12/10/2011
Although UN climate negotiators made some modest progress during their Panama talks, the final round of talks before the December summit in Durban, South Africa, the hot political issues, such as the future of the Kyoto Protocol and climate finance, remain far from ready for a compromise. Will Durban become a repeat of Cancun with delegates and political leaders saving the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) process (and their jobs) instead of the planet?
It is hard to do a thorough evaluation of the prospects that Durban will deliver anything serious in terms of tackling the climate crisis. Reading the official documents, NGO reactions and media reports of the Panama conference, one cannot but feel perplexed. Of course, UNFCCC officials will continue to paint a rosy picture, and even NGOs present in Panama seem to be struck by a “let’s not be too critical” attitude, but one would expect someone to do a serious and realistic comparison of what is ultimately needed (huge and effective reduction commitments by both developed and developing countries before the middle of this decade) and the continuing slowness of the international climate circus.
According to the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), in one of the better analyses of the Panama meeting, there are three major issues which are hampering hopes of any progress in Durban.
The first one the IISD calls “Mind the ambition gap”, referring to the gap between countries’ current pledges for emission reductions and what scientists say is really needed to stick to the agreed target of a 2 degrees Celsius temperature increase. Efforts to scale up ambitions failed again in Panama and it is hard to see how Durban will be different.
Secondly, there is the “Show me the money” issue. Developing countries see concrete financial commitments by developed countries as a precondition for undertaking any action themselves and accuse developed countries of a “financing gap”. They say the Green Climate Fund is nothing more than an “empty shell”. One also wonders whether any progress can realistically be expected in Durban with the developed economies obsessed by the current debt crises and economic recession.
Last but not least, there is the issue of the Kyoto Protocol’s future (“To Mandate or Not”). With Kyoto expiring in 2012, there is serious legal and institutional concern over the continuity of the mechanisms and instruments of the Protocol (Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and others). The EU has offered a compromise solution by accepting a second commitment period for Kyoto provided all countries agree to a path forward for a new legally-binding instrument under the Convention, but neither the US nor China seem ready to commit to such a path.
All in all, the signs for Durban are looking pretty gloomy and the political game of downplaying expectations for Durban in the hope of some minor “victory” on technical issues – or even worse, like in Cancun, simply “keeping the process alive” – will not solve the climate crisis. The lack of real global leadership is nothing less than tragic.
Further Reading:
By Willy De Backer
Head of the Greening Europe Forum