|
The global economy is currently under pressure from a number of crises. All of them, though seemingly independent, are actually closely linked with one another. This also includes the environmental crisis, which, juxtaposed with the food and financial crises, poses serious threat to the global economy in general and to developing countries and LDCs in particular. But, despite its obvious adversity, the current scenario has also made the world rethink its development policies. It has opened up the scope of undoing past flaws and build a better and more equitable environment for all.
In this regard, the negotiations presently underway at the UNFCCC hold a key instrument for achieving the dual objectives of equity and emissions reductions. The Parties have discussed about the various policy combinations of meeting these objectives over the years. But to a great extent, the differences, rather than converging, have increased over the years. The significant gap between the positions of the developed and the developing nations has been the major stumbling block to the process of culling out a fair and equitable deal. The recently concluded Poznan meet have experienced the fallout of these differences. On the one hand, while the developing countries came forward with some of the brilliant (most insightful) submissions related to finance, technology transfer, shared vision, and adaptation issues, the developed countries opted for the tactics of delaying the process. The sheer reluctance to engage over the various ideas being put forward by the developing countries show the extent of non-engagements (any other word?)from the developed countries. Anyone closely following the COP would agree that Poznan has been the COP of putting the ideas on table. So the coming year of 2009 will be the year of negotiations. There are a series of contentious issues to be taken up. The world is also waiting for the Obama government to act on the commitments that the US has to fulfill as the largest emitter. At this juncture, we need to step up the pressure on the developed world to act on the legally bindings commitments and also to simultaneously build up an equitable framework for the developing countries.
The current negotiations are hinged on a number of differentiated issues before the developed and the developing world. The most important among them is the differences on shared vision. The fact is that the EU, in a post Poznan scenario, has already started behaving viciously on their commitments towards reductions and fulfilling the first Kyoto period. The other major issue that remains to be addressed till date as the tip of the ice-berg is the technology and financing. Without finance and proper technology, it will be impossible for any country to achieve the goal of development with low emissions. The various proxy arrangements for technology transfer in the name of trading would not meet the actual technology requirement in the climate change context.
Similar is the case with finance. The developing countries require finance to the extent of billions of dollars and this must be a sustained flow. To make this a reality, there should be binding commitments from the developed countries. Further, there is a need to develop strategies and mechanisms for generating finance. Leaving everything to the rules of the market will not meet the objectives of development. The innovative ideas of financing needs to be developed and this has to fulfill the obligations laid out in the UNFCCC. Any extra-UNFCCC arrangements have to be resisted with full force. The recent attempt by the World Bank should under no circumstances be allowed to happen (give a bit more here). Finally, we need to develop the southern voice more emphatically so that the existing proposals get their due importance. In addition, we need to come up with new innovative ideas on an urgent basis. There is a need to outsmart the North in this regard and make them discuss the agenda of the global South. The time has come for an agreesive rather than a defensive stance to the ideas of the developed countries.
Achieving these objectives would require proactive engagements with the stakeholders at all levels. There has to be a multi-layered approach and this must be both top-down and bottom-up. While there is significant recognition among Southern civil societies and policymakers about a pro-active approach to climate change, the current efforts still fall short of the necessity in this critical hour. The discussions have been contained within narrow limits and have still not reached a wider audience that is a must, both for mitigation and adaption as well as for countering the North centric stance of the current climate change efforts. At the minimum, civil society engagement needs to significantly increase to build up effective pressure groups. The need for open discussions, both for expertise gathering as well for knowledge dissemination is undeniable at this juncture.
Therefore, Centad proposes to launch a consultation series called ‘the Climate Change Consultation Series: A Vision for South Asia’ from February 2009 in order to provide a platform for discussion on the urgent issues of climate change from a Southern perspective. Centad’s idea is to involve the four pillars of society, namely the academia, government, civil-society and the industry in tandem. The consultation series would bring all the stakeholders to one platform for deliberations. The series of actions would involve activities like expert group meetings, peer-group hearing, grass root level fact sharing meetings in rural areas, and publishing information dossiers and relevant materials before important national and international consultations.
As a South Asian organisation, we want to specifically involve our partners from the region, in order to come up with a detailed policy framework as described in the above framework of actions. The issues before us are plenty. Therefore we would be concentrating particularly on the issues involving: adaptation and livelihood; the CDM and the potential for South Asia; the issues of technology transfer and IPR; the negotiation politics; the pressure on human development; and finally to map out the domestic obligations of the various governments in the region and their international commitments. The overarching objective is to mainstream the climate issues in the planning and development agenda of the governments of the region.
Centad has already undertaken considerable research and advocacy in this area. Centad’s research output and advocacy efforts will be used as a launching pad in the consultation series, which, through further deliberations and disseminations among the various stakeholders will aim to achieve the critical objective of this effort.
Agenda
Presentations :
Towards Copenhagen: suggestions for an Indian position - D.Raghunandan
‘CBDR‘ in Post 2012 Debate - Sanjay Vashist
Climate Change and business - Anil Patni
Towards a Global Compact for Managing Climate Change - Dr. Ramgopal Agarwala
Shared Vision? Politics & Developing Countries - Shirish Sinha
Technology Transfer Issues at the UNFCCC - Tirthankar Mandal
|
