From the FT:
China and the US have begun an ambitious new phase of talks on curbing their carbon dioxide emissions that observers say is the most promising development in nearly 20 years of global climate change negotiations…Harvard University’s Professor Robert Stavins, an expert in global climate negotiations, said the extent to which the US and China were now co-operating marked a substantial shift. “It is the most promising development since the Kyoto protocol,” he said, referring to the 1997 climate treaty that is the only legally binding UN climate pact ever agreed, but is moribund because the US never ratified it and China was not bound by it.
…Still, it remains to be seen if they can overcome their long-running disagreement over the extent to which China should be required to meet similar emissions targets to advanced industrial nations, a key hurdle in past climate negotiations.
Millions of Chinese still live in chronic poverty despite the extraordinary economic growth that means the country emits nearly a third of the carbon dioxide belched out each year by the coal plants and factories that scientists warn is warming the atmosphere to potentially risky levels.
This cannot be ignored in the climate talks, said Mr Xie. “China does not pretend to be poor, we are poor in real terms,” he said, adding there had been no disagreement in the US talks about the vexed issue of “common but differentiated responsibilities”.
This phrase is shorthand in the global climate negotiations for an agreement dating back to 1992 that developing countries should not have to shoulder the same burden of cutting carbon emissions as richer nations. At the time, China was classed a developing nation, which is why it was not bound by the Kyoto Protocol.
Todd Stern said the US, which accounts for 16 per cent of global emissions, had no quarrel with the phrase itself but “the issue is how you interpret it”.
Hmmm, well, that’s all very diplomatic but not very concrete. To me it’s quite clear that the bulk of responsibility lies with developed economies – in moral, economic and real terms – but that does not often translate into political reality. Let’s hope the positive sentiment transforms into action.
