The Environment - What Next After Copenhagen?

Interview conducted by Innocent Chia
The inability of World leaders to arrive at some real actionable compromise deal at the Copenhagen Environmental Summit literally stunned a great many hopefuls who are living witnesses of a globe that has been experiencing extreme climatic mutations. Historically, however, the Scientific community may not have been surprised that politicians - in identical  
fashion to those who executed Galileo for stating that the world was round and debunking 
prevailing knowledge that it was flat –  politicians decided that executing the World with a wait and see approach was less harmful than committing their respective governments. A month after the start date of the summit,The Chiareport returned for a follow-up conversation with the Climate Change Deputy Project Manager at the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), Dr Richard T. Munang to help explain and give fresh perspective on all that transpired at Copenhagen.

Chiareport: Was the Copenhagen climate summit a success?

Dr Richard T. Munang:  This was perhaps not the big breakthrough some had hoped for, but neither was it a breakdown which at times seemed a possibility. The litmus test for the ambitions of developed countries will, in a sense, come immediately. If the funds promised in the Accord start flowing swiftly and to the levels announced, then a new international climate change policy may have been born." The outcome represented a compromise of a myriad of differing national and economic interests including developed, developing, least developed and small-island developing states. Trying to take over 190 countries through the same door towards a more cooperative global warming policy has proved challenging but, ultimately possible and do-able.
 
Time will be the true judge as to whether 19 December 2009 was indeed an historic date for accelerating a response to combating dangerous climate change and for more sustainable management of economically important ecosystems, such as forests. I  think this outcome would also restore certainty to global carbon markets by demonstrating a scaled-up international commitment to climate change while assisting to focus and to catalyze the investments -including private sector ones-towards a low carbon economy.

Chiareport:  What has the Copenhagen summit changed?

Dr Richard T. Munang:  The great German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche said "from chaos comes order". It is difficult at this time to see the order that may result from the chaos of the Copenhagen climate change conference (COP15), but as the dust settles, traces of a path forward are becoming visible. For the first time, the US, China and other major developing countries united in an effort to curb global greenhouse gas emissions. The Kyoto Protocol did not achieve this - it imposed no obligations on developing countries to restrain the growth of their emissions, and the US never acceded to it. The Copenhagen conference was a unique moment in history.

  With 110 world leaders present and a single issue on the agenda, there has never been a meeting like this. The countries that brokered the text, the US, China, India, South Africa, Brazil and the EU, also reflects a world in which the balance of power has significantly changed in the last 20 years.
At a fundamental level, the conference redefined the debate between countries in terms of awareness of climate science and support for action. There is no longer any question that climate change is central to the political thinking of every country on the planet.

Public awareness has also massively increased. The vast campaigns run around the world in the run-up to Copenhagen by governments, NGOs and business and the media coverage of the issue and the summit have made addressing climate change widely understood and discussed from the pubs of rural England to the bars of Beijing.

The other very important change is that green growth is now the prevailing economic model of our time. The idea that addressing climate change is bad for business was buried at Copenhagen. Countries from both developed and developing worlds have announced low-carbon economic plans and are moving forward.

Chiareport:  What did it not change?

Dr Richard T. Munang: The summit did not result in a legally binding deal and there is still uncertainty in how market orientated policies will develop. There was no clear signal on the support to be given to move towards a clean energy based economy. The accord calls on countries to state what they will do to curb greenhouse gas emissions, but these will not be legally binding commitments.
Furthermore, there is no global target for emissions reductions by 2050 and the accord is vague as to how its goals - such as the $100bn of funds annually for developing countries - will be achieved. The accord does refer to the target of limiting global warming to 2C above pre-industrial temperatures, as well as the need for quantified action by both. The move to green growth is no longer in doubt, but the details, actions and time frame remain unclear at best. 
However, we need to understand the complexity of the situation and learn to work within the constraints of human behaviour, differences in cultures, histories and ambitions. It is, therefore, understandable why such an apparent compromise Accord was produced.

Chiareport:  What happens next? 

Dr Richard T. Munang: Under the Copenhagen Accord Developed countries are to commit to 'implementing individually or jointly the quantified economy-wide emissions targets for 2020' by 31st January 2010. This means that developed countries can decide their own emissions targets. Measuring, reporting and verifying emissions will be based on 'guidelines', rather than being legally binding.
Developing countries are to state by 31st January 2010 what they will do to implement mitigation actions. For the least developed countries and Small islands, these actions can be voluntary.
There will be a further UNFCCC meeting in Bonn, Germany in the summer, and the Conference of the Parties will reconvene for the 16th meeting in Mexico in late November 2010. Many countries will be seeking to have the commitments made by Parties to become legally binding.
 
Chiareport:  How does humanity turn the tides around from now on?

Worldwide cheap calling cards

Dr Richard T. Munang:  To some extent the tides have already been turned around, albeit in small amount, in that the World's attention is now on the issue of climate change and, the US is on board. The success of any future agreement will depend on many factors: Obama will face mid-term elections soon - the US Senate needs to have 2/3 majority to approve legislation related to foreign policy; how the general public responds to the lack of a clear agreement from Copenhagen; what efforts the Chinese make in developing a green economy, and so on...
The main progress that can be made is that the developed countries make real efforts to change the basis for their economies and help developing countries with clean energy technology development and adaptation support. Developing countries need to keep the pressure on the developed countries to reduce emissions.

Chiareport:  How will the 'Copenhagen Green Climate Fund' be supported (who will pay into it and how much) and divided (who to and how much)?

