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 | Equity, global climate policy and climate negotiations-Mukul Sanwal

Equity, global climate policy and climate negotiations-Mukul Sanwal

Share this article Share this article
published Published on Apr 30, 2012   modified Modified on Apr 30, 2012

Speaking at an international workshop on Equity and Climate Change, held on April 12, the minister for environment and forests, Jayanthi Natarajan, sought to build a consensus on the inter-relationship between equity and the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities in the Climate Convention, and the nature of the obligations they entail in the new arrangement that is to be negotiated.

By focusing on a technical definition of equity the approach continues to be to tweak a failing system arrived at in 1992 rather than develop a global vision for 2032.

The starting point should have been an assessment of how, despite the principles of the Convention and continuing growth of emissions in developed countries, half of humanity, which has yet to enjoy the benefits of industrialisation, urbanisation and increases in levels of income, finds itself in a situation where there is strong pressure on it to take on commitments to reduce increase in emissions of carbon dioxide. The question is whether a new paradigm is needed.

Clearly, the arguments that were made in the run-up to the climate treaty in 1992, subsequently over a 20-year period, and now being repeated are flawed.

We have adopted an ostrich-like attitude in clutching at the common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) principle as the global policy driver, even though it does not exist in this form. A compromise was made in the Climate Treaty in 1992, and we agreed to the addition of the words "and respective capabilities".

The result is that international environmental law continues to struggle with ongoing debates over whether developing countries should reduce their greenhouse gas emissions and, if so, how much financial support developed countries should provide for such efforts.

The minister is right in stressing that the strategic issue for the next round of climate negotiations is a common understanding of equity. The unresolved question, however, is not defining equity, on which there is no agreement even within developing countries, but whether political decisions on equitably sharing the global commons (a new paradigm) are a precondition for agreement on a global rule-based system, or if incremental steps to develop a rule based system on the basis of the Cancun Agreements (the old paradigm) will lead to equitable outcomes.

There are two widely different perspectives considering the way climate negotiations review the use of global natural resources. The environmental case is based on impact of climate change on natural ecosystems, and the assertion that the stabilisation level and timeframe for peaking of emissions is the most important global policy issue.

The sustainable development case is based on global commons as an economic resource requiring stabilisation of concentrations of greenhouse gases to ensure developed countries do not use up all the carbon space.

Both views of the climate challenge are legitimate. The scientific basis for climate change can be made either in terms of reducing emissions and environmental damage (natural sciences) or sharing the global environmental resource for sustainable development (social sciences), but with very different implications for countries.

Environmental damage is measured in terms of additional 'flows' and points the finger at developing countries, while limited availability of ecosystem services is measured in terms of sharing total 'stocks' of greenhouse gases and requires developed countries to take substantial measures. Global climate policy is a zero-sum game, if technology is not factored into the equation.

According to recent analyses what really matters is the total greenhouse gas budget we allow ourselves, because of the scientific uncertainty associated with emission rates and concentration targets, which cannot be accurately inferred.

Countries like the UK and US have already adopted a budget approach. In this paradigm, differentiation would be based on stages of development rather than historical responsibility for environmental damage.

Consequently, at the coming workshop on equity, to be held in Bonn in May, we should pose the policy question: recognising the existence of global ecological limits, can human well-being be achieved through technological innovation and efficiency, if so, how? If not, how much of the worlds' common resources does any one nation or individual have a right to for well-being?

Global rules would then be based around a new principle of 'shared prosperity and responsibility', with an annual review of progress in three areas - reaching multilaterally-agreed national carbon budgets, development and sharing of innovative renewable energy and agricultural biotechnologies, and bringing energy services, infrastructure and food to those who do not have adequate access to them at present.

The Economic Times, 30 April, 2012, http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/opinion/guest-writer/equity-global-climate-policy-and-climate-negotiations/articleshow/12930722.cms


Related Articles

 

Write Comments

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

*

Video Archives

Archives

share on Facebook
Twitter
RSS
Feedback
Read Later

Contact Form

Please enter security code
      Close