...in line with the talks attended yesterday organised by CSR Asia @ Bursa Malaysia, KL...i am interested in looking forward on the issue related to COPENHAGEN ACCORD...below is the info gathered from the net for my understanding and sharing....
and the talks conducted yesterday is really an interesting topics "Business Risk and Opportunities Post Copenhagen", chair by CSR Asia, talks by Ministry of Agriculture, Malaysian Airline System and Corston-Smith Assets Mgt
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Copenhagen Accord is the document that delegates at the United Nations Climate Change Conference (UNCCC) agreed to "take note of" at the final plenary session of the Conference on 18 December 2009 (COP-15). It is a draft COP decision and, when approved, is operational immediately.
The Accord, drafted by Brazil, China, India, South Africa, and the United States, is not legally binding and does not commit countries to agree to a binding successor to the Kyoto Protocol, whose present round ends in 2012. The BBC immediately reported that the status and legal implications of the Copenhagen Accord were unclear.
Summary
The Accord:
Endorses the continuation of the Kyoto Protocol
Underlines that climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our time and emphasises a "strong political will to urgently combat climate change in accordance with the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities"
To prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system, recognises "the scientific view that the increase in global temperature should be below 2 degrees Celsius", in a context of sustainable development, to combat climate change.
Recognises "the critical impacts of climate change and the potential impacts of response measures on countries particularly vulnerable to its adverse effects" and stresses "the need to establish a comprehensive adaptation programme including international support"
Recognises that "deep cuts in global emissions are required according to science" (IPCC AR4) and agrees cooperation in peaking (stopping from rising) global and national greenhouse gas emissions "as soon as possible" and that "a low-emission development strategy is indispensable to sustainable development"
States that "enhanced action and international cooperation on adaptation is urgently required to... reduc[e] vulnerability and build.. resilience in developing countries, especially in those that are particularly vulnerable, especially least developed countries (LDCs), small island developing states (SIDS) and Africa" and agrees that "developed countries shall provide adequate, predictable and sustainable financial resources, technology and capacity-building to support the implementation of adaptation action in developing countries"
About mitigation agrees that developed countries (Annex I Parties) would "commit to economy-wide emissions targets for 2020" to be submitted by 31 January 2010 and agrees that these Parties to the Kyoto Protocol would strengthen their existing targets. Delivery of reductions and finance by developed countries will be measured, reported and verified (MRV) in acordance with COP guidelines.
Agrees that developing nations (non-Annex I Parties) would "implement mitigation actions" to slow growth in their carbon emissions, submitting these by 31 January 2010. LDS and SIDS may undertake actions voluntarily and on the basis of (international) support.
Agrees that developing countries would report those actions once every two years via the U.N. climate change secretariat, subjected to their domestic MRV. NAMAs seeking international support will be subject to international MRV
Recognises "the crucial role of reducing emission from deforestation and forest degradation and the need to enhance removals of greenhouse gas emission by forests", and the need to establish a mechanism (including REDD-plus) to enable the mobilization of financial resources from developed countries to help achieve this
Decides pursue opportunities to use markets to enhance the cost-effectiveness of, and to promote mitigation actions.
Developing countries, specially these with low-emitting economies should be provided incentives to continue to develop on a low-emission pathway
States that "scaled up, new and additional, predictable and adequate funding as well as improved access shall be provided to developing countries... to enable and support enhanced action"
Agrees that developed countries would raise funds of $30 billion from 2010-2012 of new and additional resources
Agrees a "goal" for the world to raise $100 billion per year by 2020, from "a wide variety of sources", to help developing countries cut carbon emissions (mitigation). New multilateral funding for adaptation will be delivered, with a governance structure.
Establishes a Copenhagen Green Climate Fund, as an operating entity of the financial mechanism, "to support projects, programme, policies and other activities in developing countries related to mitigation". To this end, creates a High Level Panel
Establishes a Technology Mechanism "to accelerate technology development and transfer...guided by a country-driven approach"
Calls for "an assessment of the implementation of this Accord to be completed by 2015... This would include consideration of strengthening the long-term goal", for example to limit temperature rises to 1.5 degrees
Emissions pledges
January 31, 2010, is the date set under the Accord for countries to submit emissions reductions targets.
The Australian Government committed to reduce emissions by at least 5% by 2020; this figure may increase if stronger commitments are made by other nations.
The US committed to reduce emissions by 17% below 2005 levels by 2020[citation needed]
Canada committed to reduce emissions by 17% below 2005 levels by 2020[citation needed]
Responses
The European Union labeled the conference and accord a "disaster".[citation needed]
South Africa, despite being one of the five draftees, described the accord as "not acceptable".[citation needed]
The G77 explained that it will only secure the economic security of a few nations.
Australia were happy overall but "wanted more".[citation needed]
India were "pleased" although related that the accord "did not constitute a mandate for future commitment".
The United States said that the agreement would need to be built on in the future and that "We've come a long way but we have much further to go."
Great Britain said "We have made a start" but that the agreement needed to become legally binding quickly.[6] Gordon Brown also accused a small number of nations of holding the Copenhagen talks to ransom.
China's delegation said that "The meeting has had a positive result, everyone should be happy."[6] Wen Jiabao, China's prime minister said that the weak agreement was because of distrust between nations: "To meet the climate change challenge, the international community must strengthen confidence, build consensus, make vigorous efforts and enhance co-operation."
Brazil's climate change ambassador called the agreement "disappointing".[citation needed]
Representatives of the Maldives, ALBA (so called Alternativa Bolivariana para los Pueblos de Nuestra América, this is, mainly Venezuela, Bolivia, Cuba), Sudan and Tuvalu were unhappy with the outcome .
Bolivian president, Evo Morales said that, "The meeting has failed. It's unfortunate for the planet. The fault is with the lack of political will by a small group of countries led by the US."
Criticism
Concerns over the accord exist, some of the key criticisms include:
The accord itself is not legally binding
No decision was taken on whether to agree a legally binding successor or complement to the Kyoto Protocol.
The accord sets no real targets to achieve in emissions reductions.
The accord was drafted by only five countries.
The deadline for assessment of the accord was drafted as 6 years, by 2015.
The mobilisation of 100 billion dollars per year to developing countries will not be fully in place until 2020.
There is no guarantee or information on where the climate funds will come from.
There is no agreement on how much individual countries would contribute to or benefit from any funds.
COP delegates only "took note" of the Accord rather than adopting it.
The head of the G77 has said it will only secure the economic security of a few nations.
There is not an international approach to technology.
Forgets fundamental sectoral mitigation, as transportation.
It shows biases in silent ways such as the promotion of incentives on low gas- emitting countries.
