India missed the Durban train
India won a reprieve,but its lack of strategic vision has caused it to lose a great opportunity.
The Durban Platform agreed to by over 190 nations at the annual UNFCCC jamboree is a classic illustration of how such UN sponsored events take the whole world for a ride by promising more of the same,actually performing little yet proclaiming a grand success.
Many in the media have credited India for the leadership role in Durban,in rallying the developing countries and withstanding the pressure from Europe. But this was also an opportunity lost. India adopted a defensive strategy by hugging to historical responsibilities of the developed countries. While past is important,the present provided much stronger case which India failed to harness in Durban.
Kyoto protocol,which was to end in 2012,has been extended to 2017. This protocol binds many of the developed countries,to continue their commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emission. But the US,which is by far the largest economy and therefore emitter of GHGs,has not ratified the protocol. China and India,two of the largest emerging economies and whose emissions are increasing,are exempt along with other developing countries. And the only way the EU countries could dramatically reduce their emissions significantly is if their economies slow down drastically as it happened with the collapse of the Communist block. This may very well happen again,given the sovereign debt crisis looming in Europe. So,in Durban,it is much ado about nothing!
At Durban,delegates agreed to write a new legally binding commitment for all countries by 2015 and which will come in to effect in 2020. Setting another deadline,a decade ahead,is like pushing the ball on to the other side of the court,and not expecting it to come back!
A lot of the intense negotiations were on the terminology to underwrite the legal commitment—‘legal instrument’,‘legal outcome’,‘legal framework’ and many others. With all its treaties,institutions,bureaucracy and finances,the current crisis in Europe shows the pathetic state of international institutions in actually monitoring,assessing and enforcing the rules. Then,to believe that the UN or a new global institution would change the governing climate and perform,is to ignore the political realities of the world today.
In Cancun in 2010,the UNFCCC delegates had made a commitment to raise $100bn a year by 2020. Given the fiscal situation across the world,not much money is expected any time soon. Yet the negotiators in Durban agreed to create a mechanism to manage the green fund that is still missing. Likewise,a green technology development mechanism has been agreed to. This is only a new name for technology transfer initiatives that have been going around for the past 50 years without much of an impact. Technologies flow only when the investment climate and economic environment are conducive. If necessity is the mother of invention,then economic competition is the guiding force behind adoption of new technologies.
The dramatic improvement in energy efficiency and consequent carbon intensity (amount of carbon emitted per unit of GDP) in China and India over the past two decades provide a glimpse of the possibilities. As their economies reformed and opened up to the world,companies began to adopt better and more efficient technologies and practices in order to compete with the world. And both these countries still have a long way to go (Chart 1).
India has improved its carbon intensity by 32% in the past 15 years as it began to reform its economy and prepared to compete globally. Yet today,India’s carbon intensity is still seven times higher than Japan’s (Chart 2). This indicates there are still huge structural and policy challenges that are preventing India from adopting the best technologies and practices currently available in the world.
The question of equity entered the climate discourse once again in Durban. India and some other developing countries stressed the fact that the responsibility for the largest share of man-made GHGs accumulated in the atmosphere lay with the developed countries of today.
While history is important,the present also raises many more questions about equity. Today,the developmental aspirations of the billions still trapped in poverty across the world cannot be brushed aside. For instance,nearly 20% of Indians today hardly have any access to electricity. Among the millions who do have electricity connections,most cannot rely on the supply. One estimate of the burden of lack of clean and safe sources of energy is the annual death toll in India of about half a million from indoor air pollution,caused mainly by fire wood,and agricultural and animal waste,as fuel for cooking in unventilated huts.
Not surprisingly,supply of electricity has emerged at the top of the political agenda in India today. The per capita availability of electricity in India is less than 1,000 kwh,which is one-tenth to one-twentieth of many developed countries. Therefore,any restriction of energy supply will be political suicide for the leadership at home,quite irrespective of any commitment made at the international level.
That the future of UNFCCC may be really uncertain is best exemplified by the inclusion of agriculture in the climate negotiations. Over the past 10 years,negotiations at World Trade Organisation—one of the most effective multi-lateral institutions—have stalled primarily because of the question of agriculture subsidies on one side and need to restrict agricultural trade on the other side.
As far as the possible impact of climate change on agriculture is concerned,so far there is a positive correlation between higher CO2 in the atmosphere and increased agriculture production around the world in the past 50 years. Of course,correlation is not causation! Yet one can’t ignore the fact that India was seen as a basket case in the 1960s. In the past 50 years,India’s foodgrain production has increased over three-folds. While India is not yet a bread basket,there can’t be any denying that periodic droughts and inevitable famines,which used to haunt the sub-continent for centuries,have become history.
There are parts of the world that are still suffering from droughts and famines,but if India’s experience is anything to go by,then that suffering is more man-made rather than induced by changes in the climate.
As in the Bali Action Plan (2007),the Copenhagen Accord (2009),the Cancun Commitment (2010),the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action (2011) promises yet more action,but only in the future. Promises galored,but performances have been hard to detect.
The developed world has to first figure out a way to recover from the most severe economic crisis in two generations. And the political aspirations in countries like India will be forcing their leaders to think twice before they sacrifice the current generation stuck in poverty,while talking of securing the future of the planet. The real political and economic climate has begun to bite today,much before any change in the natural climate in the future!
India may have won a tactical battle in Durban,and won a reprieve for a few more years,but the lack of strategic vision has caused a loss of a great opportunity to really reshape the climate of debate in the future.
The author is director of Liberty Institute,an independent think tank. Views are personal
Share
