Reaction to the conclusion of the UN climate change conference in Cancun, Mexico, last weekend has been almost universally downbeat.
“A slap in the face,” Friends of the Earth International said.
The Guardian’s leader column described it as “another opportunity lost.”
However, there’s a different way of looking at the deal — on emissions reduction, deforestation and financial help for developing countries — that 193 nations reached on Dec. 11. It’s to see the very fact of agreement as a crucial advance.
Climate change presents what economists call a “collective action problem.”
It can be tackled only if everyone acts together: No one country’s efforts will be enough. So if governments, businesses and individuals believe that others are not taking action, a rational response is not to do so oneself. It’s a version of the prisoner’s dilemma — it pays to co-operate, but not if others are not doing so. However, if we don’t act, we will definitely face catastrophe.
That’s what happened after the debacle of the Copenhagen conference last year. Governments and businesses looked at the failure to come to a meaningful agreement and began to withdraw their own commitments. The US, the EU and Australia started rowing back on their pledges. Businesses put clean energy investment plans on hold. Those with a vested interest in not taking action, and the climate skeptics, became emboldened, assiduously spreading further doubt.
Cancun reverses that negative momentum. Now countries have put domestic emissions reduction commitments into a formal UN agreement, further action can be justified. The really convincing political and economic case for investing in low-carbon energy is not just tackling future climate change, but generating “green growth” now.
It’s the jobs and the new clean industries that will be stimulated by a low-carbon world that countries and businesses are eyeing up eagerly. However, investing in these requires confidence that others are also cutting emissions — that there will be new low-carbon markets and that high performance will not be undercut by competition from lower-cost polluters.
After Cancun, the global race to produce clean technologies is back on. Business and investor confidence has a chance of being restored. Europe has justification for moving to its higher 30 percent emissions reduction target by 2020. The really significant shift is the willingness of emerging economies — China, India, Brazil, South Korea and others — to cut emissions growth and their refusal to allow the world to be dragged backwards by the dysfunctional politics of the US. The view now is that the US will simply have to catch up later when the economic costs of its high-carbon economy become painfully apparent.
Cancun’s critics are of course absolutely right to say that what was achieved is not enough. As the agreements themselves insist, all countries’ commitments will have to be revisited in the light of a scientific review in three years. However, let’s not miss the significance of what has been done. If the Cancun commitments are fully implemented, global emissions should peak in about 2020, and that is the essential first step toward a subsequent decline.
And it isn’t correct that Cancun’s 2020 targets mean the global temperature will inevitably breach the tolerable 2°C threshold. The level at which it will stabilize will be determined as much by what happens after 2020: Countries will have to make much greater — and more expensive — efforts, but it is not out of the range of the possible.
Climate change is a frightening phenomenon: It often feels too large and difficult, requiring too much political will, to deal with. For many, fear induces paralysis and feelings of hopelessness.
However, the world is now beginning to combat global warming and there is now a chance that this knowledge will encourage further effort. There is no room for complacency, but the real danger is that pessimism becomes self-fulfilling.
So the question about Cancun is not “Did it do enough?” — we knew the answer to that already — but “Does it make further action more or less likely?”
On that there’s no doubt.
In climate change, fatalism will prove fatal. Optimism that we can combat climate change is not just an essential psychological condition, it’s a vital political posture. Cancun gives optimism a boost: It should therefore be a reason not for continuing despair, but for hope and renewed determination to do more.
Michael Jacobs is a visiting senior fellow on climate change and the environment at the London School of Economics and a former special adviser on energy and climate to the British prime minister.
On Sept. 27, 2002, the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste (East Timor) joined the UN to become its 191st member. Since then, two other nations have joined, Montenegro on June 28, 2006, and South Sudan on July 14, 2011. The combined total of the populations of these three nations is just more than half that of Taiwan’s 23.7 million people. East Timor has 1.3 million, Montenegro has slightly more than half a million and South Sudan has 10.9 million. They all are members of the UN, yet much more populous Taiwan is denied membership. Of the three, East Timor, as a Southeast Asian
Taiwan has for decades singlehandedly borne the brunt of a revanchist, ultra-nationalist China — until now. Ever since Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison had the temerity to call for a transparent, international investigation into the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic, Beijing has been turning the screws on Canberra. This has included unleashing aggressive “wolf warrior” diplomats to intimidate Australian policymakers, enacting punitive tariffs on its exports, and threatening an embargo on Chinese tourists and students to the nation. A tense situation became more serious on June 19 after Morrison revealed that a “sophisticated state-based actor” — read: China — had launched a
There have been media reports that the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) plans to hold military exercises in August to simulate seizing the Pratas Islands (Dongsha Islands, 東沙群島) in the South China Sea. In the past, only Coast Guard Administration (CGA) personnel have been stationed there, but the Ministry of National Defense has dispatched the Republic of China Marine Corps to the islands, nominally for “ex-situ training,” to prevent a Chinese attack under the guise of military drills. The move is only a temporary measure and not sufficiently proactive. Instead, the government should officially declare sovereignty over the islands and station troops
Hsiao Bi-khim (蕭美琴) is to be Taiwan’s next representative to the US. Hsiao is well versed in international affairs and Taiwan-US relations. In her days as a student in the US, she was a member of the Formosan Association for Public Affairs (FAPA) and served as chief executive of the Democratic Progressive Party’s US mission. She is familiar with a broad spectrum of Taiwanese affairs in the US. FAPA hopes that Hsiao, after taking up her new post, would continue to deepen and normalize relations between Taiwan and the US, and that she would try to get a free-trade agreement