would include implementing the Green Climate Fund as a governing instrument for climate finance.
Despite these important elements, the lack of political ambition on mitigation and finance put climate justice and vulnerable communities further at risk, when they are the least responsible of current unsustainable levels of green house gas (GHG) emissions.
“This African COP raised a lot of expectations from developing countries all over the world. Developed countries had the responsibility to answer this call for climate justice. These agreements are a first step, but unfortunately, they are too small to meet the needs of the poorest countries. Much more needs to be done,” CIDSE’s Secretary General Bernd Nilles said.
“The Kyoto Protocol was not destroyed in Durban, and future potential for a deal on legally binding emissions reduction is still possible, but there is still no clarity on the length or on the ambition of the emissions reductions of this second commitment period. We need to rapidly bridge the gap between what is being done and what scientific consensus says is necessary to prevent damaging climate impacts,” he added.
The decision on a global agreement on emissions reductions for all countries is an important step, but some concerns remain unaddressed. A global agreement on emissions reduction will only contribute to solve the climate crisis if it is really legally binding and it will only be fair if the emissions reductions targets are set on the basis of each country's historical contribution to current GHG levels.
The implementation of the Green Climate Fund is an important step towards an efficient tool for climate adaptation and climate mitigation for developing countries, but the Fund will be of no help if there is no reliable and predictable money housed within it.
Indeed, developed countries still have to identify a set of sources of long-term finance, including innovative finance, to fill the fund and this has not yet been finalised, and it will not be agreed until the conference in Qatar next year.
“It is the responsibility of developed countries to give guarantees on the sources that are going to fill the Green Climate Fund.”
“How do I give a blank check and give a legally binding agreement to sign away the rights of 1.2 billion people and many other people in the developing world? Is that equity?” said India’s Environment Minister Jayanthi Natarajan who refused a compulsory ceiling on green house gases.
“This is a new arrangement, and we all support the serious decisions made at this conference which demonstrated that a multinational mechanism is functioning to address climate change,” Chinese envoy Xie Zhenhua said.
Greenpeace China campaigner Li Yan spoke about China's role at Durban. “China should play a bigger role in breaking the deadlocks in climate talks and China has to be prepared domestically for accepting a global binding deal in a few years' time.”
Environmentalists and many poor nations vulnerable to global warming criticised the outcome, an opinion shared by Catholic environmentalists. For the latter, the new deal in Durban represents a small step in the right direction, but does not protect the poor.
For CIDSE, an international alliance of Catholic development agencies, the Durban agreement does not deliver enough to prevent dangerous climate change and its impacts on developing countries, such as drought, flooding, cyclones and the social consequences for people, like food shortages and mass migration.
At the Conference of the Parties (COP), exhausted government representatives finally agreed a document more than 24 hours into extra time. The incremental gains of the new package move the negotiations forward but are not sufficient to safeguard the most vulnerable countries already feeling some of the negative effects of climate change, or ensure global average temperatures stay below the crucial consensus safety limit of 2 degrees Celsius.
The CIDSE sees the final Durban agreement as a step towards building a global climate regime that would include implementing the Green Climate Fund as a governing instrument for climate finance.
Despite these important elements, the lack of political ambition on mitigation and finance put climate justice and vulnerable communities further at risk, when they are the least responsible of current unsustainable levels of green house gas (GHG) emissions.
“This African COP raised a lot of expectations from developing countries all over the world. Developed countries had the responsibility to answer this call for climate justice. These agreements are a first step, but unfortunately, they are too small to meet the needs of the poorest countries. Much more needs to be done,” CIDSE’s Secretary General Bernd Nilles said.
“The Kyoto Protocol was not destroyed in Durban, and future potential for a deal on legally binding emissions reduction is still possible, but there is still no clarity on the length or on the ambition of the emissions reductions of this second commitment period. We need to rapidly bridge the gap between what is being done and what scientific consensus says is necessary to prevent damaging climate impacts,” he added.
The decision on a global agreement on emissions reductions for all countries is an important step, but some concerns remain unaddressed. A global agreement on emissions reduction will only contribute to solve the climate crisis if it is really legally binding and it will only be fair if the emissions reductions targets are set on the basis of each country's historical contribution to current GHG levels.
The implementation of the Green Climate Fund is an important step towards an efficient tool for climate adaptation and climate mitigation for developing countries, but the Fund will be of no help if there is no reliable and predictable money housed within it.
Indeed, developed countries still have to identify a set of sources of long-term finance, including innovative finance, to fill the fund and this has not yet been finalised, and it will not be agreed until the conference in Qatar next year.
“It is the responsibility of developed countries to give guarantees on the sources that are going to fill the Green Climate Fund.”
.png)
See also
Tensions between Seoul and Pyongyang rise as Cold War fears cast a shadow over Korea
12/02/2016 15:14
12/02/2016 15:14
UN reports 2020 was the hottest year in Asia (INFOGRAPHIC)
26/10/2021 16:31
26/10/2021 16:31
Youth4Climate, Asian voices for the planet
30/09/2021 18:00
30/09/2021 18:00
