Mostrar mensagens com a etiqueta COP3. Mostrar todas as mensagens
Mostrar mensagens com a etiqueta COP3. Mostrar todas as mensagens

sexta-feira, 8 de dezembro de 2023

Cartoon sobre as COP - Bado


Posted by at Sem comentários:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

terça-feira, 9 de novembro de 2021

For A Worse Tomorrow

Extinction Rebellion activists hold a “die-in” protest in front of the Mercer building, as the UN Climate Change Conference (COP26) takes place, in Glasgow, Scotland, Britain, November 8, 2021.


With 98 months to halve global emissions by 2030, COP26, the world’s “last best hope” was—at best—disappointing.

The Cairo Review’s assistant editor, Ariana Bennett, spoke with journalist Dahr Jamail about the outcome of COP26, the death trap of fossil-fuel capitalism, and the uncertain future of our planet. Jamail has covered the climate crisis for Truthout and is the author of the book The End of Ice: Bearing Witness and Finding Meaning in the Path of Climate Disruption.

The 26th UN Climate Change Conference produced an outcome document that Jamail deemed a failure. While the outcome text made an unprecedented reference to the role of fossil fuels in global warming, progress was clouded by a last-minute change to phase “down” instead of phasing “out” coal, the largest source of carbon dioxide emissions, due to pressure from India and China.

Given the agreements included in the Glasgow Climate Pact, experts estimate warming will reach 1.8 to 2.4 degrees Celsius by 2100. Limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius is a pipe dream, Jamail said. To remain in compliance with this target set by the 2015 Paris Agreement, the world needs to wean itself off fossil fuels and the resultant dependent economy. The world needs to reduce emissions by 45 percent to reach carbon neutrality by 2050. However, emissions are expected to rise 14 percent in the next nine years.

Parties will reconvene before the end of 2022 at COP27, set to be held in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, to revisit their Paris Agreement commitments.

Cairo Review: Are these Conferences of the Parties (COPs) generally effective?

Dahr Jamail: “In general, I would say definitely not, as far as engaging or enforcing policies internationally that would actually bring carbon dioxide emissions down. In short, there is nothing binding in these agreements that cause them to be enacted in a physical way, which has to happen.”

Specifically pertaining to the Glasgow Climate Pact, he said, “[parties] admit that emissions must fall by nearly 50 percent from 2010 levels by 2030 for global warming to be kept at 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial baseline levels. And yet, under the existing emissions reduction pledges, emissions will be nearly 14 percent higher by 2030 than they were in 2010.”

Additionally, rich countries consistently avoid financial responsibility for their disproportionate share in causing the climate crisis, he said. The Glasgow Climate Pact commits developed countries to doubling climate financing within the 2021-2025 $100 billion annual target; however these same countries were unable to meet a similar goal set for 2020 in 2009.

These broken promises foster distrust among developing nations in COP summits. Countries can make pledges all day long but until binding commitments are agreed to, with penalties incurred if conditions are not met, pledges do not carry any substance, Jamail said.

CR: Given the disappointment following COP26, what made COP3 (Kyoto Protocol) and COP21 (Paris Agreement) successful?

DJ: “Define success…I would define success only as rich countries taking full responsibility for the havoc that they’ve caused to the planet, footing the entire bill for poor countries, and immediately bringing carbon dioxide emissions down, like the example we saw during the pandemic. Nothing short of that kind of global reaction is worth anything at this stage of the game.”

CR: Would you call the outcome of COP26 successful?

DJ: “I think it was a dismal failure, and I’m not using that adjective lightly. It couldn’t even get countries to pledge to phase out coal or reduce subsidies to the fossil fuel industry or to protect forests…I’ve heard it referred to as the COP-out 26, and I think that’s very applicable.”

CR: What are your thoughts on the media coverage surrounding COP26?

DJ: “Context is everything, and by and large the context of the coverage of COP26 is completely lacking the context of the scale of the emergency and how far along in the crisis we are.” Calling 1.5 degree warming a “fantasy,” Jamail said, “we’re still locked in to catastrophic changes by 2100. There’s nothing to indicate, with what’s on the table, that global temperature rise is going to be kept anywhere below 5 degrees Celsius…Everything we’re witnessing today is just from 1.2 degrees warming.”

