Whither the UNFCCC and the Copenhagen Accord?

I have been meaning to post some thoughts on an article in Foreign Affairs for some time, so here goes!

Levi puts forward the argument (NB: bear in mind that it was written in the run-up to COP15) that mega-multilateral agreements, a la the Kyoto Protocol, are a dead end. Hopes that an international treaty, to be negotiated in Copenhagen, are misplaced. And not solely due to logistical, diplomatic barriers. Levi sees the problem as running much deeper. At a fundamental level the possibility of agreement between the developed and developing nations is not possible, due to the divergence of international demands and domestic political realities. This is a familiar story-line, but that makes it no less true: the US needs China/India/Brazil to take on absolute emissions targets; China needs the US/EU to take on aggressive absolute emissions reduction targets; the “south” needs a large pile of money from the “north”; and the “north” needs to put in place effective monitoring and verification measures to ensure that emissions cuts in the “south” are actually taking place.

Levi pulls three core problems facing an effective international treaty, and highlights them as the reasons why the Kyoto/Copenhagen process should be abandoned in favor of a “bottom-up” country-driven approach (in which countries adopt their own domestic targets and then strike targeted bilateral/multilateral deals):

Read Full Post »

The way forward: Finding a new home for international climate negotiations?

Further to my post on the take-aways from COP15, Rob Stavins has posted on the institutional implications of the Copenhagen conference for the UNFCCC. Stavins suggests that the UNFCCC is troubled by four major problems:

1. Too many voices: at a current membership of 196, the UNFCCC is just too cumbersome. Having been witness to the process, it is hard to disagree with this evaluation. Precious time is taken up with procedural discussions, pro forma statements, and political posturing. Considerations of process legitimacy support an open and inclusive forum for international negotiations that deal with the ultimate public good (the atmosphere and global ecosystem). But when it comes to crafting a political agreement between states, this concern for inclusion and formal equality may need to be suppressed.

Read Full Post »

COP15 – Reflections, Conclusions, Prognostications

Some fairly unorganized thoughts about the process and outcome of COP15 – as filtered through two weeks of turkey, booze, and really cold weather back home for the holidays!

• The role of China in the negotiations (assertion of Chinese power, strained relationship between China and the G77, tension b/w China and the US that is running across a number of issues including climate, currency valuation, int’l trade, human rights)
• the dysfunctionality of the mega multilateral, all-inclusive conference and the questioning of the COP as the most appropriate forum for effective decision-making on climate (revealing a real tension between the process and output legitimacy of the thing).  In my view, this was the last (and largest) of the great climate conferences, and the real decision-making on climate policy will shift to a more manageable forum (maybe the G20, maybe the G8, maybe the Major Economies Forum). The big question that remains is….will the COP be retained as a site of “legitimate” decision making (even though the real decisions will be made elsewhere) or will it be jettisoned as it gets dragged down into Doha-like WTO stagnation?

Read Full Post »

China and COP15 – From the Other Side of the Mirror

The Copenhagen Accord that emerged from COP15 has been characterized recently as a toothless document that does nothing to address climate change. Mark Lynas published a widely read and cited article in The Guardian asserting that the Chinese torpedoed the conference, insisting on a watered down final accord that removed all meaningful commitments to reducing emissions.

Read Full Post »

Much ado….but about what?

Originally posted at UofTCOP15.ca

The Guardian yesterday ran a feature story about the “Danish text leak” – an event that purportedly has left the climate talks in a state of “disarray”.  After reading the actual document itself, I can’t believe the ruckus that has accompanied it. The substance of the text presents what is easily understood as a set of standard bargaining positions for an annex 1 (plus US) – or developed world –  countries.

Read Full Post »

Foreign Politeness before Foreign Policy

In light of the will he/won’t he back and forth this week regarding Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s (in)decision over whether he would travel to Copenhagen to take part in the upcoming COP15 negotiations, it struck me that the general public and news media have Mr Harper all wrong. This strategy he has adopted (and perfected I dare say) is one that attempts to re-instill those traditional conservative values of manners, etiquette, and chivalry to foreign policy.

No longer should Canadians be ashamed of the Canadian strategy of lurking in the shadows while other nations announce targets, action plans, and policy programmes. We should, instead, hold our heads high and laud the high politeness that Messrs. Harper and Prentice are advocating. No spotlight shall be stolen, not on their watch. Other countries are encouraged to go first, please, while the Canadian government holds open the door. South Korea, Kenya – please step in and announce your unilateral emissions reduction targets. Australia (NOTE: legislation is still making its way through the Australian legislature at the moment, but looks to be on track for approval), Japan –  after you and your domestic climate targets and legislation. India and China, Brazil and Russia – you all deserve a moment to declare your respective unilateral targets and plans. Not to mention those timid, media-shy world powers – the EU and USA – who have, each in their own time and way, announced firm emissions reduction targets.

Read Full Post »

(not so) great expectations

The official expectations for the upcoming COP15 in Copenhagen have been downgraded, as announced at the APEC summit in Singapore this past weekend. Danish PM Rasmussen flew in to meet with the APEC leaders and came out with a statement to the effect that a political agreement “in principle” is the best outcome that can be accomplished.

This isn’t a great surprise, as the mid-year negotiations taking place in Bonn, Bangkok, and Barcelona (an unintended poeticism i’m sure) have illustrated the challenges that bedevil the process. What it does do is to give the Obama administration some additional time to push domestic legislation through Congress – allowing the bipartisan tripartisan (with Senator Lieberman now on board) coalition to find a way to satisfy enough interests to get a piece of legislation signed and delivered.

Read Full Post »