I have been to quite a few Conferences of the Parties of the Framework Convention on Climate Change (COPs). Some have been brilliant, like COP11 in Montreal. Some were dismal, like COP14 in Poznan. But, Copenhagen takes the cake as a bad COP.
We were welcomed to a city postered in the encouraging slogan "I live in HOPE enHagen." By the time we left, one clever friend was calling it "Hopeless Hagen."
It was rough at a couple of levels -- some substantive, some just atmospheric (no pun intended). The impact of the bad logistics, crazed and paranoid security and abusive treatment of civil society participants did impact on the substantive. Delegations whose members had been trapped in security cordons (some for as long as 8 hours in bitter cold) were not in a good mood to negotiate. When the UN has a venue that holds 15,000, it should not register 40,000 to attend.. Clearly the reduced access to some level was needed. But then they over-did it reducing NGO participation from 20,000 to 300. The halls and chairs in Bella Forum were empty. But why?
The exclusion of civil society turned out to be just the beginning. On Friday, once President Obama arrived, a very non-UN approach took over. Brokering a deal between the US, India, China, South Africa and India would have been a brilliant starting place to the negotiations, had it been accomplished in advance. As it was, the arrogance of ignoring so many nations resulted in another 12 hours, through the night, of negotiations.
What is the result? The two page Copenhagen Accord is a political statement, non-binding. It leaves targets for GHG reductions to be filled in later. It pledges to keep global average temperature below 2 degrees C, promises to consider 1.5 C but would, on current commitments take the world past 3 degrees.
The same nations will meet again for COP16 in Mexico. Meanwhile the June G-8 and G-20 would be an excellent place to push for more and stricter commitments. Too bad those meetings are in Canada.
A spring election could help, but only if climate and the responses to the climate crisis could play a role.
In the meantime, we cannot let up the pressure for a nanosecond. Mexico City's COP16 had better be a very good COP.
- Home
- Good COP, Bad COP
Good COP, Bad COP
Elizabeth May
December 19, 2009