The severity of the crisis is unparalleled. According to a 2019 study, humans are injecting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere at a rate ten times higher than it was during the paleocene eocene thermal maximum (PETM), a global warming event 56 million years ago to which there is no modern geologic equivalent. It is likely to be repeated within the next few hundred years, Jamail said.

“Three months after that study was published we hit 415 parts per million (ppm) of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, and less than two weeks after that, the International Energy Agency announced global carbon emissions set a record in 2018, 2 percent higher than the previous year. Things are unravelling at a rate that is alarming, and coverage should be alarmist. In my opinion, it doesn’t go nearly far enough when you look at what’s actually happening to the planet.”

CR: What are some agreements you would have liked to see come out of the conference, from both developing and developed nations?

DJ: “I think developed countries have to foot more of the bill, if not the entire bill, of the costs developing countries are incurring from climate crisis-caused disasters. The developing countries are emitting almost negligible amounts of carbon dioxide compared to countries like the United States, India, China, and Russia, yet they are the ones paying disproportionate amounts of money to rebuild and keep themselves afloat as the disaster commences.”

He also highlighted the importance of putting an end to fossil fuel subsidies. At the conference, there were more than 500 lobbyists representing over one hundred fossil fuel companies—representation greater than any single country. In fact, despite claims of safety and inclusivity, COP26 campaigners warned the event would be the whitest and most privileged conference to date as attendees faced lack of access to vaccines and changing travel rules.

UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres acknowledged the plight of women, youth, indigenous communities, and those on the frontlines of the climate crisis, recognizing their disappointment in the face of insufficient commitments from national governments.

“I would imagine that the groups of people he issued that apology towards probably don’t want it,” Jamail said. “Talk is cheap.” Immediate action and compensation are what nations—who are literally going under water—desperately need, he emphasized.

CR: How do the discordant actions of policy leaders, such as taking a private jet to a climate conference, affect public perception of the climate crisis?

DJ: “It only breeds more cynicism and, I think, hopelessness when you see people continuing along the lines of business as usual while the planet literally burns.” The message sent to young people and activists is disheartening, he added. While Greta Thunberg opted to take a train to the conference, Jamail asked, “Could you imagine Joe Biden taking a boat, for example? I think it’s a pretty sad state of affairs when we have to rely on a Scandinavian schoolgirl to exhibit appropriate behavior during a crisis.”

CR: There’s been a larger emphasis recently on climate adaptation as opposed to merely mitigation, in light of the severe climate events of the past year. What do you think of this transition and how can countries implement both in tandem?

DJ: “I think the only thing left to do is move towards adaptation. That does mean taking radical steps, like abandoning the idea of the perpetual growth economy, and that means everything has to become a lot more local. Shipping goods around the globe is a dinosaur system. It’s going to go away whether we like it or not. The more actively countries can start adapting to that now, as opposed to being forced to, the easier that transition will be.” Increased local production, with the help of advanced manufacturing and automation, can help reduce maritime transport, which accounts for 2.5 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions.

Capitalism’s perpetual growth, driven by the fossil-fuel economy, is incompatible with emissions reductions targets, and euphemisms like “green capitalism” are merely “psychological protection,” Jamail argued. “The idea of perpetual growth is ridiculous; it’s impossible, and it’s insane,” he said. “Deep sacrifices have to be made, especially in developed countries.” Sacrifices, Jamail said, like those made during pandemic lockdowns, which proved that when necessity and government preferences align, changes can be made rapidly.

“Bottom line, there is no way we can maintain the global economy and lifestyles in developed countries that we have today. Full stop.”

CR: While adapting to climate change how will countries tackle the predicted influx of climate refugees?

DJ: “That is one of the biggest issues that governments face going forward, even in the United States. The Pentagon noted in their annual report that [climate refugees] are one of the biggest security threats going forward not just in the United States, but globally. We know, from studies that have come out, that the number of climate refugees every year is going to increase into the hundreds of millions going forward…We’re going to see displaced people in numbers we’ve never seen from any war or anything else before.”

CR: Was there a significant emphasis on the Middle East and North Africa region during COP26?

DJ: “The short answer is no, absolutely not….There was not nearly enough attention brought to the climate havoc that’s already being wrought upon countries in Africa and the Middle East.”

Poor countries and developing countries, who emit negligible amounts of carbon dioxide, bear the brunt of higher temperatures, droughts, wildfires, and infrastructure loss from climate disasters, he said.

