Dateline: Copenhagen

The beaches of Cancun will be hosts of COP 16. After a lukewarm result from Copenhagen it will be up to the Mexican government to create the environment that will make a legally binding international agreement more likely. Beyond excellent logistics and security, the COP in Mexico will have to tackle the challenge of reaching consensus from a group of countries that appears to be even more fragmented after COP 15. The division has led many analysts to speculate that this year the Climate Change debate will shift to regional or G forums (G8, G8+5, G20 etc.), or even to bilateral negotiations between the most influential states. Reducing the number of Parties might be a good strategy to reach concrete results more efficiently, without the hassle of building consensus, but it threatens principles embedded in broader multilateralism (like equity and transparency). Historically, Mexico has been a keen adherent to these principles. The COP presidency will give the Mexicans an opportunity to uphold the UNFCCC process as the forum to reach a Climate Change global agreement.

Politically, the Mexican government has a large stake in the COP 16 success. President Felipe Calderon Hinojosa has made Climate Change a top priority for Mexico. Indeed, the Special Climate Change Program (PECC) published in the Official Gazette of the Federation late last summer offers a 51 MMt CO₂e unilateral reduction target by 2012. On the international stage, Mexico’s Green Fund proposal is one of the most significant contributions from a single country to the international climate debate, designed to work effectively with broad participation from developed and developing countries alike. President Calderon was part of a handful of heads of state to drill down the Copenhagen Accord last December. And he has been active behind the scenes as well: Last November, along with Australia’s Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, he brought in the Danish Prime Minister, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, to host an unofficial breakfast on Climate Change during the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meeting in November in Singapore. It’s safe to say that Mexico’s Administration has adopted Climate Change as the centerpiece of its foreign policy (some internal Mexican bureaucratic divisions non-withstanding).

The Mexican government faces the urgent need to “walk the talk.” A key piece for Mexico to meet its domestic emission reduction target will require the Energy Ministry to mandate the national public utility company (CFE) to double its renewable energy installed capacity from 3.3 to 7.6 % by 2012. This transition, neglected for too long, would mainly rely on expanding the wind energy base operated by private developers, mostly for self-supply – a scheme that makes CFE uncomfortable as it weakens its monopolistic power. Other actions contemplated in the PECC’s mitigating strategy like a REDD pilot project and the expansion of the “Green Mortgage” initiative will also face similar power struggles.

In the international sphere, consensus building needs to start now as well. President Calderon and his team need to enhance their facilitator role in the months leading up to COP 16. There is a strong opportunity this year to frame one of the most ambitious global agreements in history. It will require flexing high-level diplomatic muscle on three different fronts. First, they need to build on the willingness to cooperate from latecomer countries like China, India, Brazil and the United States to close the dividing line between Annex 1 and Non-Annex 1 countries. Second, it is essential for them to address the concerns of the most vulnerable countries, like Tuvalu, and least developed countries, like Mali, to ensure a smooth flow of discussions. Third, they should reach out to countries like Venezuela, Ecuador and Saudi Arabia that consider a Climate Change accord as another plot for developed countries to get their way. This three-tier strategy will have to move forward while keeping an eye on talks behind closed doors at forums in which Mexico does not participate, as well as U.S. domestic politics. Mexico appears to have the diplomatic willingness to lead on this effort, and its international climate initiatives are not only sound and well-received but are also fairly consistent with its domestic policy. If President Calderon and his team manage to succeed, negotiations at COP 16 could be as rejuvenating as a sunny day at the beach.

This blog has been contributed by Juan Pablo Osornio, International Policy Analyst at the Center for Clean Air Policy in Washington DC, and Jonathan Pinzon, Research Director at Cassals & Associates in Mexico City.

Feelings of inequality and tensions between the global North and South—which have plagued international negotiations leading up to the December United Nations climate conference in Copenhagen, Denmark—were also present at the XIII World Forestry Congress last week (October 18- 23, 2009). Over 7000 participants representing 160 countries convened in Buenos Aires for this event, hosted by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the government of Argentina. Founded in 1926, the Forestry Congress serves as a forum for governments, civil society, academia, and the private sector to discuss forest-related issues and formulate recommendations at multiple levels of governance. 

 The Conference’s theme was “Forests in Development: A Vital Balance.” Discussion topics included biodiversity, forests and energy, forest management, tourism and recreation, and development opportunities. A forum focused on “forests and climate change” was held Wednesday afternoon, with a keynote address by Roberto Acosta, Secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The forum included panels on land use and land use change as well as Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD), and discussed the impacts of climate change on forests and people.

Forests are not just carbon sinks, they provide economic, cultural and spiritual livelihoods for billions of people

 The forum also produced a message to the UNFCCC’s 15^th Conference of Parties (COP 15) which will convene in Copenhagen this December. It outlines the important role of sustainable forest management in climate change mitigation and adaptation, and calls for increased “inter-sectoral collaboration” to improve forest governance and the livelihoods of people dependent on forests for income, as poverty and lack of human rights are linked to deforestation and forest degradation. The message to the COP 15 also called for increased recognition that forests are “more than just carbon,” as they provide valuable ecosystem goods and services, promote biodiversity, and provide the economic livelihood, “cultural and spiritual identity of billions of people.”

 An ongoing theme of the Congress was that climate change has pinholed forests as tools of storing greenhouse gases, rather than also focusing on the opportunities for “rural development, foods security and livelihood improvement” that forests offer to developing nations, as expressed by Sudanese representative Balgis Osman Elasha (who incidentally authored one of the climate connections for State of the World 2009, “Building Resilience to Drought and Climate Change in Sudan.”

 This theme echoes the North-South divide that has also characterized recent climate negotiations. Developing countries do not appreciate being viewed exclusively as mitigation tools (or in this case, as carbon sinks) for industrialized countries. Accordingly, the World Forestry Congress emphasized that forests should be appreciated in a broader sense including their vital role for the daily lives of hundreds of million people depending on them in the developing world, rather than valued for their usefulness to industrialized countries.

Worldwatch Institute senior researcher Michael Renner recently posted a blog outlining the policy positions of two leading front men in the international climate negotiations: UK.. economist Lord Nicholas Stern and U.S. envoy Todd Stern.  Despite sharing the last name, the two men could not be more different. Michael’s article “A Tale of Two Sterns… But Only One Planet” summarizes clearly their opposing views.  Do these two men represent the greater the greater tensions between the global North and South? As we approach the final stretch before the COP 15 this December, the world community can only wait to see if the negotiators at Copenhagen will act as two or one.