Dr Richard T. Munang:  It is still early days yet since the announcement was made and its presumptuous for me to zero in with a plan on how this will happen- who pays and who receives. I think in reality it will not make a lot of difference to ordinary people in rural villages in Africa. The money may trickle down to a few projects, but a lot of the cash will be lost in administration, corruption and inefficient implementation. Also, although $30 billion has been proposed - it is not certain that this amount will be provided.

Chiareport:  Is the 2 degree Celsius warming limit too high for many developing countries to bear? Should the limit be set lower?

Dr Richard T. Munang:  Even the 2 degrees Celsius limit is unacceptable. This is because we still do not yet understand the feedback mechanisms in the environment. Given that we have had a 0.7 degree rise since pre-industrial times, but are seeing positive (worsening) feedback mechanisms being activated, such as the melting of polar ice, then it is not hard to imagine that another 1 degree rise will accelerate positive feedback mechanisms even more.
A global average rise of 2 degrees may not be disastrous for some temperate climate countries (Britain included), but for countries that already have a high water deficit, like in Sub-Saharan Africa, then even a small temperature rise will lead to even greater water shortages. So I think the politicians have missed the point: 2 degrees is the absolute limit beyond which we may progress into climate chaos; 1 degree rise (about another 0.2 to 0.3 degrees rise), will still have severe impacts on many already impoverished people and degrade ecosystems. Using the precautionary principle it would make sense to take action that halts the temperature rise as quickly as possible, and invest heavily in trying to understand how our world works.

Chiareport:  The Kyoto Protocol has run its course with mixed results…The Copenhagen Accord seems to be in the cracks... How are these challenges going to impact villages in Africa and other developing regions of the world?

Dr Richard T. Munang:  The failure of Kyoto to restrict emissions increase has jeopardized many in already marginal areas. The implications of a weak agreement from Copenhagen is that it will take even longer to start the process of reducing emissions, therefore increasing the probability that those already prone to climate change will be even more at risk.

Chiareport:  Put yourself in the place of the average global citizen that may not be very familiar with some of the negotiation jargon that we have used here. What is the simplest and most important message you want the person to retain and pass on?

Dr Richard T. Munang:  This is a very important question. I think ordinary people just need to be aware of what they can do as individuals to both reduce emissions, and what they can do to cope with impacts when they arrive. The secret to this is communication and education. Individuals can also take an active role in putting political pressure on our leaders to make them be more active in finding solutions. This will help put climate change, sustainability and other environmental issues at the forefront of the political agenda. However, there is no such thing as an ordinary global citizen - each person has their own views, objectives and motivations. What is needed from all levels of society is a recognition that we cannot continue in the way we have in the past, and that sacrifices are required (particularly in the developed nations) and that people in developing nations may not be able to have the same materialistic gain that they see people in developed countries have had in the past.

Chiareport: with all your hard work towards making the case for ecosystems to be included in the deal, personally how do you feel?

Dr Richard T. Munang:  I was looking forward to celebrating a momentous occasion in World history when all nations faced together their collective responsibilities and worked together to tackle our shared problems, but it looks like I'll have to put the celebrations on hold for a while longer. Many politicians were stating that Copenhagen was the start of a new era in co-operation, but I think that the battle has only just begun to get consensus and have a genuine strategy. It makes me wonder how much worse the climate and environmental problems need to get before really decisive action is taken.
I think our efforts to build on the ecosystems based adaptation can be developed further. As we have been saying, the ecosystems approach offers cost effective mitigation and adaptation - this is a message I think needs to be shouted louder and wider and beyond just forest ecosystems. Perhaps the message is finally getting through to politicians that we need ecosystems to provide climate regulation, though I suspect that their focus over the next year will still be on arguments over economic positioning and emissions reductions. I think there is a real opportunity now to place ecosystems even more in the spotlight at CoP16 in Mexico.
Chiareport:  Are you optimistic?

Dr Richard T. Munang:  My mother taught me one thing- hope is the bedrock of success. So, I'm always optimistic. At least now the climate issue is centre stage, it just may take a while to hammer out a strategy that will succeed on the climate stabilization goals - but we don't have too much time left, so we'll have to come up with something quick.  Will a new world order result from the chaos? The jury is out.
Chiareport: Sir, we thank you for your time and hope to do this again in the nearest future.

Dr Richard T. Munang: Thank you Mr Chia.

Dr. Richard Tingem Munang’s career has evolved from research scientist at Nottingham University, UK through Trinity College, Dublin through to today where he is the climate change Project Manager at United Nations Environment programme (UNEP) Climate Change Adaptation Unit. He coordinates UNEP's activities on the joint initiative of UNEP and UNDP project called CC-DARE. This project aims to become a practical example of UN cooperation on a critical development issue and provide direct evidence of UN reform under the One UN banner. Dr. Munang’s areas of expertise include in climate change science & policy, societal adaptation, managing ad coordinating national and international climate change programs, research programs and assessments and communicating scientific, technical and economic information to policy makers.
 

Comments

[Joel]

Dr Munang,
Thanks so much to enlight us on such critical issues.

I share your optimism that agreement will be reached on a global Co2 reduction agreement and ecosystem preservation.

Nevertheless i find it a little bit naive to oversee the funding issue, as i believe money must come from somewhere to support and help the realisation of all these projects.

My fear is that Africa will be left out once more with the drag bags of the issues if we solely rely on western country to have the matter solved.

What do you think of an african approach, where African country can decide themselves on some regulations with global impact like for example putting an halt to the industrial exploitation of our natural resources by western multinational companies?

Thanks in advance

Joel from Kinshasa