Breaking News
Get 40% Off 0
Is NVDA a 🟢 buy or 🔴 sell? Unlock Now

With COP26 credibility at stake, some urge ratcheting up schedule

Published Nov 07, 2021 11:06AM ET Updated Nov 07, 2021 11:15AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This article has already been saved in your Saved Items
 
© Reuters. People demonstrate during the UN Climate Change Conference (COP26), in Glasgow, Scotland, Britain, November 7, 2021. REUTERS/Yves Herman

By Mark John, Simon Jessop and William James

GLASGOW (Reuters) - Behind the headlines touting new emissions and finance commitments, the U.N. climate talks in Glasgow are facing a battle for credibility.

Over the last week, rich countries were accused of repeatedly breaking promises. Big polluters traded barbs. And environmental campaigners have cried betrayal, as years of U.N. climate negotiations to rein in climate-warming carbon emissions and protect the world’s most vulnerable have had little effect.

"We have not seen sincerity in the commitments and progress made by developed countries, and have heard far more slogans than practical results," Chinese delegate Gao Xiang wrote in Saturday’s official Shanghai newspaper, Guangming Daily.

Emissions are rising, and global temperatures – already 1.1 degree Celsius higher on average than in pre-industrial times – continue to climb. Rich nations that failed to meet a 2020 deadline to extend $100 billion a year in climate finance to poorer nations now say they won't meet that pledge until 2023.

Activists have dismissed the first week’s fanfare as “greenwashing,” even as country delegates and U.N. negotiators are still working on the details for implementing old and new promises.

But with the history of climate diplomacy littered with broken promises, many have asked: what needs to change beyond this year’s two-week conference to ensure accountability?

TIGHTEN THE RATCHET

Negotiators from nearly 200 countries return to the COP26 table on Monday, with just five days left to cut deals needed to cap global warming at 1.5 C - the limit beyond which the world will be courting devastating climate change impacts.

Among the big issues to resolve are: setting reliable rules for carbon markets, assessing how industrialized countries should pay for climate-linked losses incurred by the rest of the world, and working out financing to help developing countries adapt.

But one idea has gained traction: making countries review and, if necessary, update their emissions-cutting pledges every year, rather than on the current five-year schedule.

"It's an emergency. Every five years? That's not treating it like an emergency," said Saleemul Huq, advisor to the 48-country Climate Vulnerable Forum, which began lobbying for more frequent reviews before the Glasgow talks even began.

U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres told delegates last week that, if COP26 fell short, countries should be required to revisit their climate plans every year.

U.S. climate envoy John Kerry also backed more regular reviews.

"I hope we come out with a very good framework. Whether it's five years (or) less, I can't tell you today," Kerry told journalists Friday. "But I definitely believe it should be as short as we can."

Supporters say such a change is crucial. With just 10 years left to bring global emissions down by 45%, which scientists say is vital to keeping the temperature rise in check, countries must be held accountable on an annual basis, they say.

"It would be negative in my mind to come out of here with too long a horizon," Kerry said.

CAPACITY CHALLENGE

For poorer countries with limited government capacity, an annual initiative could prove a strain.

"One year is too short," said Chioma Felistas Amudi, the assistant chief scientific officer in the climate change department of Nigeria’s Ministry of Environment.

She said many of country pledges, called Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), spanned a wide range of policy areas, energy plans, and government initiatives that needed both political will and financial backing.

"So a one-year check-in would disrupt the process of implementation," she said. "Five years gives us broader time to implement, and also do the stock-take."

Britain's environment minister questioned whether formal changes to the U.N. process were needed, saying it was already designed for incremental progress.

"I am not sure whether the technicality around a ratchet is something that we would push for or would be in the final text" this year, Environment Minister George Eustice told Times Radio. But he didn't rule it out.

"When you have these annual events ... there is a lot of referring back to previous agreements."

With COP26 credibility at stake, some urge ratcheting up schedule
 

Related Articles

Add a Comment

Comment Guidelines

We encourage you to use comments to engage with other users, share your perspective and ask questions of authors and each other. However, in order to maintain the high level of discourse we’ve all come to value and expect, please keep the following criteria in mind:  

  •            Enrich the conversation, don’t trash it.

