Negotiators finally wrapped up an intense two weeks in Cancun, hashing out an international agreement on climate change over the weekend. I had said that the outcome from this meeting should be building blocks towards a future agreement, should set a goal to limit global warming to 1.5-2°C above preindustrial levels and that ecosystems were a vital part of solving the climate crisis. The good news: all of these issues were addressed and many are saying this year’s meeting restored confidence in the U.N. process that was ruptured last year in Copenhagen. The bad news: the world’s response – led by the U.S. – continues to be inadequate to stave off dangerous climate changes ahead.
Building blocks
The negotiations made progress on a number of fronts. The parties committed to establishing and funding a Green Climate Fund to help developing countries respond to climate change. The Cancun Agreements also include important provisions for reducing deforestation and degradation (a major global source of greenhouse gas emissions), including safeguards for ecosystem services and biodiversity and the protection of native forests (though these provisions need to be strengthened with transparency and accountability measures).
As the largest historic emitter of greenhouse gas, the U.S. has always been the 800-pound gorilla in these talks.
1.5-2°C
The Cancun Agreements are the first official U.N. documents where the parties agreed to limit global warming to 2°C above preindustrial levels. In addition, the Agreement calls for further study of the issue with a possible strengthening of the commitment to 1.5°C in future meetings.
Ecosystems
The role of ecosystems in climate change adaptation and in reducing emissions (primarily through forest protections) is recognized, for example by inviting parties to build “resilience of socio-economic and ecological systems, including through economic diversification and sustainable management of natural resources.”
Work left undone
Although monitoring, reporting and transparency of commitments were central themes in the negotiations, there is nothing legally binding about the text. More troubling for the climate, the existing pledges for emissions reductions from the developed countries falls far short of what is actually needed to limit global warming to 2°C.
As the largest historic emitter of greenhouse gas, the U.S. has always been the 800-pound gorilla in these talks. (We were only just outpaced by China.) Without real commitments from the U.S. to reduce our emissions, it is understandable why the rest of the world is reluctant to move forward.
The outlook for comprehensive climate and energy legislation in the U.S. looks bleak – that’s why Defenders is working to uphold the administration’s authority to control greenhouse gas pollution outside of new legislation. With strong U.S. action over the coming year, next year’s international climate talks could garner more action to save the planet.
Learn more:
Author
comments
