Coming together in Durban, looking on to 2015
- By Pan Jiahua
0 Comment(s)
Print
E-mail
China.org.cn, November 28, 2011
Since the Copenhagen summit concluded in Dec. 19, 2009, negotiations on climate change have been on a tenuous path.
It has been anything but easy in following the Bali Roadmap and reaching a comprehensive agreement on global emission reduction in Durban that's fair to all parties. Yet one thing is becoming clear: Although a reduction in global emissions remains necessary, and there must be a legally binding international climate agreement, reaching that agreement requires a lot longer than the projected one to two years – a more reasonable expectation may be 2015.
Because of the historical and political significance of climate change issues, no contracting parties would openly propose to suspend the talks.
However, both U.S. special envoy for climate change, Todd Stern, and E.U. commissioner for climate action, Connie Hedegaard, indicated that it would be hard to reach a legally binding agreement in Durban. Stern said the best plan would involve a major emitting nation voluntarily setting an emission-reduction target, and signing the agreement with all other major emitters. Japan, Russia and Canada said they would not continue to reduce emissions after the Kyoto Protocol expires at the end of 2012 unless all the major emitters commit to a new agreement.
Although it is nearly impossible to stay on track of the Bali Roadmap in Durban, the first climate talks in Africa has set up a framework for negotiating the technical aspects of future plans.
This framework is built to preserve progress made in future negotiations and will allow negotiating parties a level of flexibility to protect their interests while, at the same time, deepen consensus reached in the Cancun Agreement regarding funding, technology, implementation and communication. The Durban talks will also give the African host a meaningful voice in the negotiations, making others accept certain reasonable demands guarding African interests.
It should be noted that implementing the Bali Roadmap has become the most important goal in climate change negotiations since the Copenhagen conference. The second commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol aims to reduce emissions in developed countries.
However, most developed countries other than the E.U. members refused to join in with the secondary commitments, effectively creating a period of "emission reduction vacuum" after the expiration of the Kyoto Protocol at the end of 2012. Obviously, there must be a transitional arrangement to fill this gap.
The fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will produce a new report on climate change in 2014, which will require time for it to be accepted and signed by all parties. Australia and Norway have projected that it will be 2015 before a legally binding agreement on reducing emissions is put into effect.
In 2010, China exceeded Japan to become the second largest economy behind the U.S. If the trend continues to develop, China's position in climate change negotiations will become blurred and eventually be converted from that of a developing country to a developed country.
The role change means China's current proposal for developed countries will be applied on itself after 2015. In this unique position, China will be asked to assume leadership responsibilities in addressing climate change. In fact, China's promises made in the South-South cooperation on climate change have demonstrated that the country has already accepted its new role.
In the end, an agreement in 2015 means extra time to adjust for developed countries, continued struggle for developing countries, and a progress delayed for the world. Yet for a new third group – the emerging economies such as China and India – pressures have doubled with leadership responsibilities.
The author is the director of the Institute for Urban and Environmental Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.
(This post was written in Chinese and translated by Zhou Jing)
Opinion articles reflect the views of their authors, not necessarily those of China.org.cn.
Go to Forum >>0 Comment(s)