CR: Saudi Arabia is praised for its fight against climate change in the region, yet wants to remain a leader in global energy markets while phasing out hydrocarbons. What do you think?

DJ: “How is that possible? Talk about speaking out of both sides of your mouth. You can’t have one without the other. If you are going to be serious about transitioning and getting off oil and gas and reducing your carbon dioxide emissions, you have to abandon the fossil fuel economy. Period.”

CR: Yet, Western countries also have a hand in perpetuating oil dependence in the region…

DJ: “Because all of our economies are fossil fuel-based. Without that deep, deep, deep collaboration, the global economy is not going to continue to function. The United States has a deep stake in the perpetuation of dictatorships and regimes in oil-rich countries so the United States maintains access to that oil and gas.”

A COP26 funeral was held on the conference’s last day by the international environmental activist movement, Extinction Rebellion, mourning the “failed process” of COP26—a harsh reminder of the hard work left to do. Jamail encourages people to start behaving according to the crisis we are in, where today is better than tomorrow. “It’s only going to keep intensifying,” he warned.
Posted by at Sem comentários:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

sexta-feira, 18 de dezembro de 2020

Dossiê BioTerra: COP

ATENÇÃO © Copyleft - É permitida a partilha do dossiê exclusivamente para fins não comerciais e desde que o autor e o BioTerra sejam citados.


Conference of the Parties (COP)  || Conferência das Partes


O que é a COP?
A COP é o órgão decisório supremo da Convenção. Todos os Estados que são  Partes da Convenção estão representados na COP, na qual revisam a implementação da Convenção e quaisquer outros instrumentos legais que a COP adote e tomem as decisões necessárias para promover a implementação efetiva da Convenção, incluindo arranjos institucionais e administrativos .

Mais informações sobre a COP
Uma tarefa fundamental para a COP é rever/reformular/ emendar as comunicações nacionais e os inventários de emissões apresentados pelas Partes. Com base nessas informações, a COP avalia os efeitos das medidas adotadas pelas Partes e o progresso alcançado na consecução do objetivo final da Convenção.

A COP reúne-se todos os anos, a menos que as Partes decidam  outra forma. A primeira reunião da COP foi realizada em Berlim, Alemanha, em março de 1995. A COP reúne-se em Bonn, sede do secretariado, a menos que uma Parte se ofereça para sediar a sessão. Assim como a presidência da COP gira entre as cinco regiões reconhecidas da ONU - isto é, África, Ásia, América Latina e Caraíbas, Europa Central e Oriental e Europa Ocidental e Outros - há uma tendência de que o local da COP também mude entre esses grupos.

Saber mais:
Bureau of the COP
Information on election and membership of the bodies of the Convention

NOVA ATENÇÃO © COPYRIGHT-  Ao partilhar, agradeço atempadamente a indicação do autor e do meu blogue Bioterra. Estes dossiês resultam de um apurado trabalho de pesquisa, selecção de qualidade e organização.
Posted by at Sem comentários:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

domingo, 1 de novembro de 2020

Donald Brown - Is climate science disinformation a crime against humanity?


Although there is an important role for scepticism in science, for almost 30 years some corporations have supported a disinformation campaign about climate change science.

While it may be reasonable to be somewhat sceptical about climate change models, these untruths are not based upon reasonable scepticism but outright falsification and distortions of climate change science.

These claims have included assertions that the science of climate change has been completely "debunked" and that there is no evidence of human causation of recent observed warming. There are numerous lines of evidence that point to human causation even if it is not a completely settled matter. Reasonable scepticism cannot claim that there is no evidence of causation and some other claims frequently being made by the well-financed climate change disinformation campaign, and they amount to an utter distortion of a body of evidence that the world needs to understand to protect itself from huge potential harms.

On 21 October, 2010, John Broder of the New York Times, reported that "the fossil fuel industries have for decades waged a concerted campaign to raise doubts about the science of global warming and to undermine policies devised to address it".

According the New York Times article, the fossil fuel industry has "created and lavishly financed institutes to produce anti-global warming studies, paid for rallies and websites to question the science, and generated scores of economic analyses that purport to show that policies to reduce emissions of climate-altering gases will have a devastating effect on jobs and the overall economy."

