The 17th conference of partners of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, popularly known as COP-17, which took place in Durban, South Africa, and was supposed to last from November 28 to December 9, but ended 36 hours late, would have been a dismal failure but for the last minute concerted efforts to give it a semblance of rallying hope for the people of the world earnestly waiting to know what next in the fight against climate change. The Durban COP was critical because the historic 1997 Kyoto Protocol is set to expire next year; so, anxious stakeholders, sneering critics and exuberant activists waited with bated breath for the outcome, conscious of the cul-de-sac that signified the end of the two previous climate conferences: Copenhagen COP-15 and Cancun COP-16.In summary, COP 17 extended the Kyoto Protocol, the only global pact that enforces carbon cuts; agreed on the format of a fund to help poor countries tackle climate change; and mapped out a path to a legally binding agreement on emissions reductions. At the end of the conference, delegates agreed to start work next year on a new legally binding treaty to cut greenhouse gases to be decided by 2015 and to come into force by 2020. The process for doing so, called the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action, would develop a new protocol, another legal instrument or agreed outcome with legal force that would be applicable under the UN climate convention.No matter the ambiguity of the phrasing of the Durban climate accord, which was dumped by Canada the following day, poor nations in general, and Africa in particular, stand to gain, because the European Union will place its current emissions cutting pledges inside the legally-binding Kyoto Protocol: a key demand of developing countries. On the other hand, considering that previous negotiations had witnessed several sensible ways suggested to design the Kyoto Protocols successor treaty but having been undermined by efforts to accommodate inappropriate US-led demands and objections, resulting in the impasse that became evident at past COP conferences, and that nearly marred the Durban edition, we can warily assume that Durbans greatest achievement was in postponing the Doomsday.For South Africa as a nation, it was a success story. The Durban COP attracted 15,000 delegates and 5,000 journalists. The event called for 27 simultaneous meeting rooms with the capacity to host between 20 and 500 delegates, two plenary halls hosting between 1,300 and 1,900 delegates, 235 administrations and country delegation offices, 800 computer internet stations, 278 exhibition stands in the International Convention Centre exhibition centre, a large travel and accommodation desks and three banking facilities. Statistics reveal that by avoiding waste disposal to landfill sites, a carbon emission saving of 40,751 kilogrammes of CO2 was achieved. Recycled materials from the conference totalled 32,030 kilogrammes. Moreover, not only was it a veritable cultural showcase for South Africa, who christened the negotiations indaba, a Zulu word connoting an informal forum for all stakeholders, it earned the nation much-desired foreign exchange. The same cannot be said of Nigeria, who in the first place reported late for the event, and then generally failed to live up to expectations as the perceived outstanding negotiator for developing nations.Critics are of the opinion that the COP meetings are perpetual failures, and have ended up piling up carbon emissions through the vast quantity of fuel burnt by delegates who have travelled from all around the world to converge for failed negotiations. But I personally posit that the COPs end with accords of little or no force because the UNFCCC mechanism is not binding and does not incorporate enforceable commitments, unlike the World Trade Organisation, whose dispute-settlement mechanism imposes penalties for abandoning negotiated reductions of trade barriers. This is where the worlds nations should strive to adjust. The carrot and the stick approach is a strategy, authentic, and task-accomplishing one.Without a legal force to beat offending nations into line, the West shall continue to dilly-dally, and play politics with an issue that is really a matter of life and death for us, and a matter of wealth and bankruptcy for them. I say this because experts have given approximate estimates which indicate that the most extreme costs for adaptation and the residual damage from climate change will be felt in West Africa and South Asia. Like they say, the South shall suffer for the Norths climate-sins. Therefore, industrialised Northern countries are morally and legally obligated to repay their climate debt, being the polluters of the earth. They grew rich at the expense of the planet and the developing world by exploiting cheap coal and oil. They must be forced to pay for the resultant loss and damage by reducing their carbon emissions now and financially supporting developing countries to move to clean energy pathways. Without enforceable commitments, the COPs will end up as annual comic playing ground for shifting of goal posts.Funny enough, the issue of how to raise the pledged climate fund was not even discussed at Durban, and the developed countries were vague on the modalities for technology transfer to developing nations in order to aid their adaptation efforts. In fact, considering the United States position at the negotiations, what the whole process means is that real action against climate change is delayed until 2020, leaving the world at the mercy of global warming as the earth may be warmed up to four degrees Celsius, which shall spell doom for Africa and the Small Island states. This was basically the reason, why these countries vehemently spoke against the Durban roadmap just before its ratification towards the end of the conference, saying that it lacked the ambition needed to ensure their survival. For sure, these are the most vulnerable to rising seas and spreading deserts.Furthermore, Durban has confirmed the sceptic view that what is at play is politics at the highest level: among Europe, the United States, Canada, Japan and three rapidly rising economic powersChina, India and Brazil. Each countrys stand is fundamentally affected by domestic politics and the stress the global financial crisis has put on it, with all of them totally forgetting about climate justice or climate equity, i.e. the obligations of rich nations to help poor countries with a problem of climate change which they had no part in creating. To be candid, USA and its allies will never allow a modus operandi that delineates China as a developing nation, exempting it from any emissions limits, which the Kyoto Protocol does. Ironically, China now has a vastly larger economy than it had in 1992when the framework convention was draftedand recently surpassed the United States as the worlds largest emitter of greenhouse gases.In the final analysis, everybody knows that the only real solution to climate change is to leave the oil and the coal alone, and change to clean energy sources. But this is an onerous task which requires a complete overhaul of energy production, transport and agriculture around the world. This means that actions on local levels are required. Developed nations must fulfil their pledges on the Climate Change Fund, and also remove bottlenecks for accessing of funds and technologies through the Clean Development Mechanism. But it is also fundamental that Nigeria and other developing nations seek to develop their human capacity on climate issues, because this is what will strengthen their negotiation teams and other climate policy down-liners. But more importantly, it shall afford them the ability to create innovative adaptation technologies and techniques for local applications. This is because, in my opinion, nobody really knows where the ultimate solution to climate change shall come from.- Odogwu, an environmental activist, wrote in from C8, Emab Plaza, Wuse II, Abuja via gregodogwu@yahoo.com. 08063601665.
Click here to read full news..
