INDEPENDENT online
While the international media continue to speculate as to whether Libya will or could turn into a second Iraq, as well as whether we are witnessing an exercise in regime change or not, the international community simply cannot afford to allow other topical issues and items to end up relegated to the back burner.
Climate change is a typical case in point.
Earlier this week I had occasion to attend a European Parliament debate with national parliamentary representatives in Brussels on climate change.
Its main themes were the implementation of the climate and energy package as well as the international climate negotiations themselves, with particular emphasis on the EU priorities for COP17 that is due to be held in Durban, South Africa later this year.
Among the keynote speakers were Connie Hedegaard, the European Commissioner for Climate Action, and Jacqueline McGlade, Executive Director of the European Environment Agency.
There are several burning issues that need to be addressed in the coming months foremost of which are the following:
In the developed world, recession means that emissions targets are more easily met. Does this reduce the political drive that is required for economic transformation?
Can austerity drive innovation?
What energy efficiency and low carbon investments need to be in place to avoid huge emissions rises with economic recovery?
Will policy makers stay the course in climate policy, or will they be deterred by costs?
What will be the impact of budget constraints in the developed world on developing countries?
What level of climate change is the UN Process on track to prevent?
What progress is likely to be made towards agreement in Durban and, in what areas?
What political conditions are needed for binding agreement to be reached?
The core issues that we need to address are varied.
Environmental and political change is rapid, constant and unpredictable so now, more than ever before, rulemaking needs to incorporate and respond to rapid change.
Another factor that must be seen to with urgency if we are really interested in tangible results is to establish to what extent do national climate plans link in with the global framework.
Politically, most governments realise that in order to achieve emission cuts, they will need to make hard choices. Are they up to it? Some are, while others are decidedly not.
Climate change is a typical case in point.
Earlier this week I had occasion to attend a European Parliament debate with national parliamentary representatives in Brussels on climate change.
Its main themes were the implementation of the climate and energy package as well as the international climate negotiations themselves, with particular emphasis on the EU priorities for COP17 that is due to be held in Durban, South Africa later this year.
Among the keynote speakers were Connie Hedegaard, the European Commissioner for Climate Action, and Jacqueline McGlade, Executive Director of the European Environment Agency.
There are several burning issues that need to be addressed in the coming months foremost of which are the following:
In the developed world, recession means that emissions targets are more easily met. Does this reduce the political drive that is required for economic transformation?
Can austerity drive innovation?
What energy efficiency and low carbon investments need to be in place to avoid huge emissions rises with economic recovery?
Will policy makers stay the course in climate policy, or will they be deterred by costs?
What will be the impact of budget constraints in the developed world on developing countries?
What level of climate change is the UN Process on track to prevent?
What progress is likely to be made towards agreement in Durban and, in what areas?
What political conditions are needed for binding agreement to be reached?
The core issues that we need to address are varied.
Environmental and political change is rapid, constant and unpredictable so now, more than ever before, rulemaking needs to incorporate and respond to rapid change.
Another factor that must be seen to with urgency if we are really interested in tangible results is to establish to what extent do national climate plans link in with the global framework.
Politically, most governments realise that in order to achieve emission cuts, they will need to make hard choices. Are they up to it? Some are, while others are decidedly not.
Comments
Post a Comment