Climate Change and Nepal


  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 1,370 other followers

  • Join NYCA Googlegroups

    Google Groups
    Nepalese Youth for Climate Action (NYCA)
    Visit this group
  • Blog Categories

  • Blogpost Archive

  • Recent posts

  • Hits !

    • 42,901 friends
  • Advertisements

Copenhagen Accord: Something or a Failure???

Posted by NYCA Blogger on December 21, 2009

Prashanta blogging from Copenhagen

The most awaited global gatherings and most importantly the largest gathering of youths from all over the world pushing for fair, ambitious and legally binding agreement went in vain. Hopes, aspiration and faith of 6.8 billion people had been literally not respected.

Obama almost travelled a halfway of the earth to tell the world he has nothing new to offer.  The word ACCORD was said to be used as harder word than a declaration but not enough harder to stabilize the increase of temperature below 1.5˚C (the demand of most of the vulnerable countries), not enough harder to address the millions of climate victims and not enough harder to ensure the safety of our lives and future generations.

Is the Copenhagen Accord something or a failure? (How will you define: a deal enough to be appreciated or a climate catastrophe?)

Target/Mitigation: A very obvious flaw of this accord: Not legally binding accord with optional commitments but promising to limit the increase of temperature by 2˚C, failing to set its peak emission year and its GHGs emission cuts targets.

Another obvious flaw: doesn’t address historical responsibility, principle of equity, precautionary and polluter’s pays principle is neglected

Besides committing for its own mitigation targets, developed countries said to provide finance to developing countries to mitigate its GHGs emission. (The collective commitment by developed countries is to provide new and additional resources, including forestry and investments through international institutions, approaching USD 30 billion for the period 2010-2012 with balanced allocation between adaptation and mitigation.)….isn’t it funny? I propose the developing countries to bounce back one part of balanced allocation to them to set their own enhanced mitigation target.

Finance:   Though a huge sum of money but not adequate for adaptation, enhanced mitigation, REDD+, capacity building, technology development and transfer is accorded to be provided for developing countries. The accord reads scaled up, new and additional, predictable and adequate funding shall be provided. ………………Is short-term finance of USD 30 billion and 100 billion USD by 2020 as read by accord is adequate to safeguard the billions of people living in most vulnerable developing countries?

“New multilateral funding for adaptation will be delivered through effective and efficient fund arrangements, with a governance structure providing for equal representation of developed and developing countries. A significant portion of such funding should flow through the Copenhagen Green Climate Fund” …………..By when the governance structure will be formed and the finance is channelled immediately in the affected communities?  Read the last sentence carefully……… Is that mean Copenhagen Green Climate Fund channel through existing financial mechanisms/bodies like World Bank……?

When the whole world is criticizing its governance structure, its history (and still) on contribution of GHGs emission, its ethical issues of funding, its transparency and policies, how would the developed countries will ensure that the financial mechanism is democratic, transparent and easily accessible,…..simply not through the existing mechanisms?

This accord totally violates the process of UNFCCC. Few countries (US, China, India, South Africa, Brazil…..) assembled this Accord outside of UNFCCC process on behalf of everyone. A lot of countries left disappointed by the Copenhagen accord, some refer it as holocaust and countries of  Latin America more furious.

Amidst of huge debate among the parties and still is, the Accord was formally accepted by Conference of Parties on Friday night (doubt: forced to accept or lured to accept).  There are some positive vibes midst of Climate Catastrophic Accord.

• Though not binding, emission target for 2020; Separate Annexes for developed and developing countries, voluntary pledges of major developing countries and nationally appropriate targets for rest

• Recognises the importance of REDD and agree to provide positive incentives

• Additional finance for mitigation and adaption to be provided for most vulnerable countries (short term-$ 30 billion and $100 billion per year by 2020: Copenhagen Green Climate Fund)

• Decided to establish tech mechanism for both development and transfer

• Carbon Markets (but not in detail and most debated mechanisms)


5 Responses to “Copenhagen Accord: Something or a Failure???”

  1. Easily, the article is really the freshest on this valuable topic. I harmonise with your conclusions and will eagerly look forward to your next updates. Saying thanks will not just be enough, for the great lucidity in your writing. I will at once grab your rss feed to stay privy of any updates. Fabulous work and much success in your business dealings!

  2. Youtube Downloader…

    This is a good tool to download great Youtube Videos…

  3. Sanam said

    Why did Copenhagen fail to deliver a climate deal?

  4. Esther Vallado said

    You think the Annexes are positive? They are empty!

    I don´t see anything positive in the whole Accord.

    I was ready to be dissapointed, but not that dissapointed.


  5. sarabjeetsingh said

    Great thought!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: