The road to Durban and beyond: the progress of international climate change negotiations (original) (raw)

Is the Durban Platform of 2011 a Break-Through in Global Climate Change Negotiations?

International Affairs and Global Strategy, 2016

This essay argues that though the Durban Summit, unlike the Copenhagen Summit, recorded some important achievements, there are inherent challenges which renders the meeting less-important. The essay argues that though the meeting as contented by Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, South Africa’s Minister of International Relations, “has taken crucial steps forward for the common good and the global citizenry”, there are questions which continue to remain a source of challenge among states. InIn making meaning of the materials, the authors utilised critical analysis to explore the issues that dominate the Durban Summit. The article benefits from secondary materials sourced from the database of Coventry University and University of Birmingham, United Kingdom.

A Future for International Climate Politics – Durban and Beyond

2011

There is a weakening consensus on how to tackle the climate crisis. Yet, the window to act is closing rapidly. A decisive response is urgently needed. A priority for the upcoming climate summit in Durban is the securing of the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol and reaching agreement to negotiate, by 2015 at the latest, a comprehensive, legally binding instrument – or package of instruments – covering all other countries. A progressive alliance of countries can make Durban a success and deliver this balanced package. This paper offers a broad view of the state of international climate politics as the international community prepares for the 17th Conference of the Parties in Durban, South Africa. The paper has been written for an expert audience of civil society colleagues with the aim to stimulate strategic discussion on possible new approaches to the multilateral climate negotiations at a time when the prospects of a fair, ambitious, and binding global agreement seems further away than ever. It is necessarily limited in its scope and reflects the bias of the author, in that it takes an insider’s view of the international negotiations process, and is written with considerable distance from the harsh realities on the ground. The focus of this paper is the state of play of negotiations. It starts off identifying the key issues and options for action in Durban – all this as input to a debate on how to change the politics of climate change, given that the science cannot be changed. The paper then proceeds to provide a frank – plain-truths – assessment of the condition of the multilateral talks. The paper does not, however, attempt to summarize the current negotiating texts. The paper also does not contain an update on the latest best-available science or of the realities of climate impacts around the world, ranging from the rising food insecurity to environmental refugees. Nevertheless, it is hoped that in its breadth, it enables a comprehensive and in depth discussion on where to next, as it is clear that business as usual – also on the side of civil society – will not prevent dangerous climate change.

Durban 2011: The failure of the post-Kyoto agreement as an opportunity for alternative solutions?

"As largely announced, the conference of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) held in Durban in December 2011 has failed to achieve an effective agreement for the post-2012 period. After more than two decades of negotiations, the international diplomacy has been incapable to bring appropriate actions to limit greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that are causing climate change. One more time, the “state-selfishness” and internal interests have prevailed to global collaboration. One of the alternative solutions might lie in focusing more on individual’s responsibilities and capabilities to concretely redress the causes of climate change and fairly include everyone and every country in a global regime."

Inside UN climate change negotiations: the Copenhagen conference

Review of Policy Research, 2010

UN negotiations on climate change entail a fundamental transformation of the global economy and constitute the single most important process in world politics. This is an account of the 2009 Copenhagen summit from the perspective of a government delegate. The article offers a guide to global climate negotiations, tells the story of Copenhagen from behind closed doors, and assesses the current state of global climate governance. It outlines key policy issues under negotiation, the positions and policy preferences of key countries and coalitions, the outcomes of Copenhagen, and achievements and failures in climate negotiations to date. The Copenhagen Accord is a weak agreement designed to mask the political failure of the international community to create a global climate treaty. However, climate policy around the world is making considerable progress. While the UN negotiations process is deadlocked, multilevel climate governance is thriving.

After Durban: It must be created a Supranational Democratic Climate Authority

2011

En españoll a continuación) "Other News" is a personal initiative seeking to provide information that should be in the media but is not, because of commercial criteria. It welcomes contributions from everybody. Work areas include information on global issues, north-south relations, governance of globalization. Roberto Savio //Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited, article sent for information purposes.// After Durban: It must be created a Supranational Democratic Climate Authority Josep Xercavins i Valls* One more year, Durban 2011, adds even a bigger failure to the one already accumulated since Copenhagen where, analyzed from the current perspective, it makes clear that more than a battle against the climatic crisis was lost.

Bringing the Copenhagen Global Climate Change Negotiations to Conclusion

CESifo Economic Studies, 2009

In this paper we discuss the global negotiations now underway and aimed at achieving new climate change mitigation and other arrangements after 2012 (the end of the Kyoto commitment period). These were initiated in Bali in December 2007 and are scheduled to conclude by the end of 2009 in Copenhagen. As such, this negotiation is effectively the second round in ongoing global negotiations on climate change and further rounds will almost certainly follow. We highlight both the vast scope and vagueness of the negotiating mandate, the many outstanding major issues to be accommodated between negotiating parties, the lack of a mechanism to force collective decision making in the negotiation, and their short time frame. The likely lack of compliance with prior Kyoto commitments by several OECD countries (some to a major degree), the effective absence in Kyoto of compliance/ enforcement mechanisms, and growing linkage to non-climate change areas (principally trade) all further complicate the task of bringing the negotiation to conclusion. The major clearage we see that needs to be bridged in the negotiations is between OECD countries on the one hand, and lower wage, large population, rapidly growing countries (China, India, Russia, Brazil) on the other. JEL Code: F13.

The EU and the progressive alliance negotiating in Durban: saving the climate?

2012

Readers are encouraged to quote or reproduce material from ODI Working Papers for their own publications, as long as they are not being sold commercially. For online use, we ask readers to link to the original resource on the ODI website. As copyright holders, ODI and CDKN request due acknowledgement and a copy of the publication. This paper was written for ODI's European Development Cooperation Strengthening Programme (EDCSP) (see: http://internationaldevelopment.eu) funded by the UK Department for International Development (DFID). It was also written for the Climate and Development Knowledge Network (CDKN) (see: http://cdkn.org/), a project funded by the UK Department for International Development (DFID) and the Netherlands Directorate-General for International Cooperation (DGIS) for the benefit of developing countries. However, the views expressed and information contained in it are not necessarily those of or endorsed by DFID or DGIS, who can accept no responsibility for such views or information or for any reliance placed on them. This publication has been prepared for general guidance on matters of interest only, and does not constitute professional advice. You should not act upon the information contained in this publication without obtaining specific professional advice. No representation or warranty (express or implied) is given as to the accuracy or completeness of the information contained in this publication, and, to the extent permitted by law, the entities managing the delivery of the Climate and Development Knowledge Network do not accept or assume any liability, responsibility or duty of care for any consequences of you or anyone else acting, or refraining to act, in reliance on the information contained in this publication or for any decision based on it. CDKN is led and administered by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. Management of the delivery of CDKN is undertaken by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, and an alliance of organisations including Fundación Futuro Latinoamericano, INTRAC, LEAD International, the Overseas Development Institute, and SouthSouthNorth. This paper was written for the Climate and Development Knowledge Network (CDKN) and the Overseas Development Institute (ODI) European Development Cooperation Strengthening Programme (EDCSP). It should be considered as a 'think piece' to stimulate further discussion on the relationship between the European Union (EU) and groups representing the poorest and most climate-vulnerable countries (the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS)) and the least-developed country (LDC) group) within international climate negotiations, and on how to strengthen this relationship with a view to furthering meaningful international cooperation on mitigation and adaptation. The author would like to thank Simon Maxwell, Dan Hamza-Goodacre, Siân Herbert and Nicola Cantore for their useful and constructive comments on earlier drafts of this paper, as well as those who provided input through interviews. The responsibility for its contents lies only with her. v vi Contents Acknowledgements iv Contents vi Acronyms vii Executive summary viii 1 Introduction 2 Negotiating the climate: building on insights on international cooperation 2.1 Why cooperate? Rational choice and sociological motives 2.2 Strategic choices for parties in international negotiations 2.2.1 What levers of influence? 2.2.2 Defining and identifying BATNAs and bottom lines 2.2.3 Building workable coalitions 2.2.4 Linking negotiations or seeking agreement on sub-items? 2.2.5 Shopping for the best international forum 2.3 Summing up 3 The EU as an international actor: the challenge of cooperation internally and externally 3.1 Who speaks for Europe? 3.2 Environmental focus 3.3 Levers of influence the EU can bring to bear 3.4 A coalition of shared interests: cooperation with developing countries 3.5 Summary 4 The EU's cooperation with the LDCs and AOSIS in relation to its negotiating performance in Durban 4.1 Strategic and normative elements in the EU's position in Durban 4.2 The Durban negotiations 4.3 The Durban deal: a major achievement? 4.4 Key outstanding challenges 5 Negotiating the climate: improving the atmosphere? 5.1 Realist and idealist options in the EU'

Negotiating an Intractable Climate Deal: The Kyoto Process and Beyond

Jadavpur Journal of International Relations, 2013

Climate change, commonly known as global warming, has threatened the very survival of the planet earth. Being a global problem it requires global actions but international actions to combat the climate cataclysm have been largely unsuccessful due to countries’ self-interested behavior. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Kyoto Protocol itself have tried to control emission of heat-trapping gases but failed due to incomplete participation. Such grim situation is also evident in other landmark climate summits where the rift between developed North and impoverished South and their bargaining over burden-sharing responsibility for climate change have contributed to the inefficacy of any effort to reduce emission. However, now the clash of interest is not only limited to developed and developing worlds, there are other shades of conflict and signs of political regrouping. This article will briefly narrate the landmark climate conferences, held under...