(Business Line)
Through these columns we have been tracing the course of the climate change negotiations in the last few years and have been observing how the discourse is getting skewed against developing countries.Over time, the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities” of nations in taking climate action enshrined in the UN Convention on Climate Change (1992) has been seen to be giving way to a new principle of “common and sha red responsibilities”. With this change, climate talks have come to acquire a new hue casting the rich, the aspiring and the poor into the same mould.Developing trends
In addition to the above, the trend had been to highlight the growing levels of Greenhouse Gases (GHGs) in the atmosphere with every passing year and the emissions of some new emerging economies, notably, China and India, as if they, more than others, were responsible for the build-up. Recent events have added a new dimension to this trend.
At the recent G-8 meet in Italy, to which China and India were invited, global warming and climate change figured prominently and two Declarations of far-reaching consequence emerged. First, leaders of the G-8 declared that they recognised the broad scientific view that the increase in global average temperature above pre-industrial levels ought not to exceed 2 degrees Celsius. Thus, for the first time, a direct quantitative limit to permissible warming was mentioned in any such declaration.
The G-8 leaders also agreed to the goal of reducing their GHG emissions by 80 per cent by the year 2050 as part of a worldwide goal of a 50 per cent cut by that year — meaning that all nations, including the poor, would contribute to this effort. Significantly, the base year for calculating the cuts was left uncertain. It could be 1990, as the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change envisaged, or a recent year like 2005.Examining the declaration
Second, leaders of the ‘Major Economies Forum’ on energy and climate followed suit by reiterating the two degree limit in their Declaration and proceeded to affirm that “progress towards the goal would be regularly reviewed, noting the importance of frequent, comprehensive, and accurate inventories”. Speculation is rife on the scope of these developments. So is the cry in India that, by acceding to the Declaration of the Forum, the Indian delegation had committed the country to accepting quantitative reduction targets and to outsider verification of its efforts. That would mean a significant departure from the tough stand India has been taking all along.
It is pertinent to examine whether the mention of the figure of 2 degrees Celsius in the Declarations was a mere underscoring of the urgency of climate action or a ploy to tie down China and India.
We need to look at several sources to arrive at a definitive answer to this question. First, let’s us look at the Stern Review (October 2006), which was commissioned by the UK government. According to Stern: “If annual emissions continued at today’s levels, greenhouse gas levels would be close to double pre-industrial levels by the middle of the century. If this concentration were sustained, temperatures are projected to eventually rise by 2-5 degree Celsius or even higher.” Stern was clearly batting for invoking temperature in defining climate goals in preference to the debatable GHG levels. Second, Working Group I of the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) had observed, as early as in February 2007, that: “For the next two decades a warming of about 0.2 degree Celsius per decade is projected…Even if the concentrations of all GHGs and aerosols had been kept at year 2000-levels, a further warming of about 0.1 degree Celsius per decade would be expected.”
Therefore, given the temperature rise of 0.74 degree Celsius already recorded and the prognosis of the IPCC for the oncoming decades, it would be reasonable to conclude that global warming would be close to 2 degree Celsius by the end of this century.Setting the focus
Thus, in the context of global warming and climate change, the result of emissions, that is, temperature rise, has come to occupy attention, in the final boundary-setting, in place of the cause, namely GHG levels. No matter what the GHG levels are, the rise in temperature should not be allowed to cross 2 degree Celsius. In this overarching view, claims for carbon space on grounds of historic deprivation or raising low living standards to comparable international levels become secondary.
Having fixed a tolerable rise in temperature as the goal of climate action, the strategy of the developed countries is to erect milestones in terms of global GHG reductions. Emissions will need to peak soon, say by 2015, and start falling so that they are halved from present levels by 2050 at the latest. This would mean developed countries cutting their emissions by 80 per cent by 2050 and emerging economies such as China and India pitching in with a cutback of 65 per cent.
The G-8 has done its homework well. By introducing the limit of 2 degree Celsius in the Declarations, it obtained an endorsement, though political, from developing countries to share the burden of the common cause instead of harping on the historic responsibility of the developed members to make all the necessary sacrifices.Mentioning specifics
One may note that the Declaration made no mention of the extent of GHG reductions that developed countries would make or of the reductions that developing countries would be called upon to shoulder. Entitlement to carbon space has thus become a discarded argument, much to the chagrin of China and India.
Was India taken by surprise at the G-8 meet? Perhaps, yes. A pointer to the 2 degree Celsius limit being raised at the meet was available in the statement made by the British Prime Minister, Mr Gordon Brown, days before the meet. The Indian delegation must have noted this statement. But the US viewpoint on the new tack was not known at that time. It was only at the meet that the US President got around to mentioning this limit specifically in the G-8 Declaration. Having made a specific mention of the limit in one document, it was just a short hop to include it in the second.Game point
With the sudden departure of the Chinese President before the major economies meeting, India could not have mustered enough support to stall the mention of the limit in the major economies’ Declaration, even had it wanted to. In the event, even China turned out to be one of the signatories.
That the 2 degree Celsius limit would be invoked at every turn from now on is an eventuality India must face. So is the matter of verification of India’s mitigation efforts and other actions. There may be no quantitative targets fixed for India but the measures it proposes to take must be “measurable, reportable and verifiable” as agreed to under the Bali Action Plan.
The climate end game of the developed countries is now clear. By invoking a tolerable limit to global warming, they hope to shift a good part of their burden on to China and India.(The author is a former Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India.)
It is pertinent to examine whether the mention of the figure of 2 degrees Celsius in the Declarations was a mere underscoring of the urgency of climate action or a ploy to tie down China and India.
We need to look at several sources to arrive at a definitive answer to this question. First, let’s us look at the Stern Review (October 2006), which was commissioned by the UK government. According to Stern: “If annual emissions continued at today’s levels, greenhouse gas levels would be close to double pre-industrial levels by the middle of the century. If this concentration were sustained, temperatures are projected to eventually rise by 2-5 degree Celsius or even higher.” Stern was clearly batting for invoking temperature in defining climate goals in preference to the debatable GHG levels. Second, Working Group I of the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) had observed, as early as in February 2007, that: “For the next two decades a warming of about 0.2 degree Celsius per decade is projected…Even if the concentrations of all GHGs and aerosols had been kept at year 2000-levels, a further warming of about 0.1 degree Celsius per decade would be expected.”
Therefore, given the temperature rise of 0.74 degree Celsius already recorded and the prognosis of the IPCC for the oncoming decades, it would be reasonable to conclude that global warming would be close to 2 degree Celsius by the end of this century.Setting the focus
Thus, in the context of global warming and climate change, the result of emissions, that is, temperature rise, has come to occupy attention, in the final boundary-setting, in place of the cause, namely GHG levels. No matter what the GHG levels are, the rise in temperature should not be allowed to cross 2 degree Celsius. In this overarching view, claims for carbon space on grounds of historic deprivation or raising low living standards to comparable international levels become secondary.
Having fixed a tolerable rise in temperature as the goal of climate action, the strategy of the developed countries is to erect milestones in terms of global GHG reductions. Emissions will need to peak soon, say by 2015, and start falling so that they are halved from present levels by 2050 at the latest. This would mean developed countries cutting their emissions by 80 per cent by 2050 and emerging economies such as China and India pitching in with a cutback of 65 per cent.
The G-8 has done its homework well. By introducing the limit of 2 degree Celsius in the Declarations, it obtained an endorsement, though political, from developing countries to share the burden of the common cause instead of harping on the historic responsibility of the developed members to make all the necessary sacrifices.Mentioning specifics
One may note that the Declaration made no mention of the extent of GHG reductions that developed countries would make or of the reductions that developing countries would be called upon to shoulder. Entitlement to carbon space has thus become a discarded argument, much to the chagrin of China and India.
Was India taken by surprise at the G-8 meet? Perhaps, yes. A pointer to the 2 degree Celsius limit being raised at the meet was available in the statement made by the British Prime Minister, Mr Gordon Brown, days before the meet. The Indian delegation must have noted this statement. But the US viewpoint on the new tack was not known at that time. It was only at the meet that the US President got around to mentioning this limit specifically in the G-8 Declaration. Having made a specific mention of the limit in one document, it was just a short hop to include it in the second.Game point
With the sudden departure of the Chinese President before the major economies meeting, India could not have mustered enough support to stall the mention of the limit in the major economies’ Declaration, even had it wanted to. In the event, even China turned out to be one of the signatories.
That the 2 degree Celsius limit would be invoked at every turn from now on is an eventuality India must face. So is the matter of verification of India’s mitigation efforts and other actions. There may be no quantitative targets fixed for India but the measures it proposes to take must be “measurable, reportable and verifiable” as agreed to under the Bali Action Plan.
The climate end game of the developed countries is now clear. By invoking a tolerable limit to global warming, they hope to shift a good part of their burden on to China and India.(The author is a former Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India.)
No comments:
Post a Comment