G8: Old Targets Set in New Language

By IPS Correspondents Reprint | | Print |

Ramesh Jaura

TOKYO, Jul 12 2008 (IPS) - After months of ministerial meetings that culminated in the summit of the world’s seven major industrial democracies and Russia (G8) last week, the focus shifts back to United Nations negotiations on a new post-2012 climate treaty regime.

At the three-day summit that concluded Jul. 9, the G8 (Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Canada, Japan, Russia and the United States) that account for 62 percent of global greenhouse gases said they would cut emissions by 50 percent by 2050.

But Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) said in Bonn: “2050 is very far away; it’s not clear what is going to serve as the baseline for this 50 percent reduction; it’s not clear how this reduction is going to be divided up between rich nations and poor nations; and finally it’s not clear how the rich nation portion of that minus 50 is going to be divided amongst individual countries.”

De Boer also questioned whether the G8 statement amounted to a major step forward in diplomatic language compared to the 2007 G8 summit in Heiligendamm, Germany.

“Last year they were talking about eight countries seriously considering and adopting a 50 percent reduction goal,” De Boer said. “Now they are suggesting that 180 countries seriously consider adopting a 50 percent reduction goal.”

However, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said the climate agreement was a “major step forward” from last year’s summit. “I’m very satisfied with the work that has gone on the G8 documents, as regards progress on the issue of climate change.”

“This, needless to say, is based on a premise that the G8 including the U.S. agree on this goal. There have been disparate positions on this matter amongst the G8 but I believe we have been able to arrive at a common view overcoming these differences, and have been able to make a contribution which is to add momentum to the United Nations negotiations,” Fukuda told reporters.

The World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), a leading conservation organisation, backed De Boer’s views. The 2050 target is “pathetic” and “dangerously short of what is needed,” said Kim Carstensen, Director of WWF’s Global Climate Initiative.

In a statement last week, WWF accused the G8 of failing to boost international climate negotiations, and criticised the lack of commitment to mid-term targets. The G8 leaders need to wake up to the threat of dangerous climate change and raise the level of ambition drastically, said Carstensen.

“Confirming the results of last year’s summit in Heiligendamm is hardly a remarkable outcome,” he said. “So little progress after a whole year of ministerial meetings and negotiations is not only a wasted opportunity, it falls dangerously short of what is needed to protect people and nature from climate change.”

Scientific evidence clearly outlines an urgent need to cut global emissions by a good deal more than 50 percent by 2050 to avoid the worst impacts of climate change. To get there global emissions have to peak and decline in 10 to 15 years, and rich nations must reduce emissions by 25-40 percent by 2020. These crucially important needs are not reflected in the G8 communiqué, Carstensen said.

From Toyako where he was attending the G8 summit, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon welcomed the statement by the G8 leaders that they aim to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 50 percent by 2050, saying he was “reasonably encouraged” by the news.

But he added that the key would be to act on this commitment and to build momentum to reach a global emission reduction pact by 2009. “We must agree by the end of December next year in Copenhagen (Denmark) to adopt a global agreement which is balanced, inclusive and ratifiable. This is a crucial task for us to do.”

The first test of the willingness of the G8 countries to go beyond Toyako will be at the Accra climate change talks Aug. 21-30 where officials from 192 countries will work on a roadmap for Copenhagen.

The next test will be the 14th session of the conference of the parties to the United Nations Convention on Climate Change, and the fourth meeting of the parties to the Kyoto Protocol that will be held Dec. 1-12 in Poznan (Poland).

The forthcoming UN climate change conferences will no doubt need to address issues that the G8 ducked last week: science-based emissions reduction targets for industrialised countries, developing country mitigation measures, technology cooperation and financing, and adaptation.

These must be addressed “not with platitudes and rhetoric, but with concrete proposals and meaningful action to truly respond to the climate crisis,” says Alden Meyer from the Union of Concerned Scientists.

This is not going to be an easy ride. As Meyer, who closely observed the Jul. 7-9 G8 summit points out, there was a clear split between the European Union (EU) countries on the one hand and the United States, Canada and Japan on the other.

There was no agreement on the level of ambition and base year for both mid-term and long-term emissions reductions, and how to meet the need for greatly ramped-up assistance to developing countries, both for clean technology and adaptation measures.

This is hardly surprising. “There are mostly negative developments in some G8 countries’ climate performance,” according to the ‘G8 Climate Scorecards’ commissioned jointly by Allianz, a leading global financial service provider, and the WWF.

Japan, France, Germany and the EU have received recognition for announcing ambitious climate targets such as reducing emissions by 20 to 40 percent by 2020.

“However, they fail to date to put policies in place to reach these targets,” the joint climate performance report says. Emissions continue to increase, for example in Canada and Russia.

One bright spot was the agreement by the so-called G5 countries (Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa) that if “developed countries take the lead in achieving ambitious and absolute greenhouse gas emissions reductions,” they would be “committed to undertaking nationally appropriate mitigation…actions” aimed at “achieving a deviation from business-as-usual” emissions levels.