Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Road to Copenhagen Climate Deal : With or Without India and China?


ejustice July 2009

Dr. Avilash Roul


The coming December Copenhagen climate meeting will definitely clinch the replacement deal for the Kyoto Protocol. The high profile climate issue must settle a deal from all government negotiators although it seems as of now a long miles to go. However, the basic rudiments of the Copenhagen Protocol remain unanswered such as emission reduction target for the industrialized countries, willingness of developing countries such as China and India limit the level of emission, modalities of financing for reduction of emissions and adapting to the impacts of climate change and managing these finances. Will that be really enough to tackle the climate change?




Will major developing countries like India and China agree to cut their share of emissions? To address these basic questions, the government representatives met in Bonn, in first week of June this year. In addition, forthcoming Bangkok meeting in September is being under full swing and also the Special New York meeting before the General Assembly meeting despite some controversies of logistics. The road to Copenhagen is still open but bumpy.



The Bonn talks which held in June found new allies and new coalition building. Since the Kyoto Protocol legally being implemented, the China and India factors have been keep coming in frequent interval even on the side line of all climate talks. The China and India are, nevertheless, key actors in any global deal to tackle climate change. Although COP-14 in Poznan saw the attempts to break the unity of G77-China, the coming Bangkok meeting will be a tougher negotiating playing field. It has been rare to see the Chinese delegations strongly support the Indian point of view as seen in the closing of the Poznan talks.



The last December Poznan talks remained unfinished to achieve a consensus on grounds of tackling climate change. Yvo de Boer, executive director of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), released a draft document on May 20, 2009 though many details remain to be agreed. The draft document, which forms the basis of the Bonn talks, suggests that developed countries must reduce carbon emissions by 75 to 95 per cent by 2050, as mere guidelines, measured against 1990 levels. However, countries have not yet agreed on targets immediately to be reached by 2020. The draft treaty further sets the first-ever targets for developing nations to reduce the carbon emissions.



However, these targets are far below those set by other countries and fail to meet scientifically backed recommendations by environmental groups. The Bonn talks expected to provide further movement of at least few key convergence areas. However, much are being left to be settled before Copenhagen.




Although the 1997 Kyoto Protocol prepared and pursued by the Clinton-Gore administration, the government miserably failed to garner support in Senate to ratify the protocol. The Copenhagen Protocol will be useless without the US entry this time. In an ambitious design, the US has signalled its willingness to be in. The new US administration has taken a lead role in the fight on climate change and has made initial recommendations on emissions reductions. This goes back to the support of former Vice President Al Gore during the Obama’s election campaign. While the negotiators were busy in Bonn, the special US negotiator on climate change concluded bilateral talks with the Chinese negotiator in Beijing which agreed to establish a joint technological research and development centre to promote cooperation in clean energy and climate-change study. The stance of the US on China has been slowed down since then. In accordance with the ‘common-but-differentiated responsibilities’, both countries agreed to take actions to prevent climate change.



India- China in climate negotiations




The way these two Asian giant-India and China has been presented in the climate change issues depends on the argument experts put forward to rationalise their positions. Mostly the Scandinavian countries/EU and the CSOs based in the developed countries who follows the suit of their countries voice strongly argue that without India and China’s commitment the climate deal won’t occur. Probably, this argument is gravely mistaken. Both countries have taken measures gradually to address the issue within their national boundaries and within their capabilities. Both countries have been major actors representing the developing countries positions since 1992. There is a deliberate attempt to make a fissure among India and China positions on climate change. So far the attempts have been failed to succeed.




During the June Bonn talks the hard positions went on as usual in any intergovernmental climate talks. When the Co-Chair of Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol (AWG-KP) called for advancing negotiating text and move away from drafting conclusions on Annex-1 emission reductions, China stressed the need to focus on ‘numbers’ and not on ‘text’. The European Union supported an aggregate reduction of 30% from 1990 levels by 2020. Representative of India warned that the 25-40% reduction range for Annex I countries in the Fourth Assessment Report of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC AR4) is not scientific but based on hidden assumptions about appropriate division of efforts between developed and developing countries.




Led by India and China, most developing countries across the world emphasized to focus on enhancing the implementation of the UNFCCC and expressed concern over the inclusion of concepts and ideas inconsistent with the Convention and the Bali Action Plan. India opposed attempts to ‘rewrite’ the Convention and impose legally binding commitments on developing countries. Many leading developing countries like India and China opposed proposals to blur distinctions between developed and developing countries. In these talks, a new term for economists comes up as “poor developing countries”!




Representative of India stressed that financial resources should only be provided by developed countries for the combating climate change. With China, India opposed to a proposal on levies on international aviation and maritime transportation. However, both countries opposed to review of national adaptation plans.
Since Poznan or some time before, the concept of ‘historical responsibility’ on GHG emissions has been the main bottlenecks between developed and developing countries. The front runner of this argument- India suggested that Annex I parties’ commitments should be calculated based on “discharge of historical responsibility,” which points to reductions of 79.2% below 1990 levels by 2020. The EU questioned the concept of historical responsibility stating that it is not based on the Convention. The battle has begun to garner support on two fronts- ‘historical responsibility’ led by India and ‘current responsibilities’ led by Scandinavian countries. The historical responsibility has been severely contested in the US against India as the illogical parochial talks going on in FOX NEWS in the US. The shared vision for long-term cooperative action on climate change has been severely fragmented.




The reduction timeline has been thrown to the world as 2020, 2025, 2035, 2050 and so on. In all this timeline of stabilising the emissions has a strong component of India and china. Ranging from Scandinavian government environment ministries to the climate campaigner has been calling India and China to join the club of emissions reductionists. However India has been stands tall in all those official negotiations to make itself out of any commitment. On the perspective of tough negotiations it’s most welcome step but on the other hand it seems India has been adamant and obstructionist to a global climate deal. “We are not defensive, we are not obstructionist. We want an international agreement in Copenhagen,” Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh told reporters in New Delhi recently.



The South Asia has been one of the region worst hit by climate change threats. Bangladesh which is facing the real threat from the climate change made visible in the climate change negotiating process highlighting its ‘right to survival as a human being’, in Bonn. Similarly, Maldives and the Sri Lanka are exposed to sever climate threats. Since 2005, the South Asian countries have been waking up gradually combating climate change. National action plans, ambitious investment in renewable energy, environment levy act, adaptation plans are being formulated one after another. Even, climate change has taken a special space in the address to nations. Indian Prime Minister during India’s 63rd Independence address on August 15, 2009 has categorically mentioned climate change and its impact and government’s preparedness. Bangladesh has a separate cell on climate change under the Department of Environment. Even every Thursday of the week it is being reserved for the climate change activities in the Ministry. Although it’s not enough to address the climate change, there is a need to proper cooperation among the countries in the region to face the challenges of the climate change and also to face the hard positions in the global climate talks.




If the world leaders follow an ambitious Copenhagen Treaty as prescribed by Andreas Carlgren, Minister of Environment, Sweden, as reduction of emissions by 25 % to 40% by 2020 and by 80 to 95% by 2050 by the developed countries and the emerging economies (read China and India) 15-30% by 2020, there will be no need of tough climate negotiations from Bangkok to Copenhagen. In all probability, the developing countries will miss the reduction entangle upon them this time. But, the Copenhagen Protocol will replace the Kyoto Protocol!

No comments:

Post a Comment