Copenhagen, and the future

The conclusion of the Climate Change Talks in Copenhagen has left us with a lot of lessons to be learned. The management of the talks left a lot to be desired both in terms of the Agenda and in the range of involvement. Developing countries do not like to be left out in the cold; they want to be fully involved in the talks that will have so much impact on their future development. I’m am glad to see the UN Secretary General has recognised this and will work to improve the negotiation process before the next round of talks

I must admit to a feeling of déjà vu watching the talks progress. Before Doha, it would have often been the G8 countries coming together, making decisions and then letting everyone else know what had been decided. While on this occasion the range of countries involved was much wider (almost the G20) it still excluded some of the countries that will be the worst affected by climate change.

One good thing is immediately apparent coming out of the talks, the high emission countries, the US, EU, China, India, Japan, etc are now fully involved in finding a solution to climate change and its causes. While the agreement is not legally binding, by publically committing to the accord the countries are recognising the problem and have agreed to work to keep global temperature rises below 2oc – this is progress.

One of the foreseeable outcomes of the agreement as it moves to implementation is the cost of development in developing countries increasing; this will change the future path of development. While the agreement makes previsions to increased Aid to the developing world, $30 Billion over the next 3 years, and $100 billion by 2020, this is not likely to be new money - the state of the finances in the developed countries makes that improbable.

The cost of development and the way it takes place will have to be reviewed, with less government money going to traditional development projects there may well be greater competition between developing nations to attract private sector support. Also the private sectors involvement, from the very beginning, in the roll out of carbon trading and the use clean technologies to the developing world is absolutely essential.

lets hope 2010 will be bring a new commitment from governments and the private sector to work for cleaner technology and lower emissions.

Solar Technology and the Commonwealth

Solar Technology has the potential to supply all the worlds energy requirements, 6000times the worlds electrical needs constantly shines on the earth. Many Commonwealth countries are well placed to make use of solar technology for energy production; high levels of Sunlight and wide opened space make them ideal locations for the technology.

Proven projects across the world show the impact the technology can have. Germany, surprisingly given its relatively low levels of sunlight, is leading the way with Spain not far behind and the new administration in the US has placed a greater emphasis on increasing their solar output and combating climate change.

There is still work to be done on the technology, issues surrounding night time storage and efficiency, but work continues to make the technology more economical viable. I was in Kenya last week to look at a potential solar project site and meet with partners, one of CBC’s aims is to use and share technologies that can help with development and improve the lives of people across the commonwealth, and solar is a technology that could have a huge impact.

What to do in the Wake of Doha Collapse

The Collapse of the Doha talks in Geneva last week is a shame, it weakens the WTO as an international institution and gives us a worrying view of the international communities intransigence even when perusing things that would benefit all, namely Freer Trade. What will happen when the harder and more devise issue of Climate Change is up for debate?

I am sure Pascal Lamy will attempt to resurrect the Round, but when is another matter, the upcoming US elections will make this all the harder, with both candidates advocating differing positions - negotiations may well be back at square one before they even start.

In the mean time then, I believe that each Country represented at the talks should demonstrate its commitment to Free Trade, by unilaterally putting in place what they would have accepted in Geneva. If India and China, for example, were to open their agricultural industries, even with the contentious ‘safeguard trigger’ in place, trade would still increase and all would benefit.

This I believe is the best way forward; it will demonstrate the international community’s commitment to Free Trade, and make resurrecting the Round easier as everyone’s position will be readily apparent when talks eventually restart.