Cancùn: The battle won’t end here

“Countries need to go home and continue to develop national plans to curb climate change.” The words spoken by the head of WWF’s Global Climate Initiative Gordon Shepherd, sum up better than any others the UN climate summit in Cancun that drew to a close last week: the international talks are over, now its time to go home and actually do something.

Some of the comments from other environmental and international development NGOs that have been following the talks in Cancun as closely as the delegates from the 120 countries attending the conference echo these sentiments. Oxfam GB’s Tim Gore said that “the agreement falls short of the emission cuts that are needed but it lays out a path to move towards them.” Friends of the Earth wrote on their website that “more and more countries are stepping up their efforts to pursue low carbon development and adaptation despite the absence of an international agreement”. Greenpeace’s International Climate Policy Director Wendel Trio said that Cancun “did not yet save the climate” but did prove that “governments can cooperate”.

However, words of warning were also issued. “Rich countries have pulled the world away from international agreements where emissions targets are based on science,” said Friends of the Earth, adding that the science has been “replaced by a haphazard system where targets can be decided on the whim of politicians”. The NGO also pointed out that the agreement in Cancun increases the possibilities for introducing massive loopholes into the already weak targets, creating an escape hatch for rich countries to avoid making their fair share of the deep emissions cuts that are so urgently needed.

Bird’s eye view on Cancun

Fund for the climate: A new “green fund” financed by developed nations was agreed on in order to help less developed countries tackle the impacts of climate change however no figure was established. According to WWF innovative sources of finance need to be identified such as taxes on the currently unregulated international aviation and shipping sectors. Friends of the Earth expressed concerns over the World Bank’s role as trustee of the fund, considering it is one of the world’s biggest lenders for fossil fuel projects. Oxfam welcomed the fund for its role as “life saving finance” for those who are most vulnerable to the effects of climate change.

Cutting emissions: Pledges to cut greenhouse gases by 2020 were made under the Copenhagen agreement but had never been incorporated officially into the UN process. With Cancun, the pledges were put into UN documentation and for the first time ever, developing nations agreed to look at cutting emissions in the future. However, all NGOs criticized the fact that none of the cuts agreed on are legally binding, meaning that it is highly unlikely the world will be able to keep warming below the 2°C mark. According to Friends of the Earth, if temperatures were to rise by 5°C as some experts predict, this would be “a slap in the face of those who already suffer from climate change”.

Deforestation: The UN’s deforestation scheme, REDD+ (Reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation in developing countries) launched in 2008, received formal backing at Cancun but was met with mixed feelings by NGOs. The WWF called it a “sound foundation” but admitted that it did not include everything it had hoped it would. In particular criticisms focused on the confusion over where the money will come from to finance the ambitious project as it is unclear whether REDD+ is to be backed by the private or public purse. Deforestation is to blame for 15% of the world’s carbon emissions.

Hopes for real solutions are now hinged on next year’s UN climate summit in South Africa. But as I write, the words of the 17 year-old volunteer Christina Ora who spoke at the Council of Youth meeting in Copenhagen in 2009 come to mind: “I was born in 1992. You have been negotiating all my life. You cannot tell us that you need more time”.