|
Copenhegan-
Climate Change
Green
Features Reports from Copenhagen (Climate Change)
Soumya
Dutta, Editor, Green Features writes from Copenhagen…….
On
the end of the day, the international climate negotiations – COP15,
at Copenhagen, a bold and ‘controversial’ proposal by the
very small island nation of Tuvalu located in the Pacific ocean, managed
to create a huge flutter, increased the rift between developing countries,
and finally brought the negotiations to a halt.
What
Tuvalu is basically asking is for internationally (legally) binding
emissions reduction targets by ALL BIG Emitting Countries, including
those in the developing country block. And this created a lot of unrest
amongst the big-developing polluters, including China, India, Brasil,
south Africa, etc None of these “emerging economies” are
willing to accept leaglly binding emission reduction targets –
rather preferring only Energy Intensity targets determined by national
goals. But many small & poor developing countries, the LDCs (Least
Developed Countries), and particularly the Island nations (AOSIS –
assn Of Small Island states) along with Bangladesh etc have supported
the Tuvaluan proposal.
Tavalu
exhibit and spokespersons- Gilliance legallic and Fanny Heros
Deforestation
The
deforestation has become a hot issue in Copenhagen. The activists from
all the developing and poor. Countries have been campaigning against
REDD mechanism. Big developing countries are giving wrong datas, ……………
1)
The latest studies have shown that the percentage contribution of Deforestation
today is close to 12% of the total emission, from the estimated 18-21
% of the 1990, largely because of very little increase in deforestation
in deforestation in the last 2 decades, while fossil carbon emissions
kept increasing,. Some groups estimate the deforestation contribution
to be 10%.
2)
In India, there is no net deforestation for the last 1.5 decades. This
is independently verified by some UN bodies also (like FAO). pl see
the attached picture from FAO.
India's
forest cover HAS ACTUALLY INCREASED OVER THE LAST DECADE, AND THIS IS
LARGELY DUE TO THE CONTRIBUTION OF FOREST PEOPLE'S STRUGGLE TO RESIST
ATTACK ON FOREST LAND BY EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRIES, PLANTATIONS ETC.
Indian
Govt. has absolutely no justification for talking REDD.
The
myth that has been spread over the last decade and a half that deforestation
is the source of around 20% of all emissions, has been shown to be false.
latest studies show this is close to 12%, AND in some developing countries
-- like India -- becoming greedy with the prospect of REDD money, deforestation
is actually very little or nil.
The
Indian Govt. and many of its constituent state Govts are preparing ground
for receiving projects under REDD, and there are some suspiscions that
the Govts attempts to give only individual land rights to forest dwellers
(through the recently passed Forests Rights Act 2006) and attempts to
deny community forest rights and to subvert survey of common lands --
is also an attempt to earmark rest of the forest for corporate trading
thru REDD type schemes.
Durban
Group
The
Durban Group rejects climate mitigation financing of forestry projects
through the REDD mechanism. Mining and burning of fossil fuels is the
primary cause of the climate crisis. [addtl sentence]
From
a justice perspective, forestry offsets exacerbate the climate crisis
while harming forest-dependent peoples in order to protect elite consumer
lifestyles and business as usual energy policies. While meant to lower
carbon emissions from forest degradation and deforestation, forestry
offsets instead will hurt efforts to fix the climate. REDD and related
forestry finance proposals fail to take
seriously the complex and diverse ways in which forests are people's
homes, sources of their livelihoods, integral parts of their cultures
and spirituality, sources of medicine, regulators of watersheds, burial
grounds, sacred grounds, and otherwise integral to the substance of
peoples' lives.
Forests
could be protected instead through deregulated forestry governance,
strong rights and institutions for forest-dependent people, especially
indigenous peoples, and locally-initiated capital and forestry management
investments for sustainable development. Fixing the climate crisis caused
by [historical polluters] must not be a burden borne by disenfranchised
indigenous and forest-dependent people.
The
urgency of this declaration is clear because approval of the REDD negotiating
text is a high priority for COP-15. Moreover, there are signs that the
US wants to make REDD a binding agreement*.
The
Thailand conservation groups have also criticized colonial efforts of
indigenous rights.
There
are some unanswered questions which are bothering the groups.
How
will REDD work with decentralized governance mechanisms? Will plantations
be included in REDD? Will harvested managed forests be counted against
the carbon balance (is it a net calculation)? How will incentives or
financing be directed to forest-dependent people? How will REDD recognize
the legally binding rights of the forest communities, their contribution
to conservation and sustainable management of forests and biodiversity?
Who can then claim the incentives for reducing deforestation and degradation?
What happens in the event of fire or other forest destruction?
Leaked
“Danish Text”
Three
hours after the "Danish text" had been leaked to the Guardian,
Lumumba Di-Aping, the Sudanese chairman of the group of 132 developing
countries known as G77 plus China, spelt out exactly why the poor countries
he represents were so incensed. "The text robs developing countries
of their just and equitable and fair share of the atmospheric space.
It tries to treat rich and poor countries as equal," said the diplomat.
The
representatives of developing nations felt betrayed by the intent of
the proposals in the draft.
"This
text destroys both the UN convention on climate change and the Kyoto
protocol. This is aimed at producing a new treaty, a new legal initiative
that throws away the basis of [differing] obligations between the poorest
and most wealthy nations in the world," said Di-Aping.
The
existing treaty is the only global agreement that legally obliges rich
countries to reduce their emissions.
Di-Aping
is one of the most outspoken of developing country leaders, at once
charming and radical. He has called poor people to part at most pressure
on politicians to come to their senses.
Brazil
Defends biofuels at Copenhagen Summit
Being
the world's largest producer and exporter of ethanol it is natural for
the Brazilian government and its partners to push biofuels as the only
real alternative for a world trying wean itself away from fossil fuels
that contribute to global warming.
Brazilian
authorities were ready with their arguments at the United Nations climate
change summit underway here. Over the past 30 years, since the country
embarked on its ethanol programme, an estimated 800 million tons of
carbon dioxide emissions have been avoided.
Brazilian
delegates were at pains to show that not only is biofuel production
the best way to reduce greenhouse gas (GhG) emissions but can also combat
poverty as exemplified by the country's scheme to promote micro-distilleries
to provide additional income for rural families.
Biofuels
have, however, come under serious attack in recent years for eating
into
farmlands meant for food production. As a result, the European Union
backed
out, last year, from a commitment to introduce a 10 percent mandatory
quota of
biofuels in all transportation by 2020.
While
admitting that "biofuels are no silver bullet," Brazilian
authorities insist that biofuels are the best way forward for developing
countries.
Today
at Halfdan Rasmussen Room, Form 7:00 to 10:00 PM (IST) the Indian groups
are meeting in a seminar on “Bringing Agriculture in focus in
Climate Change Negotiation”. The organisers expect a lot of participation
and a collection of ‘declarations’ from different peoples
groups in India are scheduled to be released.
Vijay
Pratap of Lokayan Samiksha adds from Copenhagen- Yesterday, we went
to a intensive tour of various stalls of NGO’s. If was very educative
for activitsts. The young men and women in a big way, are attracted
to the issues being discussed in Copenhagen. The attitude towards Gandhi
is ritualistic, indifferent or even allergic except by greens. Nobody
is talking forcefully about learning from the life style of marginalised
majority, who are neither using energy nor emitting green house gases.
Vijay
Further adds that European Civil Society is challenging Eurocentric
views. African groups are more vocal and are in a fighting mood against
Developed and big developing countries’ easy attitude.
Green
Features
...........................................................................................................................................
Cutain
Raiser
Report
on 12 December 2009
|