The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) organized its 25th edition of the Conference of the Parties (COP25), which culminated without producing a viable framework for emission reduction credits. This is not an isolated incident, as its predecessor, COP24 held in Katowice, Poland in 2019, also failed to produce decisive conclusions regarding the establishment of new carbon markets and emission reduction targets. As a result, COP25 now holds the record for being the longest climate COP meeting in the conference’s 25-year history.
The “Chile-Madrid Time for Action” Declaration
The summit succeeded in passing the “Chile-Madrid Time for Action” declaration, urging nations to enhance their existing commitments towards reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The declaration highlighted the plight of the poorer countries bearing the brunt of climate change repercussions and called for necessary support. No fresh financial aid was assigned for this purpose, though.
One of the critical aspects of the declaration was its emphasis on the urgency of reducing greenhouse gases. This directive aligns with the goals set during the 2015 Paris climate change accord, which set forth a common aim of limiting global temperature increase to a maximum of 1.5 degrees Celsius by the century-end. However, at present, the world is veering towards a dangerous trajectory of a 3 to 4-degree Celsius rise that could unleash severe global consequences such as escalating sea levels and more violent storms.
Disagreements at the Summit
Despite the overarching goals mentioned in the declaration, the summit failed to achieve consensus on several vital issues. These included a final agreement on carbon markets, which allow the buying and selling of carbon emissions aimed at reducing global emissions. There was also disagreement regarding what defines and composes climate finances. Climate finances comprise of local, national, or transnational funding sourced publically, privately, and from alternative sources. These funds are meant to support mitigation and adaptive actions to counteract climate change.
Another point of contention was the voluntary commitments to be made by nations towards emission reductions. The countries responsible for 80% of the world’s emissions did not make any significant announcements. On the other hand, smaller countries publicized their targets for reducing emissions in subsequent years.
Historical Responsibility and Future Events
| Country | Emission Percentage | Targets Announced |
|---|---|---|
| Key Polluting Countries | 80% | No substantial announcement |
| Smaller Countries | 20% | Announced targets to reduce emissions in the coming years |
The summit’s outcome is viewed as a deviation from the principle established at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992. This principle held that developed countries bear the most significant historical responsibility for emissions and should shoulder the cost of helping poorer countries combat climate change. Looking forward, the next Climate Summit scheduled to convene in Glasgow, Scotland, in 2020, is expected to address liability concerns arising from global temperature increases.
(Source: TH)