  •           Stay focused and on track. Only post material that’s relevant to the topic being discussed. 

  •           Be respectful. Even negative opinions can be framed positively and diplomatically. Avoid profanity, slander or personal attacks directed at an author or another user. Racism, sexism and other forms of discrimination will not be tolerated.

  • Use standard writing style. Include punctuation and upper and lower cases. Comments that are written in all caps and contain excessive use of symbols will be removed.
  • NOTE: Spam and/or promotional messages and comments containing links will be removed. Phone numbers, email addresses, links to personal or business websites, Skype/Telegram/WhatsApp etc. addresses (including links to groups) will also be removed; self-promotional material or business-related solicitations or PR (ie, contact me for signals/advice etc.), and/or any other comment that contains personal contact specifcs or advertising will be removed as well. In addition, any of the above-mentioned violations may result in suspension of your account.
  • Doxxing. We do not allow any sharing of private or personal contact or other information about any individual or organization. This will result in immediate suspension of the commentor and his or her account.
  • Don’t monopolize the conversation. We appreciate passion and conviction, but we also strongly believe in giving everyone a chance to air their point of view. Therefore, in addition to civil interaction, we expect commenters to offer their opinions succinctly and thoughtfully, but not so repeatedly that others are annoyed or offended. If we receive complaints about individuals who take over a thread or forum, we reserve the right to ban them from the site, without recourse.
  • Only English comments will be allowed.
  • Any comment you publish, together with your investing.com profile, will be public on investing.com and may be indexed and available through third party search engines, such as Google.

Perpetrators of spam or abuse will be deleted from the site and prohibited from future registration at Investing.com’s discretion.

Write your thoughts here
 
Are you sure you want to delete this chart?
 
Post
Post also to:
 
Replace the attached chart with a new chart ?
1000
Your ability to comment is currently suspended due to negative user reports. Your status will be reviewed by our moderators.
Please wait a minute before you try to comment again.
Thanks for your comment. Please note that all comments are pending until approved by our moderators. It may therefore take some time before it appears on our website.
Comments (4)
john andre
john andre Nov 07, 2021 5:06PM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
President Trump was right in claiming that the Paris Accord on climate control was a huge waste of money. Now ********Biden reinstates it and apologizes to the eu.insulting
Steve Bojo
Steve Bojo Nov 07, 2021 3:45PM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
Human cause climate change is a scam
Roger Miller
Roger Miller Nov 07, 2021 12:51PM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
People are starting to see through ineffectual and wasteful government and hypocritical politicians that are only pandering for votes.  The climate activists see it to, but insanely keep believing government is the solution.  In the end, much of what the government does will makes things worse, not including the loss in quality of life from the economic wealth they wasted trying.
Karl Kessler
Karl Kessler Nov 07, 2021 11:38AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
Fixing climate change couldn't be simpler. All you need to do is raise interest rates.
jason xx
jason xx Nov 07, 2021 11:38AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
How does that fix it?
Nov 07, 2021 11:38AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
hahahhahah
Roger Miller
Roger Miller Nov 07, 2021 11:38AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
The earth doesn't care about interest rates, it will keep changing the climate as it's been doing for thousands of years.
Karl Kessler
Karl Kessler Nov 07, 2021 11:38AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
jason xx It's as LarsH says. Economic activity IS fossil fuel consumption, given our current energy mix, and it's going to be this way for many decades yet. Tighten the economic strings, and fossil fuel consumption goes down. Loosen, like we've been doing for 40 years, and it doesn't matter how many "climate conferences" you have, emissions will continue to rise.
 
Are you sure you want to delete this chart?
 
Post
 
Replace the attached chart with a new chart ?
1000
Your ability to comment is currently suspended due to negative user reports. Your status will be reviewed by our moderators.
Please wait a minute before you try to comment again.
Add Chart to Comment
Confirm Block

Are you sure you want to block %USER_NAME%?

By doing so, you and %USER_NAME% will not be able to see any of each other's Investing.com's posts.

%USER_NAME% was successfully added to your Block List

Since you’ve just unblocked this person, you must wait 48 hours before renewing the block.

Report this comment

I feel that this comment is:

Comment flagged

Thank You!

Your report has been sent to our moderators for review
Continue with Google
or
Sign up with Email