Post Breakfast
Bali climate conference and the future
A drama-filled 190-nation conference ended mid-December after setting a 2009 deadline for a landmark pact to fight global warming. This was possible only after the United States backed down from its last-ditch objections. We in Bangladesh have followed the steps leading up to this conference with great care. It became that much more important for us after the recent devastating cyclone Sidr which followed the earlier twin floods.
It may be recalled that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) had underlined the connotation of global warming before the Bali Climate Conference. It was mentioned that this Panel was at least 90% certain that human emissions of greenhouse gases rather than natural variations were warming the planet's surface. It also commented that temperatures were probably going to increase by 1.8-4C (3.2-7.2F) by the end of the century, that sea levels were most likely to rise by 28-43cm, and that global warming was likely to influence the intensity of tropical storms. These findings were based on an unequivocal series of evidence, which indicated that fossil fuel burning, and land use change were affecting the climate on our planet. Consequently, negotiators during this latest round of UN climate talks in Bali were able to pause and contemplate the earlier treaty, which their forerunners' had compiled in the 1997 Kyoto winter. However, discussion in Bali was harsher than anticipated.
Participants wanted the conference to endorse the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) conclusion that global greenhouse gas emissions should peak and begin to fall within 10-15 years. They wanted industrialised countries to commit to emissions cuts of 25-40% from 1990 levels by 2020 (the EU has already committed to 20% unilaterally), and the major developing countries to agree in principle to firm targets in the future. For Europe, already committed to unilateral emissions cuts of 20% by 2020 and prepared to go further if others joined in, the grail was to leave Bali with the US, Japan, Russia and the rest of the industrial world signed up to big cuts. Drought-ridden African countries, and those likely to be erased from the geographical and political maps by rising sea levels also wanted the rich West, which has built its wealth largely on the back of coal and oil, to pay for the effects of the pollution they have caused and from which they have benefited.
The US and Canada however, on ideological grounds, and Japan because it is already struggling to meet its Kyoto Protocol targets, were determined to avoid anything firm now. Their arguments were supported by claims of 'common but differentiated responsibilities' that other major emitters of the developing world like -- China, India, Brazil, South Korea -- should also accept the principle that at some point, they would have to come on board with numerically-defined emissions curbs.
The talks overran their scheduled close by more than a day and delegates from the EU, US and G-77/China embarked with UN officials on a series of behind-the-scenes consultations aiming to break the remaining deadlock. Discussions on carbon caps went to the wire. Fortunately however, despite existing differences, the participants were able to agree on some least common denominators. This included the contentious issue of agreeing on the management of the Adaptation Fund, designed to provide money to help poorer countries protect themselves against climate change impacts. This deal saw the establishment of an independent board with representation from developed and developing countries, and from all regions.
The document coming out of the meeting, the "Bali roadmap," contains text on emission cuts, the transfer of clean technology to developing countries, halting deforestation and helping poorer nations protect their economies and societies against impacts of climate change such as rising sea levels and falling crop yields. The roadmap also sets the parameters and aims for a further set of negotiations to be finalized by the 2009 UN climate conference, to be held in Denmark. It is being anticipated that by that stage, parties would have agreed on a comprehensive plan for curbing global warming and adapting to its impacts.
It would be pertinent here to also note that another encouraging aspect emerged from the Bali meeting. Consensus was reached on the principle of rewarding poorer countries to protect their forests. It was widely acknowledged as the cheapest single way of curbing climate change, and ushering in benefits in other environmental areas such as biodiversity and fresh water conservation. Delegates agreed on a framework that could allow richer nations and companies to earn "carbon credits" by paying for forest protection in developing countries. This would require the valuing of standing forests but would also assist in reducing deforestation.
Environmentalists are hoping that by 2009 a mechanism will be found for leveraging funds from carbon trading to fund adaptation projects. It is being hoped that international carbon trading will subsequently pay for sea walls, fresh water infrastructure, new crop varieties, mosquito nets and whatever else that may be needed as the world warms and rainfall patterns change.
This aspect has assumed critical importance given the fact that there is still scarcity of available money globally for adaptation. The fund is still being measured in tens of millions of dollars, whereas estimate of the amounts needed run into tens of billions. Kyoto provided small sums of money into the Adaptation Fund but a successor treaty ought logically to leverage far more from the international carbon market. In this context it would also be pertinent to note that this would be impossible unless stakeholders take steps to ensure that the carbon market is big enough to generate significant adaptation funding. This is turn will not be possible without a wider and deeper set of emissions targets that produce a meaningful carbon price. Otherwise, the market is likely to remain too small to produce adequate funds.
The "Bali roadmap" has initiated a two-year process of negotiations designed to agree on a new set of emissions targets to replace those in the Kyoto Protocol. Now the map leads to Poznan in Poland in a year's time, and to Copenhagen late in 2009 -- the scheduled final destination on the Bali roadmap. The next important staging-point on the path to Poznan will however be the Honolulu meeting in January 2008 of the "major economies" or "big emitters" group. This meeting is being set up by the Bush administration and is hoping to include 16 major producers of greenhouse gases. EU leaders have gone on record that they want negotiations on the Bali roadmap to be initiated by April. Countries like Bangladesh and Maldives are hoping that concrete signals on targets and commitments from major developing world economies on adaptation funding will emerge by then, even if they are kept under wraps in Honolulu. The countries with the highest possibility of being affected by climate variability will also look forward to agreed formats on the question of free transfer of green technology, over-riding the demands of the private sector and their stress on intellectual property rights.
Environmental groups and some delegates have criticized the Bali roadmap as being weak and a missed opportunity. Some have also claimed that what was needed was a real roadmap, and this conference had failed to give a clear destination with regard to firm targets for reducing emissions. They have suggested that there has only been a modest step forward.
Qualms have also been expressed that very little concrete advances should be expected in 2008 because of the uncertainties of the coming US Presidential elections towards the end of this year. That is true. It is however also correct that the next elected administration after President Bush will, due to international pressure, have to take the whole matter more seriously. It will be difficult to disregard totally the final Bali text that mentions that "deep cuts in global emissions will be required to achieve the ultimate objective" of avoiding dangerous climate change. The US cannot continue to stress on democracy and human rights and overlook the international consensus that a delay in reducing emissions will make severe climate impacts more likely. Such a view would also apply with regard to China, India, South Korea and Brazil.
It is important to understand that global warming affects directly or indirectly the whole humanity living on planet earth. It is for this reason that we must have coordinated and concerted efforts to address this issue. The Bali roadmap as agreed, has been just the first step. Now begins the hard work of all nations working towards a deal in Copenhagen in 2009 to address the defining challenge of our time.
Muhammad Zamir is a former Secretary and Ambassador who can be reached at mzamir@dhaka.net
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments