• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

Copenhagen: did it achieve anything?

Written by Jennifer Harrison
Saturday, 23 January 2010 00:00

COP15 should have gone down in history as the two weeks when governments from across the globe seized a unique opportunity to change the future of the planet and its people.

You could be forgiven for feeling confused as to whether this summit delivered any real success, particularly when it came to taking real action to halt the devastating effects of climate change.

The legally binding treaty, which so many had hoped for, was instead replaced by a decision to “take note of” an accord brokered by China, South Africa, India, Brazil and the US on the final evening, with emission reduction targets still to be announced.

Many world leaders tried to put on a brave and optimistic face – Gordon Brown said the agreement was a “vital first step” in a press conference following the summit.

But this “vital first step” was not enough to please advocates for developing countries (already suffering greatly from the effects of climate change through changing weather patterns) and they slammed the outcome.

International Development NGO ActionAid’s Climate Justice Coordinator Tom Sharman said: “We now have a weaker statement than the Bali Action Plan agreed two years ago. In no way can we call this a success - it is a cataclysmic failure - pure and simple."

Lumumba Di-Aping, chief negotiator for the G77 group of 130 developing countries went further, saying the deal was like "asking Africa to sign a suicide pact, an incineration pact in order to maintain the economic dependence of a few countries. It's a solution based on values that funneled six million people in Europe into furnaces.”

Many people have heard tales of shorter crop growing seasons in Africa resulting in periods of chronic hunger, rising sea levels around low-lying countries such as Bangladesh, and an increase in every type of natural disaster imaginable from floods to drought, but what might the future bring?

The formation of a green climate fund and a commitment to provide $US30 billion in aid over the next three years to developing countries for adaptation and mitigation seems impressive. This could help countries develop green, renewable energy sources for the future and fight the onslaught of problems they are already facing at the hands of climate change.

But it was not agreed how this money might be used, or where it would come from. After billions more dollars were recently found to bail out the world’s banks, $30 billion appears rather insignificant.

More importantly, the accord contains no commitments to reduce emissions, in order to achieve the “recognised” scientific standard for keeping temperature rises to no more than 2C above current levels. It is these very emissions, produced by the world’s most developed countries (China is the main perpetrator, followed by the USA) that are having devastating consequences for developing countries, whose emissions are minute by comparison.
Immediately following the summit, UK Climate Change Secretary Ed Milliband said he wished there had been a timescale set for a legally binding deal – it is hoped this will be worked towards at forthcoming summits.

Later this month, environment ministers from South Africa, Brazil, India and China will meet in New Delhi in preparation for a January 31st deadline, set for countries that support the accord to submit climate change action plans and formal emission targets.

These countries brokered the draft version of the accord alongside the US and will also need to convince other countries to sign up to the accord. Currently, only 29 out of 194 countries worldwide have put pen to paper.

This coalition could have a tough job on its hands. During the final hours of the negotiations in Copenhagen, Bolivia, Venezuela, Sudan and Cuba made it clear they opposed the agreement. Cuba has gone one step further by already informing the UN that it will not sign up.

This is a more important “vital step” and is only the second on a long and difficult path. At the end of the road is something that could potentially make a huge difference to the millions of people in developing countries that do not have time to wait for world leaders to get their act together.