Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 150
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 151
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Climate change talks-Dilemma in Durban by Uday Abhyankar

Climate change talks-Dilemma in Durban by Uday Abhyankar

Share this article Share this article
published Published on Oct 30, 2011   modified Modified on Oct 30, 2011

Climate change negotiations are with us again, this time in Durban following the high-level meetings in Cancun (2010) and Copenhagen (2009). The aim is to agree on a regime to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (particularly CO2) post-2012, when the present commitments under the Kyoto Protocol run out.

Climate change and global warming are important issues for India. Agriculture, which provides a livelihood for two-thirds of our population, is heavily dependent on the monsoons. Any disruptions to the monsoons due to global warming could jeopardise the livelihoods of millions. We also have a long coast line, vulnerable to rising sea levels — another likely consequence of global warming.

The Kyoto Protocol calls on industrialised and transition countries (Annex I countries) to make ‘legally binding’ commitments to reduce GHG emissions, while China and the developing countries have been asked for only voluntary action. But the US never ratified the Kyoto Protocol, a serious weakness in its coverage. Apart from this distinction between legally binding and voluntary commitments, India has long emphasised the concept of equity and historical responsibility of industrialised countries in causing global warming.

But the latter argue that whatever the history might be, today China is the world’s largest emitter of CO2 (over 23 per cent of the total). Other emerging countries have also become significant emitters of CO2. So a climate treaty that gives China a free pass is not going to be acceptable.

The basic problem with Kyoto is that Annex I countries account for less than 30 per cent of global CO2 emissions. Obviously, you cannot address the problem of global warming if you deal with less than 30 per cent of the problem. Not surprisingly, many Annex I countries, including Russia, have said that they will not make new commitments under Kyoto in these circumstances. So, merely insisting on Kyoto is likely to lead to a dead-end at Durban.

All this presents India’s negotiators with a dilemma, particularly since developing countries are not quite united on climate change issues. The previous environment minister, Jairam Ramesh, noted at Cancun last December that “there are more and more developing countries asking questions of India” regarding our refusal to accept commitments. The 41 small island developing states (SIDSs) as well as the least developed countries (LDCs) are deeply worried by climate change. For them, a new climate change agreement is a win-win — no obligations and hopefully, significant new ‘green’ financing. So, they will be very unhappy at failure in Durban and will blame anyone who seems to be the stumbling block.

As Kyoto addresses only a small part of global CO2 emissions, to achieve any impact, Kyoto will have to be complemented with an agreement that includes China, the US and other major CO2 emitters. Over the last two years Ramesh had started to explore some new approaches, suggesting voluntary but verifiable commitments. This approach could provide a basis for a complementary agreement. Recently however, we seemed to have backed away from these ideas. Some don’t like “verification”. But would it not be in our own interest if the voluntary commitments of, say, China, with its notorious official figures, were verified?

But you might ask: doesn’t India need to increase its CO2 emissions substantially to maintain economic growth? Well, according to 2006 figures, India produced GDP worth $579 per tonne of CO2 emissions. The US, which is not especially energy efficient, produced $2,291 — four times as much as India, France more than 10 times, while the EU as a whole, 6.4 times. So, if over the next 20 years we could increase our energy efficiency to the present US level, we could almost quadruple our GDP without increasing our CO2 emissions. In fact, we should aim to do better than the US, with its gas-guzzling cars!

In any case, we must increase our efficiency in the use of fossil fuels. We simply cannot be internationally competitive in the years ahead if we require four or six times more oil, gas and coal (much of which will have to be imported) per unit of output. And if we are going to limit our CO2 emissions for reasons of efficiency, would it not make sense to multiply the impact of our own national effort through a wider agreement to complement Kyoto?

One other issue of significance is that of maintaining the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). India is the second largest beneficiary, after China, of CDM funding — Indian entities could potentially receive up to $5 billion through the CDM over the next few years. Worth having!

A last point. India is not likely to receive any money from new bilateral ODA (overseas development assistance) to combat climate change. So, while calling on industrialised countries to fulfill their Copenhagen/Cancun pledges to provide additional financing, we could make a virtue of necessity by declaring that such ODA-based financing for climate change should only go to LDCs and SIDSs. In the end, even with voluntary but verifiable commitments on the table, there may still be no progress in Durban, given the lack of will in many industrialised countries — especially the US — in today’s economic climate.

But even so, we may have some gains. The SIDSs and LDCs will be happy at India's unselfish willingness to fight for their cause. China will have to do its own battles without India providing it cover. And industrialised countries will not be able to hide their own failures behind the so-called ‘obstructionism’ of India. And who knows we might even get a meaningful agreement, perhaps not at Durban but further down the road.

The Business Standard, 30 October, 2011, http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/uday-abhyankar-climate-change-talks-dilemma-in-durban/453958/

Tagged with: climate change



Related Articles

 

Write Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

Video Archives

Archives

Im4Change.org हिंदी वेबसाइट का परिचय. Short Video on im4change.org...

Im4Change.org हिंदी वेबसाइट का परिचय. Short Video on im4change.org...

"Session 1: Scope of IDEA and AgriStack" in Exploring...

"Session 2: Farmer Centric Digitalisation in Agriculture" in Exploring...

"Session 3: Future of Digitalisation in Agriculture" in Exploring...

Objectives | About Us | Workshops | Disclaimer
share on Facebook
Twitter
RSS
Feedback
Read Later

Contact Form

Please enter security code
      Close