Climate Strategies Press Release: Copenhagen deal is still a reality
Copenhagen a year too soon for the US, but rest of the world could agree to a framework of legally binding emission targets, suggests leading UK climate adviser
One of the UK’s leading climate economists has put forward a radical new policy proposal to counter the increasing pessimism surrounding the start of the UN climate change conference in Copenhagen next week. According to Professor Michael Grubb, chair of Climate Strategies – an international network of climate academics hosted at the University of Cambridge – this policy could pave the way for agreement on more than just declarations of good intent.
The proposal put forward by Professor Grubb, which is under consideration by a number of leading delegations and has been discussed with US negotiators, would pave the way for Copenhagen to reassert the need for emission caps that are binding under international law, without alienating the US which is unlikely to endorse that principle at Copenhagen.
According to Professor Grubb, the US needs more time to navigate the complexities of its domestic political process, and he argues that Copenhagen decisions structured under two separate deals would give maximum political leverage for this.
Professor Michael Grubb, chair of Climate Strategies, said:
“Copenhagen has come a year too soon for this US administration. The President has indicated his willingness to pursue multilateral talks, but the Administration cannot yet endorse an approach to agree on commitments that are binding under international law. Due to the multiple issues he’s had to deal with in his first year in office, it has been impossible to resolve this core issue in time for Copenhagen.
We should try and find a way that would enable the US to acknowledge, but not yet commit to, a view that is pretty much shared by the rest of the world – the need for consistent international targets that are binding in a multilateral treaty. That would give us a year to navigate just how far the US can accept such a multilateral framework before finalising a legal treaty at next year’s summit.”
The idea involves the governments which have ratified the Kyoto Protocol (under the CMP5 process) reiterating that its core principle - a legally binding framework driven by national emission caps measured on a common basis – must be maintained. . The United States would not be part of such a statement as they never ratified the treaty. However, the US could acknowledge the support of the rest of the world for this principle in the over-arching Copenhagen agreement, and commit to negotiations though which these could be adopted – or adapted - with US agreement when incorporated in a unified treaty at next year’s summit in Mexico.
Professor Michael Grubb believes that the best chance of a strong deal emerging from the Copenhagen process may be to have decisions under both the ‘Kyoto track’ and COP15 itself, with a COP15 clause ensuring integration under a subsequent treaty.
Professor Grubb said:
“It is already acknowledged that Copenhagen will result in decisions, but not a new Treaty. A Kyoto Parties decision adopted in close consultation with the US but to which the US would not be a formal signatory would establish key elements required for a long term framework aimed at reducing carbon emissions.”
“Given US opposition to Kyoto, the fallback currently proposed would allow each government to set their own rules; this risks creating a free for all in which emissions could fall between multiple cracks. To harness private sector finance there needs to be legal security and international compatibility. That can only come from a legally binding agreement with a common way of counting emissions, and that principle needs to be endorsed at Copenhagen.”
ENDS
Notes to editors
About Climate Strategies
Climate Strategies aims to assist governments in solving the collective action problem of climate change. It connects leading applied research on international climate change issues to the policy process and to public debate, raising the quality and coherence of advice provided on policy formation.
We convene international groups of experts to provide rigorous, fact-based and independent assessment on international climate change policy. To effectively communicate insights into climate change policy, Climate Strategies works with decision-makers in government and business, particularly, but not restricted to, the countries of the European Union and EU institutions.
