Steering through struggles

The ninth COP kicked off on December 1 with the Opening Plenary and was attended by 166 countries, over 300 intergovernmental, non-government and observer organisations, and numerous media outlets. Some of the issues that were discussed were: the Clean Development Mechanism and how to treat afforestation under the mechanism, good practice guidance on land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF), the Special Climate Change Fund (SCCF), and the Least Developed Countries (LDC) Fund. Alongside the COP9, the 19th sessions of the Subsidiary Bodies, namely the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA) and the Subsidiary Body on Information (SBI) were also held. The plenary sessions were spread out over the conference days and the high-level meetings were scheduled in the last days of the conference.

Discussions at the COP9

The outgoing President, India, recalled the Delhi Declaration and called on developed countries to take the lead in the fight against climate change and also support developing countries with transfer of technology and financial assistance. India also emphasised that developing countries have adaptation issues, for which the Special Climate Change Fund and the Least Developed Countries Fund discussed at COP8 should be operationalised as soon as possible. The COP9 elected Hungary as the President, whose Environment and Water Minister, Mr Mikls Persnyi, highlighted the importance of the Kyoto Protocol.

In the discussions that unfolded at COP9, developing countries continued to take their stand of not taking any commitments and emphasising common but differentiated responsibilities. They also emphasised the importance of adaptation and the need for financial assistance for the same. It was again the EU, which took the lead in pushing countries to ratify the Kyoto Protocol and implement it. It urged Russia to ratify it without further delay so that the criteria of 55 per cent of emissions in 1990 accounted for by 55 Annex I countries could be met. The EU was even contemplating the beginning of its emissions trading scheme, irrespective of whether Kyoto Protocol came into effect.

While the ratification of Kyoto Protocol and its implementation was the primary focus, members also discussed the allotment and use of funds for developing countries. Here again, negotiations turned contentious on the

issue of funding economic diversification projects in oil-rich countries like Saudi Arabia. When there was no consensus in sight, this issue was also pushed to COP10, while the use of funds for poverty reduction, sustainable development and adaptation measures was approved.

Among the many decisions taken at COP9, the one that stood out was the treatment of forests in the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). Various activities related to afforestation and reforestation were detailed and the standard operating procedure on how these could be used towards emissions reduction commitments under the CDM was laid out. For this reason, COP9 is also referred to as the forestry conference. The CDM was also made operational, in general, during COP9 and the first projects were expected to be registered in 2004.

All in all, the COP9 will be remembered for the following decisions:

* Activation of the Special Climate Change and Developing Country Adaptation Funds;

* Fast tracking transfer of technology and capacity building in developing countries;

* Agreeing on afforestation and reforestation as contributing to emissions reduction commitments under the CDM;

* Fast tracking of the CDM and projects thereunder.

The Milan Ministerial Declaration reaffirmed the commitments to the principles of UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol and called for a commitment to adaptation, particularly to support vulnerable countries.

Business as usual or real change?

There was much despair among many climate watchers that COP9 had gone the way of the other conferences, and that apart from the decision of forestry in CDM and the operationalisation of various funds, nothing much was achieved. Most importantly, Russia was still stalling on ratifying the Kyoto Protocol, having stated that global warming may be good for a cold country like Russia. It may be recalled that Russia was supporting the Kyoto Protocol more enthusiastically until the US had not bailed out. This was in the expectation that its surplus credits (Russia was one of the few countries where greenhouse gas emissions had plunged after the break-up of Soviet Union) could be sold to the US for a handsome gain. Of course, if the US had ratified the Protocol, this wouldn’t have been an issue. But as we saw in earlier articles, the US couldn’t ratify because of its domestic politics and the stand taken by the US President George Bush that the US won’t be able to sign any treaty that jeopardised its commercial interests.

There was also a lot of concern that the drawing out of the ratification of Kyoto Protocol was only pushing back the fight against climate change. This was because of the persistent uncertainty over what kind of projects could be undertaken. For example, would a country still go for large-sized coal fired power projects, if carbon were to become more expensive? Moreover, most Annex I or developed countries were already having trouble meeting their commitments. Even within the EU, while some countries had done well (the UK, Germany), others (Spain) had failed to keep their commitments. As a result, instead of emissions falling below the 1990 levels, they were slated to rise over the next few years.

Conclusion

The COP9 did succeed in a limited manner by kickstarting the CDM and putting its procedures in place and getting the financial assistance to developing countries started. Beyond that, there was not much progress in terms of operationalising the Kyoto Protocol. The wait for the ratification had lengthened,

with Russia showing no intention to ratify the Protocol. Even if the Protocol were to be ratified by Russia, the operationalisation would take time and the first commitment period of 2008-2012 would be too close to meet commitments. It was becoming clear that in addition to Kyoto Protocol, other approaches would have to be considered in the future. With this hope, the delegates returned to their respective countries hoping that COP10 would have better outcomes.

The writer is Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Mass Education Extension and Library Services and Department of Cooperation, Government of West Bengal