Disinformation about the state of climate change science is extraordinarily – if not criminally – irresponsible, because the consensus scientific view is based upon strong evidence that climate change:
  • Is already being experienced by tens of thousands in the world;
  • Will be experienced in the future by millions of people from greenhouse gas emissions that have already been emitted but not yet felt due to lags in the climate system; and,
  • Will increase dramatically in the future unless greenhouse gas emissions are dramatically reduced from existing global emissions levels.
Threats from climate change include deaths and danger from droughts, floods, heat, storm-related damages, rising oceans, heat impacts on agriculture, loss of animals that are dependent upon for substance purposes, social disputes caused by diminishing resources, sickness from a variety of diseases, the inability to rely upon traditional sources of food, the inability to use property that people depend upon to conduct their life including houses or sleds in cold places, the destruction of water supplies, and the inability to live where has lived to sustain life. The very existence of some small island nations is threatened by climate change.

As long as there is any chance that climate change could create this type of destruction, even assuming, for the sake of argument, that these dangers are not yet fully proven, disinformation about the state of climate change science is extraordinarily morally reprehensible if it leads to non-action in reducing climate change's threat. In fact, how to deal with uncertainty in climate change science is an ethical issue, not only a scientific matter, because the consequences of delay could be so severe and the poorest people in the world as some of the most vulnerable.

The corporations that have funded the sowing of doubt on this issue are clearly doing this because they see greenhouse gas emissions reduction strategies as adversely affecting their financial interests.

This might be understood as a new type of crime against humanity. Scepticism in science is not bad, but sceptics must play by the rules of science including publishing their conclusions in peer-reviewed scientific journals and not make claims that are not substantiated by the peer-reviewed literature. The need for responsible scepticism is particularly urgent if misinformation from sceptics could lead to great harm.

We may not have a word for this type of crime yet, but the international community should find a way of classifying extraordinarily irresponsible scientific claims that could lead to mass suffering as some type of crime against humanity.

Posted by at Sem comentários:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

segunda-feira, 14 de dezembro de 2015

O final feliz da COP21


Por volta das 19h30 do último sábado, 14/12, em Paris, ouviu-se bater um martelo. Foi quando 195 países do mundo concordaram com um só documento que define passos comuns a serem seguidos rumo a uma economia de baixo carbono. Este é um feito inédito em 21 anos de convenção mundial do clima – as COP’s - e, sem dúvida, um grande passo para a Humanidade.

A partir de agora, cada país que apresentou seus objetivos domésticos de mitigação de gases do efeito estufa e adaptação às mudanças climáticas – as Metas Nacionalmente Determinadas – terá que cumprir compromissos de transparência e cooperação sob um regime internacional com força de lei. As metas do Acordo do Clima começam a valer em 2020. Durará por 5 anos e terá seu sucesso revisto então.

Alguns fatores colaboraram imensamente para o sucesso deste COP. A condução francesa foi muito elogiada - como o país anfitrião lidera os trabalhos conta muito para criar o ambiente político em conferências deste tipo. Em Paris, esta tarefa foi dada ao ministro de Negócios e Desenvolvimento Internacional, Laurent Fabius. Foi tão bem sucedido, que ao entrar no salão para anunciar a vitória, Fabius arrancou suspiros e gritinhos entusiasmados da plateia.

Entre as boas sacadas francesas, a estratégia de trazer os chefes de estado para o dia inicial da conferência foi acertada. Se 150 grandes chefões voaram até uma Paris pós-atentado para deixar claro que gostaríam de ver sair este acordo, os negociadores tinham que se virar para cumprir. Também a lembrança de que a França construiu este momento logo após todo o sofrimento vivido em 13 de Novembro foi devidamente reconhecida. “Nos devolveu a fé na comunidade global”, comemorou o Secretário de Estado dos Estados Unidos, John Kerry.

O Brasil esteve em alta. Saiu-se com metas arrojadas, se comparadas aos demais. Vendeu casos de sucesso no combate ao desmatamento e reforçou seus bons números de energias renováveis - os dois grandes vilões das emissões de gases estufa. Apresentou proposta de mecanismos de mercado aplaudidas. Presidiu um dos grupos de trabalho mais complicados - o que debateu a questão de diferenciação de responsabilidade entre os países. Foi elogiado pelo corredores pela excelência de seu corpo de diplomatas e terminou com a ministra do Meio Ambiente Izabella Teixeira comemorando que o acordo teve mesmo foi sotaque brasileiro.

