Climate talks need a dose of top-level political will
Written by: Sven Harmeling
Reuters and AlertNet are not responsible for the content of this article or for any external internet sites. The views expressed are the author's alone.

Some 500 activists from the joint NGO campaign 'tcktcktck' form a human exclamation mark reading 'Yes You Can', calling for progress in international climate negotiations, Bonn, June 6, 2009. REUTERS/Handout
The latest round of U.N. climate negotiations, which took place at the beginning of June in Bonn, marked the start of the negotiating countdown to Copenhagen. The session focused on the first discussions of the 50-page draft negotiating text for a Copenhagen Agreement, which was published two weeks prior to the session. Bonn II did not bring much substantial debate on the content of this text, but countries raised their reservations, which helped identify gaps in the positions. They were also invited to add text where they felt their views weren't adequately reflected. As many countries made extensive use of this offer, the text has now grown to 199 pages, which - honestly speaking - is a non-negotiable text. Also, more redundancies have been added than new substance, leaving the process with the challenge of cutting down the text again before starting the negotiations on technical details. The Bonn talks were characterised by the stamp of new scientific findings. These show more clearly than ever the dangers of self-accelerating changes in the climate system and emphasise the need for comprehensive global emissions reductions of 80 percent by 2050 from 1990 levels. The increase in developing country demands - already seen in Bonn in March - continued. Alongside the small island states and the least developed countries (a total of more than 80 nations), China is now also demanding that developed countries reduce their emissions by at least 40 percent by 2020 compared to 1990 - a target demanded by the science but which developed countries have yet to live up to. BARRIERS TO PROGRESS The lack of an ambitious "official" aggregate emissions reduction target for developed countries as a basis for negotiations continues to be one of the impasses. Another is the critical issue of financial and technological support. According to different scientific studies, the scale of ambition needed to steer the developing world onto a low-carbon and climate-resilient development path is estimated to be in the order of more than 100 billion euros ($141 billion). The EU finance ministers addressed this topic during the negotiations, but mentioned neither the scale of the financing to be provided nor the central instrument for raising it - namely the auctioning of industrialised countries' emissions permits. This continues to hinder progress in the negotiations, since developing countries are reluctant to put offers on the table without knowing how much support they can expect. The next round of negotiations, Bonn III, will take place from August 10-14. The expanded negotiating texts will not be changed again until the next round, so that all countries have time to firm up their positions. At the technical level, much progress can be expected at the summer meeting. However, the large keystones - mitigation, financing and technology cooperation - will not be laid through technical negotiations. These will ultimately be decided on the last night of the crucial December meeting in Copenhagen. Before then, top-level political will must grow at meetings bringing together heads of government, including the G8, the G20, the Major Economies Forum and the U.N. General Assembly. By the end of September we will have a much clearer idea of the scale of ambition for the Copenhagen deal. Will these meetings decide on vague benchmarks or on a new, path-breaking agreement? Without much more pressure from civil society the stronger option will not happen. In this regard, June's Bonn meeting was a good but small beginning.
For further information, contact Sven Harmeling: harmeling@germanwatch.org. Christoph Bals, executive director of policy at Germanwatch, also contributed to this article.
Reuters AlertNet is not responsible for the content of external websites.
We welcome argument but AlertNet will not publish comments that are racist, abusive or libellous.
Leave a Reply
When you submit a comment to us we request your name, e-mail address and optionally a link to a website. Please note where you submit a website address, we may link to it via your name. By sending us a comment, you accept that we have the right to show the comment and your name to users. Although we require your email address, this will not be published on the site, and is only required to enable us to check facts with you, e.g. if you are making a claim we can not confirm easily. Additionally, if you would like your comment removed at anytime, you'll have to use this e-mail address when you contact us. To remove a comment at any time please e-mail us at blogs-(at)-reuters-(dot)-com (address obscured to avoid spam) specifying who you are and what you would like removed. We moderate all comments and will publish everything that advances the post directly or with relevant tangential information. We reserve the right to edit comments in order to maintain the quality of the comments, and may not include links to irrelevant material. We try not to publish comments that we think are offensive or appear to pass you off as another person, and we will be conservative if comments may be considered libelous. Reuters will use your data in accordance with Reuters privacy policy. Reuters Group is primarily responsible for managing your data. As Reuters is a global company your data will be transferred and available internationally, including in countries which do not have privacy laws but Reuters seeks to comply with its privacy policy.
All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content in this article, including by framing or by similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters.