As the dust settles on the Copenhagen Summit, the general consensus is that, whilst progress was made, the agreement was a disappointment. But what was actually agreed?
The Accord, reached between the US, China, India, Brazil and South Africa, contains no reference to a legally binding agreement, and was merely ‘recognised’ by the 193 nations, so it is unclear whether it is a formal UN deal.
The most significant part of the text is recognising that the global temperature cannot rise above 2C over pre-industrial levels. By 1 February 2010, countries must outline how they will curb their emissions by 2020 but there was no agreement of penalties for failing to meet these promises. However, these pledges will come under rigorous scrutiny from the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, so many countries might exercise caution on emission targets they believe they can achieve.
On a more positive note the deal promises to deliver $30bn (£18.5bn) of aid for developing nations over the next three years. The overall goal is to provide $100bn a year by 2020 to help poor countries deal with the effects of climate change which will be particularly important in Africa, where the effects of climate change are expected to hit hardest.
The Copenhagen Accord will be reviewed in 2015 which might strengthen the deal, such as a lower target on global average temperatures and a legally binding agreement. Unfortunately it may prove just as difficult in five years time as environment groups, who felt frustrated this time round, may find the emerging economic powers of China and India even more difficult to lobby in the future.
But sadly by then it might be too little too late.
If you would like to comment on the Summit and/ or this article, please email us at info@sauceconsultancy.co.uk
By Gareth Hill
Tags: Copenhagen, Copenhagen Summit, UN Framework Convention
Subscribe to our News Feed (RSS)