In Bringing the Copenhagen Global Climate Change Negotiations to Conclusion, John Whalley and Sean Walsh declare that prospects for a satisfactory outcome from COP 15 are daunting. I might add intimidating, overwhelming, and frightening, but that’s just me.
We’re talking about nearly 200 countries, representing 6.7 billion people, coming together to discuss, in two weeks, a response to our precarious global predicament. Overall the goal of COP15 is to establish an ambitious global climate agreement. The issues at hand however, stretch far across any conceived, demarcated political boundaries. Each country and each individual delegate of that country has a motive and many conditions that hinge their lasting participation in whatever outcome may arise. COP negotiations in the past have been criticized for their lack of tangible, lasting conclusions. This video, created using footage from the COP14 in Poznan Poland sums up these criticisms quite succinctly.
Climate Change Humor
One disheartening barrier to success in Copenhagen is the lack of consensus on the science and severity of climate change. Those who have read the Stern Report and the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC report believe that swift strong action was required… yesterday. Today it is nothing short of imperative. The Stern report labels climate change as the largest market failure and predicts that by 2050, if we continue business as usual, could produce damaging effects – numbers like 20% – to the global economy. But there are still climate skeptics, or climate rationalists who stand by the findings individuals like Roberto Mendelsohn and his claim that the Stern Report makes assumptions that inaccurately increase the gravity of climate change. How can we expect the COP to come to an international agreement when the central driver of the negotiation is being debated?
Whally and Walsh argue the unclear and open-ended negotiation mandate may also hinder the effectiveness of the Copenhagen negotiations. At COP14 in Ponzan, participants lacked a common vision for climate change action and could not reach agreement on the scale, depth and type of CO2 cuts. Whally and Walsh argue that much of the available, valuable negotiation time will be spent figuring out these details. Other technicalities require concurrence as well: what year to use for baseline data, whether to measure emissions based on levels or intensity, per capita emissions or overall emissions, production emissions or consumption emissions- the list is very, very long. And then there is the idea of ‘common but differentiated’ responsibilities and determining what exactly this phrase involves. I think Wally and Walsh depict the core of this issue when they write, “In other words, to what extent does development toward economic, social, cultural, and other key goals within a country take precedence over environmental considerations for each country? A difficult ethical question to be sure, especially when the last few hundred years of any given countries history also weigh into any discussion on this question” (261).
The lack of dispute resolution and enforcement is also a source of concern. Currently there is a backlog of countries with unfulfilled Kyoto agreements. If the backlogs are dismissed from future commitments, countries like India, who call on Annex 1 countries to lead the way, will not be happy. If they are incorporated into future requirements, those who failed to comply will be weary to agree, as most likely, they will face discouraging reductions.
The question also arises, if the Kyoto Protocol didn’t work, why would a Copenhagen agreement be anymore sucessful? The overall perception of climate change severity and agreement on international goals for the negotiations will play a significant role in ensuring post COP15 outcomes are successful. Unfortunately these issues are still up in the air.
The Skeleton- is Copenhagen next?
I think daunting accurately describes the challenges the world seeks to face in Copenhagen. We are optimistic if we think that the skeleton of an international climate change agreement can be effectively debated and assembled by 192 nations in fourteen long days. And we must remember that a skeleton then needs skin and clothes… Daunting
Whalley, J., and S. Walsh. 2009. “Bringing the Copenhagen Global Climate Change Negotiations to Conclusion.” CESifo Economic Studies 55(2):255-285.
Tags: climate change, common but differentiated, COP15 Resources
