The vital the United Nations climate conference in December 2015 in Paris is coming up soon. Many users of the OTB Website are active – like Mireille Pouget who is cycling from Scotland toward Paris as part of the lobbying support (see OTB under Crisis in Western Democracy). Heather Pierce in Queensland monitors developments and provides a flow of information updates daily. It would be curious and wrong for OTB to ignore this vital issue, about which there in more energy and perhaps hope well as fear than over any climate event to date.
Is the case for decisive change about to be carried at the highest political level and led to sustained action? Or will we return our heads to the sand, murmur business as usual, and head faster towards the precipice? Please offer your views and analysis.
Two pieces are cited here to inform OTB users and to invite their participation. They are contributed by Heather, one general, the other more specific to Australia, which suggest the important (change of) political leadership, such as just seen also in Canada, can be.
The first is edited from Dr. Sander Chan ([email protected]) of the German Development Institute / Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE),Tulpenfeld 6, D-53113 Bonn, Germany. Note the emphasis on civil society and ‘bottom-up’ climate governance.
We draw your attention to a newly published article in Global Policy, in which 13 experts from academia, think tanks, and civil society argue that Paris should launch a comprehensive framework for non-state action, to maximize the potential of non-state and subnational climate actions.
The article not only synthesizes work on ‘orchestration’, ‘transnational governance networks’ and ‘partnerships’, it also translates evidence emerging in social science into a practical policy approach.
Because of the high relevance to a large audience in the context of the Paris Climate Conference, Global Policy and Wiley, have made the article freely accessible until the end of February. Please follow this link to access:http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1758-5899.12294/abstract.
Reinvigorating International Climate Policy: A Comprehensive Framework for Effective Nonstate Action
Chan, S., van Asselt, H., Hale, T., Abbott, K. W., Beisheim, M., Hoffmann, M., Guy, B., Höhne, N., Hsu, A., Pattberg, P., Pauw, P., Ramstein, C. and Widerberg, O. (2015)
As countries negotiate a new climate agreement for the United Nations climate conference in December 2015, a groundswell of climate actions is emerging as cities, regions, businesses and civil society groups act on mitigation and adaptation, independently, with each other and with national governments and international organizations.
The Paris conference provides a historic opportunity to establish a framework to catalyse, support, and steer these initiatives. Without such a framework, ‘bottom-up’ climate governance runs the risk of failing to deliver meaningful results. Social science research highlights the need for a comprehensive approach that promotes ambition, experimentation and accountability, and avoids unnecessary overlaps. This article specifies functions and design principles for a new, comprehensive framework for sub- and non-state climate actions that could provide effective coordination.
Other recent publications on climate change by the German Development Institute /Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE):
Pauw, Pieter / Richard Klein / Pier Vellinga / Frank Biermann (2015) Private finance for adaptation: do private realities meet public ambitions? Climatic Change doi:10.1007/s10584-015-1539-3.
Brandi, Clara / Axel Berger / Dominique Bruhn (2015). Between minilateralism and multilateralism: opportunities and risks of pioneer alliances in international trade and climate politics. Briefing Paper 16/2015. Bonn: German Development Institute / Deutches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE).
Chan, Sander / Pieter Pauw (2014). A Global Framework for Climate Action: Orchestrating Nonstate and Subnational Initiatives for More Effective Global Climate Governance. Discussion Paper 34/2014. Bonn: German Development Institute / Deutches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE).
Chan, Sander / Pieter Pauw / Harro van Asselt / Thomas Hale / Todd Edwards (2014) NAZCA portal: capturing and catalysing climate action at all levels in: Outreach: a multi-stakeholder magazine on climate change and sustainable development, 12.12.2014, 7
Hein, Jonas / Karen Meijer / Jean Carlo Rodríguez de Francisco (2015) What is the potential for a climate, forest and community friendly REDD+ in Paris? Briefing Paper 3/2015. Bonn: German Development Institute / Deutches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE).