Um acordo deste porte traz algo além do que compromissos. Ele passa uma mensagem. Algo que, para fins de políticas internas e externas, é o mais importante. É um sinal claro e inequívoco de que há uma coisa no mundo com o qual os países que o compõem concordam: que do jeito que está, não vai dar mais. Este sinal vermelho falará alto aos políticos e à sociedade civil. Mas, quem foi mesmo citado com recorrência em Paris foram os setores privados e financeiro. A contar pela presença em massa de empresas na COP 21, o recado foi dado.

Escondidos no juridiquês da negociação circularam conceitos profundos. O que fala em “no country left behind” - nenhum país será deixado para trás, em português - é particularmente significativo, pois traduz um intuito verdadeiramente cooperativo entre nações. Foi graças a ele que a batalha em prol dos países mais vulneráveis acabou vencida - e a meta de almejarmos um aquecimento máximo de 1.5 oC até o final do século, se comparados aos níveis pré-industriais, entrou para o texto final. Justiça Climática também foi expressão que ganhou corpo. E, quem diria, até a Mãe Terra foi citada no acordo final. As ONG’s, encabuladas em suas ações pelo rigor da polícia francesa, saíram, desta forma, também um pouco de alma lavada.

A palavra que mais se ouviu ao final, no entanto, foi implementação. Cada país sai de Paris com compromissos determinados por eles mesmos e com reconhecimento de seus pares de que aqueles são os melhores objetivos que puderam apresentar. No abraço de agradecimento a sua delegação, Izabella Teixeira frisou: "Agora é hora de ir para casa trabalhar”.

Foi com Nelson Mandela, mais de uma vez citado durante os motivadores discursos dos nossos salvadores do clima em Paris, que a chanceler sul-africana Edna Molewa encerrou sua fala durante a plenária final. “Eu andei a longa estrada para a liberdade”, começa a citação. “Mas só posso descansar por um momento, pois com a liberdade vem a responsabilidade, e eu não me atrevo a demorar, pois a minha caminhada não terminou”.
Posted by at Sem comentários:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

segunda-feira, 30 de novembro de 2015

COP21 – A Cimeira de Paris que quer reformular o Protocolo de Quioto



A 21ª Cimeira do Clima – COP21 realizou-se em dezembro de 2015, em Paris, e teve como principal objetivo estabelecer um novo acordo internacional sobre o clima, para diminuir a emissão de gases de efeito estufa, o aquecimento global e em consequência limitar o aumento da temperatura global em 2º C até 2100.

A resposta política internacional às alterações climáticas começou na Cimeira da Terra no Rio em 1992, durante a qual se definiu o Quadro das Nações Unidas sobre Mudança do Clima (UNFCCC). Esta convenção estabeleceu um quadro de ação destinado a estabilizar as concentrações atmosféricas de gases com efeito estufa (GEE) para evitar “uma interferência antropogénica perigosa com o sistema climático.” A UNFCCC, que entrou em vigor em 21 de março de 1994, tem agora uma adesão quase universal de 195 nações.

O principal objetivo da Conference of Parties (COP) consistiu em ​​rever a implementação da Convenção. A primeira COP teve lugar em Berlim em 1995 e desde então nos encontros significativos incluem-se a COP3, onde foi adotado o Protocolo de Quioto, COP11, onde foi produzido o Plano de Ação de Montreal, COP15 em Copenhaga, onde um acordo para o sucesso do Protocolo de Quioto não foi, infelizmente, realizado, e COP17 em Durban, onde o Fundo Climático Verde foi criado.

Em 2014, a COP20 realizada em Lima atraiu mais de 15 mil delegados oficiais, e os negociadores concluíram as negociações com o ‘Lima Call For Climate Action‘, um documento que estabelece as bases para um novo acordo climático global.

O que é a COP21 e qual o seu objetivo?
Em 2015, a COP21, também conhecida como a Cimeira do Clima de Paris, pela primeira vez em mais de 20 anos de negociações das Nações Unidas, alcançou um acordo juridicamente vinculativo e universal sobre o clima, com o objectivo de manter o aquecimento global abaixo dos 2 °C. O limite da subida de temperatura média do planeta de 2 ºC prende-se com o facto de que, se ultrapassado, consequências perigosas e irreversíveis tornar-se-ão inevitáveis.

