About
Accounts
Members
Friends
Click here to check if anything new just came in.
March 08 2010
New Report Offers Little Hope for International Climate Agreement, Suggests "New Thinking" in Climate Diplomacy
It's the big pink elephant in the room that few others wish to acknowledge, but a central theme in a new report by former climate negotiator Nigel Purvis: An international climate change treaty isn't likely to be signed anytime soon.
Purvis served as president Clinton's chief UN climate negotiator, and in his report released today Purvis says that the United States and Europe should "accept reality" and take immediate practical steps to deal with global warming.
The report, entitled Rethinking Climate Diplomacy: New ideas for transatlantic cooperation post-Copenhagen, co-authored by Purvis and Andrew Stevenson, a research assistant at the think tank Resources for the Future, see opportunity in their grim assessment:
While the outlook may seem bleak, the United States and Europe have a number of meaningful opportunities for ratcheting up global climate action," Purvis and Stevenson write. "Progress will depend, however, on letting go of cherished, unrealistic goals while opening up to new ways of thinking."
The report is a contribution to the Brussels Forum paper series through the German Marshall Fund, and is one part of a growing body of analysis that attempts to sort out the "mixed and messy," as Purvis calls it, outcome of the COP15 climate conference in Copenhagen that produced the Copenhagen Accord.
Purvis and Stevenson argue that two fundamental truths emerged as a consequence of COP15: America might make promises it can't keep. Conversely, China won't make promises, but will act.
Even though many saw China as a major spoiler at COP15, strongly resisting a "top-down international climate protection regime" that threatens state control and its economic self-interest, most analysts expect China to make good on its promise to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, meeting or even exceeding its stated goals.
Despite president Obama's expression of support for climate legislation, the reality is that the Senate will likely be unable to act on any climate bill this year (indeed, the Senate appears unable to act on any substantive legislation of late, but that is fodder for another post on another blog).
Even though the Copenhagen Accord is a step forward, it does not fundamentally change the political calculus in the Senate," say the authors.
As a consequence, Europe must "come to terms with the unfortunate truth" that the United States won't be a leader in the climate fight and should thus be "prepared to continue leading alone."
Working through the catch-22
The major stumbling block to an international climate treaty coming into COP15 proved the insurmountable hurdle going out: developing countries like China and India will not agree to any treaty that puts poor nations on a par with rich developed nations that carry the baggage of decades of greenhouse gas emissions. And on the other hand, rich industrialized nations like the US won't go along with an agreement that does not apply equally to rapidly emerging economies – in particular China.
Therefore, it is time, the report argues, to adopt a new way of thinking. One that does not insist on trying to convince countries the need to build a climate protection program based on international commitments.
The primary transatlantic climate strategy needs to become directly incentivizing action and penalizing inaction," the report states.
Purvis said in an interview that the new partnerships that emerged last year between the United States and developing countries like China and India are a good start, but need to be "dramatically ramped-up," with wealthy nations looking for ways to raise funds for climate finance, suggesting fees on international transport as one possible area.
Emission reductions are urgently needed and can be achieved now if funds are made available, with economic and security co-benefits for the United States, Europe and the world," Purvis and Stevenson wrote.
Further, despite the political resistance, funds should more easily flow to rapidly developing countries, like China and India, whose emissions are growing in tandem with their expanding economies.
In short, a "zero-sum" mindset, where one country's advantage comes at another's disadvantage, should be replaced with a "non zero-sum" mindset that incorporates the mutual benefits of bilateral cooperation.
Making good on financial pledges without too many conditions related to global climate talks is essential," they write. "The key here is to understand that doing so is not raising the white flag of surrender, but that helping to reduce the cost of climate action is a winning strategy for convincing developing nations to act even if those nations continue to resist international climate conditions."
Source and further reading
ClimateWire (subscription required)
Report: Rethinking Climate Diplomacy (pdf)
November 10 2009
A Sense of Urgency Ahead of Cop15?
I am currently in the Maryland countryside, participating in a Transatlantic Media Dialog hosted by the German Embassy and the Ecologic Institute. The mission of the event is, in part, to serve as a followup to the efforts the German foreign ministry has made in recent months to create a better understanding of German energy and climate policy, including the international environmental journalist press trip in which I participated last spring. These efforts serve to foster greater communication on the Transatlantic Climate Bridge begun by the German government in January.
Policy experts,writers, and journalists from both the EU and US have an opportunity here to discuss climate policy and public perceptions of the issue in the final days before the COP15 climate conference in Copenhagen next month.
It has been widely reported that the definition of success in Copenhagen is steadily shifty downward in a "management of expectations" as the theatrics in the US Senate over the Kerry-Boxer climate bill play out. As goes the US Senate, it is understood and feared, so goes what can be achieved at COP15.
Much of the discussion yesterday focused on the varying perceptions of the state of negotiations on both sides of the Atlantic. Those in the EU typically, and rightly look at the US as laggards in climate protection and energy policy. Those in the US see much of the touted gains in emissions reductions in the EU as "Fall Wall" profits – pointing to the fact the as much as 50% of the emissions reductions in the EU since 1990 is due to the collapse of Eastern European industry in the wake of the fall of the Berlin wall. In light of that, current US efforts may be far more ambitious than they seem at first blush.
Both sides have legitimate arguments, and the discussion served to highlight the differing perspectives of how we got where we are today (and I will touch more on this in subsequent posts).
What is at issue now, however, with COP15 looming just a few short weeks ahead, is where do we go from here? For some time, 2009 has been understood as the year that climate change comes onto the international stage with the world community grappling with the growing impacts of climate change and working to move beyond the Kytoto Protocol expiring in 2012. In many parts of the world there has been a growing sense of urgency that time to act is increasingly short. But that sense of urgency is perceived as lacking in the US, as expressed by Jakob Erickson, a counselor for climate affairs for the Danish Embassy based in Washington DC.
Erickson's closed his address yesterday imploring the US to regain that sense of urgency, asking "Where is it? What happened? Where is the debate in the US media?"
Speaking with Erickson afterwards, he told me that despite the apparent lack of urgency in the public's perception of the issue, and despite the starkly polarized posturing in Congress, the political momentum is probably not going to be greater than it is now. The Obama administration expresses commitment on getting legislation done on climate change, as will as a willingness to to go to Copenhagen if it will help seal some sort of a deal.
The time is now, and the matter could not be more urgent.
Maybe Soup is currently being updated? I'll try again automatically in a few seconds...
