Doha Climate Summit 2012: success or failure?
The city of Doha (Qatar) hosted the 2012 U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change conference, from 26 November to 07 December. Nearly 200 countries met with the intention to conclude a new pact aiming at reducing global warming and supporting developing countries’ adaptation process. As it is always the case since Rio-92, hot debates, hot talks between developed and developing countries marked the two weeks. At the end of the last Kyoto I conference, some activists look at it to be progressive, whereas many remain bitter with the resolutions. Through this presentation, I will analyze with you the progressive points of the conference, the weaknesses and the future prospects for climate change regime.
The Copenhagen climate summit (2009), one of the most awaited conference resulted to a big failure. Since then, ecologists across the world follow with scepticism the negotiators in their response on the growing environmental crisis. Two main questions prevailed during this conference: 1. how will be the post Kyoto after this year? 2. How developed countries will finance to poor nations, the 2009 adaptation funds of $100 billion a year by 2020?
Progressive points
The outcomes of the conference show some progressive points: The Kyoto Protocol enters another eight years commitment to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases until 2020 for the European Union, Australia and a dozen of industrialized countries. These countries emit only about 15% of global emissions; however, this agreement constitutes a bridge to a global agreement. Hence, the “Durban Platform for Enhanced Action” which suggested last year to produce by 2015 a new treaty applicable to all parties and covers 100 percent of global emissions, remains.
The long-term Cooperative Action that delivered between 2009 and 2012 $30 billion in “fast-start” finance for adaptation and mitigation measures closes. The agreement does not include a specific target amount for a second round of fast-start financing but urges developed countries to commit more. In addition, a ramp up period until 2020 will ensure that the jump from the climate related assistance of $ 10 billion a year to 100 billion could be possible. Some negotiators suggested that, an amount of $ 60 billion from all sources by 2015 could help to meet this target and stabilizing temperature at 2 degrees Celsius by the end of the century.
Weaknesses or failure
The progressive points represent only the visible part of the iceberg. Many unsolved problems explain the negative position of most ecologists. Canada, Japan, New Zealand and Russia have not sign for a second commitment period, which begin January 1, 2013. The United States have never ratified the Kyoto Protocol and their position has not changed during this conference.
The difference between achievement and commitment during the last period, known has gap approximates currently about one-third of the reductions needed to keep the 2-degree-Celsius pathway. In actual fact, emissions may rise to 3 or 4 degree Celsius by the end of this century. If this happens, the world will face manifold consequences.
Future of the summit
The Doha conference merges the two negotiating track, the Kyoto protocol and the ad hoc working group on long-term co-operative action into one. Hence, all the negotiations on climate issues will be under a single umbrella. In Poland next year, the two workstreams created, to design the new treaty by 2015 and to address the so-called ambition gap needs clarifications. Doha has produced a new arrangement “loss and damage” that still need to be define. This could allow countries most severely impacted by climate change to get support to deal with climate related catastrophes.
The new agreement allows transfer of surplus assigned amount units known as hot air to the second commitment period. A country may acquire from other Parties up to 2 percent of its assigned amount for the first commitment period. This would limit the amount of “hot air” that can be carried over into the second commitment period of the treaty.
Conclusion
Investing in mitigation has several advantages. Light Andrew and other authors argues that every $1 invests in climate issues returns $7 if structured appropriately. Climate finance might create economic growth and new jobs and reduce dependency on oil. The US congress has considered $60.5 billion dollar to cover loss and damage from super storm Sandy. This type of damage could be prevented by investing in climate related issues.
I will conclude by quoting Mr. Peter Altmaier the German Environment minister “Doha send a signal of confidence” if all countries increase their effort in emission reduction until and after 2020.
Author:
Adrien Djomo, PhD.
Bioenvironmentalist
For more about Adrien Djomo, visit his website www.adriendjomo.com
12 Phd Positions in Berlin, Florence and Budapest PhD research fellowship in Medical Sciences- Centre for Molecular Medicine (Norway)
Comments are currently closed.