The 2nd extract is edited from RenewEconomy, a free Daily Newsletter to which you can subscribe, headed Australia open to 1.5 °C climate target, “carbon neutral” in 2050, by Giles Parkinson on 17 November 2015
Australia remains open to including an option to tighten the global climate target to a maximum 1.5°C warming above pre-industrial levels, and may also support a long-term goal for the world to be “carbon neutral” by 2050.
In a briefing to many of the more than 100 environmental NGOs and business representatives due to attend the Paris climate change conference which begins in late November, the Australian delegation underlined the point that Australia remained “flexible” in many of the key issues to be discussed at the two-week conference.
It reveals how far the Australian government has moved since the replacement of Tony Abbott as prime minister by the more moderate Malcolm Turnbull, who will lead the delegation to Paris and speak at the leader’s day on the first day of the summit.
The Abbott government had based much of its long-term planning on the International Energy Agency’s “New Policies” scenario, which was based on no successful Paris outcome, and an emissions trajectory that would take the world to 3.6°C warming. It used this scenario as the basis of its energy white paper, and its emissions reductions discussion paper.
Australia’s official line is that it supports the 2°C target, but there is considerable pressure for the world to adopt a more ambitious target of 1.5°C, because capping warming at 2°C only leaves a 50-50 chance of avoiding the impact of runaway climate change.
The 1.5°C target remains in the text to be negotiated at Paris, and many parties, particularly island nations, want it to stay there, or even be the principal target….
So far, the pledges for Paris from more than 150 countries add up to a cap of around 2.7°C – assuming that the pledges and actions continue beyond 2030, which few have agreed to or outlined.
Hence the focus, also, on long-term goals in the text; and the draft text includes options for “zero emissions”, “decarbonisation” and “carbon neutrality” by 2050.
The Australian delegation indicated it would be comfortable with the latter. This is a dramatic change from the Abbott government, which had actually removed Australia’s own long-term target – of an 80 per cent cut in emissions by 2050 – when it removed the carbon price last year. Having a long-term goal is considered key to providing the investment decisions on trillions of dollars of energy infrastructure and investment that will be made in the coming decade. The UNFCCC estimates that $90 trillion will be invested over the next 15 years in infrastructure and energy.
A coalition of business groups last week argued that long-term goals were critical. They pushed for a goal of net-zero emissions by the year 2050. They noted that scientific research showed achieving that goal in 2100 would only provide a 66 per cent chance of limiting global warming to 2°C. We believe that a 1-in-3 chance of failure is unacceptable, given the potential for catastrophic climate impacts, they said.
The devil, however, will be in the detail, and how those terms are interpreted– and what they mean for fossil fuels and the carbon budget. Still, the official text retains numerous options, giving an idea of the amount of work that needs to be achieved in Paris….
Australia is sending a big team to try to negotiate through this web. Turnbull will talk on day one, at the leader’s summit, and environment minister Greg Hunt will also be in Paris in the first week. Foreign minister Julie Bishop will lead the negotiations in week 2…. Hunt told ABC TV that the conference would go ahead despite the terrorist attacks in Paris last weekend because of its profound importance.
In the talks themselves, there are still huge hurdles to be overcome. Not just in the text outcomes listed above, but also on issues such as climate finance, “loss and damage”, and the push for western countries to compensate poorer countries for damage caused by climate change. The conference is also unlikely to obtain pledges to match either the 2°C target or the 1.5°C target. But it is expected to lay down a platform that will enable those pledges to be increased over time. Another issue is on verification – particularly in light of the VW emissions scandal – and on the legal form of the treaty.
There was also frustration at the slow pace of progress at the G20 meeting, with officials reportedly frustrated by stalling efforts by India and Saudi Arabia, and environmental groups expressed disappointment on the lack of progress, particularly in the removal of fossil fuel subsidies.
The environment minister however believes that the Paris process will deliver a two degree outcome, not in terms of all the pledges that are on the table now, but what is likely is that it will set up a process that will bring us to come back in 2020, and 2025, and 2030….
Printer-friendly version
