Indian Economy, 5th edition (95 page)

The Prime Minister of India, during COP 11 announced India’s ratification of the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing under the CBD and also launched the ‘Hyderabad Pledge’ of US $ 50 million during India’s Presidency to strengthen institutional mechanisms and capacity building in developing countries. The Prime Minister unveiled a commemorative pylon in Hyderabad to mark COP- 11. It has been decided to establish a biodiversity museum and a garden on this site. At national level, efforts will be made to strengthen the implementation of the Biological Diversity Act and provide support to the State Biodiversity Boards and at local level prepare Peoples Biodiversity Registers. Doha Climate Change Conference 2012.

The 18th session of the COP to the UNFCCC, that started on 26 November and concluded on 8 December 2012 in
DOHA
, Qatar has resulted in a set of decisions (clubbed together as
‘Doha Climate Gateway’
) aimed at advancing the implementation of the UNFCCC and its Kyoto Protocol (KP). The key issues for the Doha conference were –

i.
Amending the
KP
(Kyoto Protocol) to implement the second commitment period under the Protocol;

ii.
Successfully concluding the work of the
BAP
(Bali Action Plan) within which there was urgent need for a clear path to climate finance; and

iii.
Planning the work under the
DP
(Durban Platform) for enhanced action.

The Conference addressed all three issues and came out with a package which balanced the interests and obligations of various countries.

At the Doha Conference, the three issues of equity, technology-related IPRs, and unilateral measures raised by India resounded in the decisions. These outstanding or unresolved issues under the BAP are now part of the planned or continuing work of various bodies of the Convention. At Doha, India also ensured that no hasty decision was taken on aspects related to mitigation in agricultural sector at global level as agriculture is a sensitive sector for developing countries. The Conference has explicitly recognised that the action of Parties will be based on equity and CBDR including the need for equitable access to sustainable development. The Conference also recognised that issues relating to global peaking that could place a cap on emissions of developing countries and restrict their development space were controversial and best avoided at this stage of development.
At the same time, in an effort to cater to the interest of all countries and come up with a balanced package, some elements of the package required compromise or deferral. In many cases, ambitious and strong demands were collectively made by developing countries, but in the act of balancing, countries were made to accept the mellowed down and subtle versions of their demands. Among the key concerns which the Conference could not address were those relating to financing commitments of developed countries and sectoral actions. No specific targets for mid-term financing (2013-2020) were adopted. While the Conference stopped short of giving a mandate to the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) or International Martine Organisation (IMO) to initiate steps for curtailing emissions in their respective sectors, the absence of a decision on sectoral framework for such actions has left open the possibility of such actions being initiated in such sectors by the respective international organisations. considering the fact that some of the leading members of ICAO prefer a global market based mechanism to be the vehicle of such actions, the framework and the principles on the basis of which such actions will be taken are likely to be a bone of contention for quite sometime. Also, despite vociferous demand from vulnerable countries, there could be no satisfactory agreement on a compensation mechanism for loss and damage resulting from climate change.

On the positive side, the Doha Conference succeeded in carrying out amendments to the KP to ensure a second commitment period. The second commitment period will last for a period of eight years as of 1 January 2013. This decision has ensured that there will be no gap between the first commitment period under the KP ending on 31 December, 2012, and the second one commencing on 1 January, 2013. With the exception of Russia, New Zealand, Japan, and Canada, all other countries that were part of the first commitment period entered into the second round, with some new countries joining as well. It has been agreed that the KP Parties will revisit their targets in 2014 with a view to increasing their ambition.

The emission reduction obligations undertaken by the KP Parties are not as ambitious as required by science; however, they provide a relative degree of certainty to the carbon markets. The EU will reduce its emissions by 20 per cent by 2020 compared to 1990 (Table 12.1). Governments also agreed to speedily work under the DP to evolve a new set of arrangements for mitigation commitments and actions applicable to all countries from 2020, and to adopt it by 2015. In a significant and positive advancement, it has been agreed that the work of the DP will be based on the principles of the Convention.

DISCUSSIONS UNDER G 20

G20—the group of twenty major economies of the world took up the agenda of inclusive green growth during the Mexican Presidency in 2011-12. The aim of introducing inclusive green growth into the G20 agenda was to support the transition of developing countries, in particular the low income countries, towards becoming lower carbon economies as well as to enable countries to become more resilient to climate change. As of now, the G20 ministers have agreed to voluntarily self-report in 2013 on their respective country’s efforts to follow inclusive green growth and sustainable development policies under their structural reform agendas. Leaders at the G20 last year also collaborated to form a Climate Finance Study Group to consider ways of effectively mobilising resources taking into account the objectives, provisions, and principles of the UNFCCC.

FINANCING CLIMATE CHANGE

The idea of a global budget for carbon and its corresponding financing stems from the objective of stabilising the GHG concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. There has already been a 0.8
0
C increase in global mean temperature. It is widely believed that we are fast approaching the 2
0
C temperature rise within which the global community is striving to limit itself. This indicates that only a small and fast closing window of opportunity exists for the international community to take actions and ensure that we avoid reaching this point.

Yet the question remains that how to finance actions to achieve this target
6
. A UNFCCC paper (2007) estimated a requirement of US$ 200-210 billion in additional annual investment in 2030 to return GHG emissions to current levels. Further, additional investment needed worldwide for adaptation was estimated to be annually US$ 60-182 billion in 2030. However, with the passage of time and inadequate action, these estimates are being revised upwards. Most recent estimates presented at the UNFCCC’s workshop on Long-term Finance (July 2012), point to an even more enormous scale of funds, in the range of $600-$1500 billion a year, that would be needed by developing countries for mitigation and adaptation. This amount is at least 5-10 times the prospective financing flows of US$100 billion per year by 2020 agreed upon as the goal under the UNFCCC. Representatives from the International Energy Agency reported at this workshop that annual global investments for power generation alone, in a 2
0
C temperature rise scenario, would involve $370 billion from 2010 to 2020; $630 billion between 2020 and 2030; and $760 billion between 2030 and 2050.

Domestic Resources and Mechanisms

The UNFCCC (The latest available data of actual emissions available is upto 2010 only) notes that Kazakhstan, Cyprus, Malta, and Belarus did not have reduction commitments for 2008-2012 under the KP. Canada, Japan, New Zealand and Russia are not Parties to the second commitment period to the
KP
(Kyoto Protocol): Countries that are undergoing the process of transition to a market economy. For any representative country say for Australia, the table shows that in the first commitment period, Australia could collectively increase emissions by 8 per cent between 2008-2012 (taking the base year as 1990), whereas for the second KP round, Australia would need to reduce its emissions by 0.5 per cent collectively between 2013- 2020. The last two columns of the table measure progress towards the first KP target which shows that Australia’s actual emissions increased by 30 per cent between 2008-10. This indicates that for the period between 2010-2012, Australia’s emission should have been reduced by 22 per cent for it to be within the target.