This is the second year that MLA has participated in the annual UN Climate Change negotiations (COP 16), and the differences between the proceedings this year and last are fairly significant. On a superficial level, there's the location — last year's talks were in frigid Copenhagen, while this year government representatives, NGOs, business interests and protesters have converged in sunny Cancun, Mexico. (I understand it is quite chilly there today, so I will refrain from sharing the temperature down here, but suffice it to say that if one — entirely hypothetically of course — had a few extra moments in between meetings to sip a margarita on the beach, it would not be unpleasant). More substantively, the expectations for Copenhagen could not have been higher, with lofty goals of a worldwide, binding agreement on carbon emission reductions, funding to assist developing countries in lowering their emissions, a path forward for cap and trade initiatives in the US and elsewhere, and more. Given that the Copenhagen proceedings ultimately fell short of these goals, expectations for this year's talks understandably were more modest. Being on the ground here underscores some key differences between perception and reality. For example, numerous media reports related to the COP 16 proceedings have focused on Japan's vocal opposition to extending the Kyoto Protocol before its requirements for cutting carbon emissions expire in 2012. The Japanese delegation has argued that such an extension would be pointless unless the world's largest polluters also agree to accept binding targets. Certainly many environmental activists and some governmental officials seek to prolong the treaty in the absence of another, effective post-Kyoto framework. Yet among the delegates and representatives we met with, Japan's position was "nothing new" and hardly the major development it was represented to be in many press reports. And, although talks among key constituents since Copenhagen left little reason to hope for much progress here, prospects for a limited deal following COP 16 now appear somewhat brighter, with the U.S. and China narrowing differences on a key element: how to monitor greenhouse gas emissions. Our inside sources suggest that the Chinese have reversed their stance in part due to the fact that they believe they are making a great deal of progress, including through cutting edge technological developments, and see monitoring as a way to share this progress with the world. Delegates and representatives were encouraged by this unexpected development, believing that an understanding on measuring emissions is an important step that could help break the long-standing deadlock on reducing pollutants that scientists say have caused global temperatures to steadily rise over recent decades. Incidentally, the World Meteorological Organisation has released some key data during COP 16 concerning just how much temperatures have increased — but more on that in my next post.
Read more detail on Recent Administrative Law Posts –
