|10,000 march in Lima in support of a strong agreement they never got.|
The "Lima Call for Climate Action" document, agreed to on Sunday by 194 countries, is not a new “deal” for the climate, as conference observer Green Party Leader Elizabeth May pointed out. It is a 12-month work plan leading to the final meeting in Paris.
One major change – a setback for some developing countries – expects nations with ‘riding economies’, such as China, Brazil and India, to begin taking action on climate change in much the same way rich countries are expected to contribute.
In what appears to be another setback for the South, the North started to squirm and wriggle its way out of a 20-year hotly disputed demand by Southern countries that northern nations must bear the cost of cleaning up the environment in Southern regions damaged by Northern industrial development.
One of the few positive advances was a promise that countries already seriously threatened by exceptional climate change, such as small islands being swallowed up by rising seas, will receive special compensation for their losses.
Deadlocked and unable to agree on details, negotiators pushed decisions on many crucial issues forward into 2015.
Even so, following the meetings, which were extended by two days in an effort to reach any kind of an agreement, a spokesman for the European Union said “we are on track to agree to a global deal” at the Paris summit.
Nearly every NGO disagreed. A frustrated Sam Smith of the World Wildlife Fund said “the text went from weak to weaker to weakest, and it’s very weak indeed.”
2C in danger under this plan
Canada, represented by a delegation that included Environment Minister Leona Aglukkaq, once again failed to speak out in favour of steps that would reduce carbon emissions. Because it plans to make use of its huge coal reserves, Australia was the other outcast at the conference.
Meanwhile, an Environics survey of 2,020 Canadians last week revealed that the public is concerned about climate change, apparently more than the federal government. Fifty per cent of respondents were "extremely" or "definitely" concerned about a changing climate, and 78 per cent of those fear the kind of legacy it will leave for future generations.
It is clear that if the world is to have a meaningful climate change agreement 12 months from now, countries need to overcome enormous challenges.
To begin with, whether the UN-led process itself will produce a meaningful agreement is in great doubt. The UN has been hosting these meetings for 20 years, and the results have been dismal. The UN is only a facilitator in the process and has absolutely no power – other than persuasion – to force an agreement.
In the North, governments protect their economies and their relationship with wealthy donors before they consider the dangers of climate change. And developing countries relying on dirty energy such as coal need to generate energy to help their huge populations survive.
The new Peru document is extremely vague in that says wealthy nations will help developing countries fight climate change by investing in energy technology or offering climate aid. It’s impossible to see how southern countries can deal with their massive environmental issues. Earlier, the North was expected to provide $10 billion a year.
In addition, northern countries reiterated they expect the more industrialized developing countries to cut back on carbon emissions. But this is unlikely to happen any time soon. China and India, the two biggest developing country polluters, say they need to burn millions of tonnes of coal so they can develop their economies.
Corporate lobby dictating to North
The public interest group Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO) says that lobbying by powerful multinational corporations is preventing developed countries from making a stronger commitment to the climate change fight. They say that companies and their lobbying organizations claim that stronger emission controls would result in the loss of many thousands of jobs.
The corporate sector was out in full force in Lima. Shell Oil was permitted to speak at the main session about its preferred way of fighting carbon emissions -- carbon capture and storage (CCS), a still unproven technology. Another oil giant, Chevron, was permitted to sponsor side events inside the negotiations.
Meanwhile, 82 NGOs and one international NGO were unable to participate in any meaningful way because they had only observer status. The various drafts of the agreement were negotiated in secret, and anyone making a statement was kept to three minutes. No Canadian NGO participated at the conference.
NGOs had so little status in Lima that they needed approval from the UN concerning what slogans could be placed on their protest banners. Neither countries nor corporations were allowed to be named on the banners. A march by 10,000 protesters had no impact on the proceedings.
NGOs plan to be more powerful
NGOs are upset over the limited role they are permitted to play in UN climate talks, as well as the lack of impact they are having around the globe. As a result, the International Institute of Climate Action and Theory released a 118-page document outlining plans to strengthen and radicalize the movement leading up to and during the Paris conference.
Looking ahead to next year, the Peru agreement calls on countries to show by March how they will cut carbon emissions, but there’s no penalty if they fail to do so. The UN will then see if the pledges will be enough to limit climate warming to two degrees Celsius.
Given the track record of most countries of holding back on climate change commitments, it’s likely the UN and all 194 countries will be operating in crisis mode again next year.
For now, delegates are returning home to get some well-deserved rest. But they can be expected to be back working hard right after the New Year, working toward pulling off a miracle in Paris.
If you haven't already, please subscribe to my blog