Jennifer Ramos '11 interviews Momoudu Nije of the Gambian Delegation
Something that has caught my attention as I was interviewing one of Gambia’s delegates Momodou Njie, is that most of us have been focusing solely on common but differentiated responsibilities and what it means, when its actually, as quoted by Nije from the preamble of the UNFCCC, “Acknowledging that the global nature of climate change calls for the widest possible cooperation by all countries and their participation in an effective and appropriate international response, in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities and their social and economic conditions.” The idea of “respective capabilities, in my opinion, has been overlooked by many. Njie’s point of the respective capabilities being an important aspect of this idea of “common but differentiated responsibilities” was interesting, and I feel that yes, countries should participate based on their capability, and not be solely given responsibilities based on whether they are Annex I, Annex II, or Non Annex I countries.
During my interview our Saleem Huq, I began to see this concept of common but differentiated responsibilities and “respective capabilities” change. I found it interesting on how he pointed out that this idea should shift from a country base, to an individual base. He used an amazing example, stating that people who fly internationally, to and from any country whether developed or developing countries, should pay an additional $5 to $10 that would go towards a mitigation and adaptation fund that would help countries being immediately affected, as well as those countries who are very vulnerable to climate change, shifting the focus from the country to the individual, because those that can afford international flights obviously are not the poorest of the poor, and should be able to pay a small fee to help with a BIG issue.
I agree with both men, I think countries should play their part, with respect to theirs, and others capabilities, and I also feel that people should begin working on individual levels. Still, there are debate as to who should be doing what and by how much. During a press conference on Tuesday, December 8, 2009, the Chinese the Deputy Head of the Chinese delegation, Su Wei, argued that “The targets proposed by China were in line with UNFCCC frameworks, Su Wei noted according to the Nigerian daily This Day, and added: ‘The EU position cannot be justified…. The [Kyoto] protocol among other UNFCCC agreements stipulate clearly what developed and developing countries should do.'” Even though I do agree that the US and EU should aim to reduce more, but I also feel that this way of thinking, in terms of continue to divide responsibilities solely between developed and developing countries, could potentially hinder the process of creating and signing of a new agreement. In my opinion, the Kyoto Protocol has not been successful, and we need to change the protocol, creating a new agreement in Copenhagen, and figure out how it will be implementing during next years COP16 meeting in Mexico. Holding an agreement off is NOT an option.
Tags: China, common but, common but differentiated responsibilities, Kyoto to Copenhagen, student-citizens
The Association for the Advancement of Higher Education (AASHE) has featured student and higher education participation and observations at the COP15 for the duration of the conference and in to the coming spring. Read the full bulletin here.
Connect to COP15 from AASHE Homepage 12.8.09
The Dickinson College blog (hey- that’s us!) is featured as a way to gain a student (and higher education) perspective on the conference proceedings.
But your voice is important too. A two-way exchange between private sectors and national governing bodies ensuring values and voices are represented at all levels of the negotiations.
Write to us here (kyoto2copenhagen@gmail.com) with thoughts to pass along to conference participants, or use one of the following campaigns.
Everytime when the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities” is being discussed, people always go back to the topic of finance and technology transfers. However, in terms of technology, there exists an issue of intellectual property rights.
Technology transfer has been seen as a barrier by developing countries with the existence of IPRs. Even though developing countries have proposed the idea to exempt climate-related technologies in their countries, developed countries are strongly against the proposal. To successfully ensure developing countries’ ability to tackle the climate change problem, technology is essential. Here developing countries are not asking for a lot of technology transfer since it is very costly. They hope developed countries would be willing to help out with building technologies in developing countries by transfering some technology skills so that developing countries could replicate them. It is just like developing countries need help from developed countries, but developed countries cannot help them forever. They need to teach them and let them develop the technologies and add their own input into it.
Tags: technology transfer
Dr. Sumaya ZakiEldeen at the COP13 in 2007
A little over an hour ago I interviewed Dr. Sumaya ZakiEldeen, a member of Sudan’s delegation and a professor at Khartoum University, along with Phil Rothrock and Doni Hoffman. While discussing Sudan’s position and her current work in capacity building, she called attention to the disparities in the resources and time allocated to climate change mitigation as opposed to adaptation. Currently, the effects of climate change are being felt most severely in developing countries, who tend to lack the resources and capacity to adapt to the changes. However, climate policy has paid comparatively little attention to adaptation, and in particular to helping poorer countries cope with climate change through the transfer of technologies, capacity building and financing of adaptation initiatives.
Her main concern regarding the outcome of the Copenhagen negotiations was how to get Annex I countries (developed countries that have ratified the Kyoto protocol) to provide stronger support for adaptation in a systematic way. Because developing countries have a historical responsibility for carbon emissions, it is necessary for them to be committed to sustaining adaptation. Unless developing countries begin to receive ‘real support’, coping with changes in climate will continue to be an impossible task.
Tags: adaptation, common but differentiated responsibilities, COP15 Resources, developing countries, Sudan
This semester at Dickinson I took a course about Comparative Law. All semester we studied the differences and similarities between legal systems of different nations. One author we read, Patrick Glenn, suggests that by studying an individual nation’s legal systems and traditions, one can uncover “truth.”
Since I have been at the Cop-15 here in Denmark, I’ve thought a lot about Comparative Law. Today I sat in the main Plenary session (which, for those who don’t know, is comparable to a full session of Congress but larger) and watched the official party delegates debate in front of me. Swaziland’s laws are entirely different from China’s, yet both countries came together to discuss a policy of global significance such as climate change. China and the United States have vastly different legal systems, yet both are present to negotiate. Of course policy positions and interests will differ, but these countries Plenary delegate seats were filled.
Does the mere fact that these countries are present at Cop-15 despite differences point to any fundamental “truth?@ I think so. At the very least these delegates and their staff are making an effort to better mankind’s position. It is TRUE that no matter our nationality, we are internally motivated for progress. How “progress” is defined, however, varies.
As a citizen of Hopenhagen for the next two weeks, and as a student of Comparative Law, I aim to determine what type of “progress” is best.
Tags: Hopenhagen, International cooperation, Kyoto to Copenhagen
Your Comments