Indecisive climate talks & Lima Summit
- The Sangai Express Editorial :: December 27, 2014 -

Notwithstanding the enhanced knowledge, inventory and rising concerns about the all pervasive issue of climate change on Earth, international summits and conferences have so far yielded little positive results in terms of mankind’s battle against ever exacerbating phenomenon known as climate change (sic global warming).

Global warming or climate change which has now taken the form of a global malady is largely mankind’s doing.

Obviously and logically enough, it is the responsibility of mankind to undo all the wrongdoings they committed on the lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere of Earth either out of greed, genuine necessity, recklessness or sheer ignorance.

Though the situation has been growing more and more alarming with each passing year, many are still optimistic that man’s ingenuity can tackle and even reverse the phenomenon of global warming. But we are doubtful.

Frankly we would rather be a pessimist and proved wrong instead of being an optimist only to be proved wrong at the end.

One major hindrance is polarization of countries when the issue of global climate change demands collective, synchronized efforts.

Shirking responsibilities by different groups of countries when it comes to tackling global climate change is evident at every international climate summit.

The sharp divide between rich countries and underdeveloped countries is also one ubiquitous major stumbling block.

The Twentieth Conference of the Parties (COP-20) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) which concluded in Lima, Peru on December 14, 2014 was no exception.

The summit indeed made a couple of forward steps but there are miles and miles to go before mankind could achieve a tangible counter measure against global climate change.

According to some observers, the summit achieved something of a breakthrough after twenty years of difficult climate negotiations.

But we are of the opinion that it’s too early to comment on the outcomes of the climate talk on such positive note for nothing has changed on the ground.

Many believed the foundation was established for the next major international climate agreement which under the auspices of the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action will be finalized and signed one year from now at COP-21 in Paris, France, for implementation in 2020. This means implementation part is still six long years away.

Who knows the proposed agreement may never see the light of day as there are strong possibilities about many parties disagree with the agreement and opt out of it given the skewed and fluid matrix of world geopolitics.

The expanded geographic scope of the Lima Call for Climate Action and thereby the incipient Paris agreement, and the emerging architecture of a pragmatic hybrid combining bottom-up “Intended Nationally Determined Contributions” (INDCs) with top-down elements for reporting and synthesis of contributions by the UNFCCC Secretariat, represents the best promise in many years of a future international climate agreement that is truly meaningful.

This is the only bright side of Lima Summit but again who knows it may ultimately prove elusive at the 11th hour.

The fact that the agreed decision text from Lima (the “Lima Call for Climate Action”) is less than four pages in length, the Annex (“Elements for a Draft Negotiating Text”) of additional options for the Paris Agreement extends to more than 37 pages speaks volumes about the tough, grueling and lengthy rounds of negotiations that lie ahead on the road to Paris.

Very often, environmental concerns faded into oblivion during economic hard times, and it is a reflection of the fact that majority of the public and most of the leadership still believe that protecting the environment represents spending money rather than saving it.

This is one skewed understanding which undermines and even negates several major international climate summits over the decades.