Contributo de Portugal para o Clima e para a Sustentabilidade
A Europa deve dar o exemplo e liderar nas políticas climáticas, como aconteceu com o Comércio Europeu de Licenças de Emissões (CELE), rumo a um acordo na Conferência do Clima de Paris, que substitua o protocolo de Quioto, afirmou Jorge Moreira da Silva, na altura Ministro do Ambiente, Ordenamento do Território e Energia.

Portugal tem já uma trajetória, rumo a Paris, bem definida. Em Abril de 2015, o Governo e 82 entidades públicas e privadas da sociedade civil assinaram o Compromisso para o Crescimento Verde, que estabelece 14 metas e 111 iniciativas até 2030. Este Compromisso, além de traçar o rumo para o crescimento e desenvolvimento sustentáveis, dota as políticas públicas de previsibilidade, estabilidade e ambição. Recorde-se que o Compromisso para o Crescimento Verde prevê a obtenção de uma meta de 40% de renováveis no consumo final de energia em 2030, quando na Europa é de apenas 27%, e a redução da emissão de gases com efeitos de estufa em 30% a 40% em 2030, face a 2005.

Participação das Empresas na COP21
Em paralelo com a COP21 decorreu o Sustainable Innovation Forum 2015, que tem como objetivo facilitar parcerias entre empresas, governos, as Nações Unidas e Organizações Não Governamentais, promovendo soluções para as alterações climáticas e fomentar a inovação na área das baixas emissões de carbono.

Saber mais:
Posted by at Sem comentários:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

quinta-feira, 20 de janeiro de 2011

Donald Brown - An Ethical Analysis of the Cancun Climate Negotiations Outcome

The Cancun Agreements of the 2010 UN Climate Summit do not represent a success for multilateralism; neither do they put the world on a safe climate pathway that science demands, and far less to a just and equitable transition towards a sustainable model of development. They represent a victory for big polluters and Northern elites that wish to continue with business-as-usual. (IBON, 2010)
Climate change is an ethical problem because: (a) it is a problem caused by some people in one part of the world that puts people and the natural resources on which they depend in other parts of the world at great risk, (b) the harms to these other people are not mere inconveniences but in some cases catastrophic losses of life or the ability to sustain life, and (c) those who are vulnerable to climate change cant petition their government to act to protect themselves but must rely upon a sense of justice and responsibility of those causing the problem. Because climate change raises civilization challenging ethical questions, any proposed climate change regime must be examined through an ethical lens.
This post reviews the Cancun outcome through an ethical lens in light of the overall responsibility of those nations who are exceeding their fair share of safe global emissions in regard to their duties: (a) to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to levels necessary to prevent harm to others, (b) to reduce greenhouse gas emission to levels consistent with what is each nation's fair share of total global emissions, and (c) to provide financing for adaptation measures and other necessary responses to climate change harms by those who are most vulnerable and least responsible for climate change.
To understand the significance of what happened in Cancun, it is necessary to briefly review the history of international negotiations leading up to Cancun. That is, it is not sufficient to simply examine what happened in Cancun without seeing Cancun in the context of twenty-year negotiating history that had as its goal the prevention of dangerous climate change and the harms that each year of delay in agreeing to a global deal exacerbate.

