Our legs are moving but are we walking?

Are climate negotiations moving forward? Yes, but at a crawl. The results of the past two COP gatherings have yielded two documents: the Copenhagen Accord and the Cancun Agreements. The Copenhagen Accord, written at COP 15, is a short document expressing the recognition that global climate change is a serious problem and the only way to address it is through serious cutbacks in emissions. It also clearly states that two degrees Celsius is the target for maximum temperature change. This in itself is not a novel idea; however, the last sentence of the document asks for “consideration of strengthening the long-term goal referencing various matters presented by the science, including in relation to temperature rises of 1.5 degrees Celsius.” The idea to cut emissions below the minimum required has not been a common trend in climate negotiations and represents a huge leap forward in international discussions. The Cancun Agreements the following year expand upon the basic themes of the Copenhagen Accord. It outlines in more detail methods for developed and developing countries to pursue and achieve their goals.

Despite the encouraging steps that countries have taken during the past two COP discussions, the negotiations get tripped up when it comes to creating a legally binding agreement. The Cancun Agreements are riddled with phrases like “requests that” and “decides to” yet all that they amount to is a stiffening in the reporting measures to improve transparency. There is no definitive numbers for targets that countries must abide by. Furthermore, as Robert Stavins blogs, the BRICS bloc (Brazil, Russian Federation, India, China, South Africa) as well as nearly sixty other Non-Annex I parties with incomes per capita higher than several low income Annex I parties are still classified as developing and thus will most likely avoid regulations in the next binding agreement. Stavins continues

Negotiations need to be ready to move forward. and fast. Image by © Randy Faris/CORBIS

to write that a more accurate term for the BRICS bloc and similar countries would be “emerging economies” rather than their current status as developing nations. Should a Kyoto Protocol-esque agreement be constructed at COP 17 that does not require developing nations to limit emissions, it would be like going for a run without shoes on; it would be painful and cause just as much harm as benefit.

Climate negotiations are definitely improving relative to the first discussions, however, that is also partly because the impacts of inaction are beginning to be more visible and identifiable, even to skeptics. The Kyoto Protocol is a warm up and the Copenhagen Accord and Cancun Agreements are merely a long water break. It is time to tighten our laces and get on the starting block for the arduous task of serious climate negotiations.