II. The Path To The Cancun Agreement
The Cancun conference took place from November 29 to December 10, 2010. The Cancun goals were modest in light of the failure of COP-15 in Copenhagen the year before to achieve an expected global solution to climate change. Copenhagen was expected to produce a global solution to climate change pursuant to a two-year negotiating process that was agreed to in Bali, Indonesia, two years before Copenhagen in December 2007.
To understand the ethical significance of the Cancun, it is necessary to review the twenty-year history of climate change negotiations that led to Copenhagen and Cancun. This history constitutes a mostly failed attempt over two decades to adopt a global solution to climate change.
Negotiations on a global climate change deal began in 1990 that led in 1992 to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). (Bodansky,2001) The negotiation process began in December 1990, when the UN General Assembly established the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for a Framework Convention on Climate Change, to negotiate a convention containing "appropriate commitments" in time for signature in June 1992 at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro. This treaty itself did not contain binding greenhouse gas (ghg) emissions limitations for countries but nevertheless included numerous other binding national obligations. Among other things, for instance, the parties to the UNFCCC agreed that:
(a) They would adopt policies and measures to prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system; (b) Developed countries should take the first steps to do this; (c) Nations have common but differentiated responsibilities to prevent climate change; (d) Nations may not use scientific uncertainty as an excuse for not taking action; and, (e) Nations should reduce their ghg emissions based upon "equity." (UN, 1992)
In the early UNFCCC negotiations, the European Union and Association of Small Island States (AOSIS) advocated establishing a target and timetable to limit emissions by developed countries in the UNFCCC, while the United States and the oil-producing states opposed this idea. (Bodanksy, 2001). Other developing states generally supported targets and timetables, as long as it was clearly understood that these targets and timetables would apply only to developed states. (Bodanksy, 2001)
The UNFCCC has 192 parties, a number that includes almost all countries in the world including the United States which ratified the UNFCCC in 1993.
The UNFCC is a "framework" convention because it has always been expected that additional requirements would be added to the initial framework in updates that are known as "protocols" or in annual decisions of the conferences of the parties (COPs).
Each year as the parties to the UNFCCC meet in COPs , decisions were made that affect the responsibilities of the parties. The UNFCCC COPs were as follows:
• 1995 - COP 1, The Berlin Mandate
• 1996 - COP 2, Geneva, Switzerland
• 1997 - COP 3, The Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change
• 1998 - COP 4, Buenos Aires, Argentina
• 1999 - COP 5, Bonn, Germany
• 2000 - COP 6, The Hague, Netherlands
• 2001 - COP 6 (Continued), Bonn, Germany
• 2001 - COP 7, Marrakech, Morocco
• 2002 - COP 8, New Delhi, India
• 2003 - COP 9, Milan, Italy
• 2004 - COP 10, Buenos Aires, Argentina
• 2005 - COP 11 Montreal, Canada
• 2006 - COP 12, Nairobi, Kenya
• 2007 - COP 13 Bali, Indonesia
• 2008 - COP 14, Poznań, Poland
• 2009 - COP 15, Copenhagen, Denmark
• 2010 - COP-16, Cancun.
Each year nations have meet in COPs to achieve a global solution to climate change and each COP for the most part continued to add small steps toward the goals of the UNFCCC. Yet in all COPs some nations have resisted calls from some of the most vulnerable nations to adopt a solution to climate change that would prevent dangerous climate change.
As the international community approached Cancun, no comprehensive global solution had been agreed to despite the fact that the original negotiations on the UNFCCC began in 1990 with a goal of achieving a global climate change solution. For this reason, Cancun must be understood as the latest attempt in a twenty year history of mostly failed attempts to structure a global solution to climate change.
Read more »
Posted by at Sem comentários:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

terça-feira, 23 de setembro de 2008

Dossiê Povos Indígenas e Conservação da Natureza

ATENÇÃO © Copyleft - É permitida a partilha do dossiê exclusivamente para fins não comerciais e desde que o autor e o BioTerra sejam citados.
Não esqueças de visitar regularmente este espaço para manteres-te actualizado

GCAP - Global Call to Action Against Poverty
International Decade of Indigenous Languages (2022-2032)

Prémios

ONG || Portais || Associações || Fundações
Brazil Lab at Princeton University
INA - Indigenistas Associados

Tratados Internacionais

Base de Dados

Notícias
Living in The Time of Dying

Filmes
A Missão
Apocalypto
Libertos - O Preço da Vida

NOVA ATENÇÃO © Copyleft - Ao partilhar, agradeço atempadamente a indicação do autor e do meu blogue Bioterra. Estes dossiês resultam de um apurado trabalho de pesquisa, selecção de qualidade e organização.
Posted by at Sem comentários:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

quinta-feira, 28 de dezembro de 2006

COP3 – Quioto, Japão (dezembro de 1997)


Quando as “Partes” adotaram a Convenção Quadro das Nações Unidas em Mudanças Climáticas – CQNUMC, já se esperava que seriam adotadas ações mais enérgicas futuramente para combater o problema do aquecimento global. Com o estabelecimento de um processo de revisão, discussão e troca de informações permanente, a Convenção permite a adoção de compromissos adicionais em resposta a avanços científicos e disposições políticas.

Assim, em 1997, na cidade de Quioto no Japão, contando com representantes de 159 nações, foi então realizada a terceira Conferência das Partes – COP3, que culminou na adoção, por consenso, do Protocolo de Quioto, que ficou como um dos marcos mais importantes desde a criação da Convenção no combate à mudança climática.

Posted by at Sem comentários:
Labels: , , , , ,
Subscrever: Mensagens (Atom)