China is not ready to lead climate deal, says Chinese academic, but will be far more active in lead-up to the UN summit in Paris than it was in Copenhagen.
The UN Climate Summit 2014 in New York last week passed, as expected, with public statements of intent but no sign of firm commitments to reducing climate emissions.
If a deal is to be reached in Paris next year, at the latest “last hope” climate summit, expectations for progress are pinned on prospects of an initial agreement between the world’s two largest emitters: China and the US.
The US has consistently made a commitment from China to cutting emissions a pre-condition of its own action, something President Obama stressed in his speech in New York:
“We recognise our role in creating this problem. We will do our part...But we can only succeed in combating climate change if we are joined in this effort by every nation, developed and developing alike. Nobody gets a pass.”
In the past, this has led to a break-down in progress. Most famously, at the UN climate talks in Copenhagen, China and India protested against what they saw as a failure to reduce emissions by developed countries, and an attempt to restrict their own economic growth and development.
Five years on, China is far more willing to accept its common, but differentiated, responsibility, says Professor Huan Qingzhi, a leading scholar working at Peking University's Centre for Environmental Politics Research.
For the complete article, please see china dialogue.
Time is running short for countries to decide the practical details of how the Paris Agreement will be brought to life, known as the Paris “rulebook”.
The world risks crossing the point of no return on climate change, with disastrous consequences for people across the planet and the natural systems that sustain them, the United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres warned on Monday, calling for more leadership and greater ambition for climate action, to reverse course.
China’s vision of a global energy system overemphasises the benefits of connectivity. Planners and investors also have to consider the potential impacts on biodiversity and local community livelihoods from different power generation methods and find ways to prevent them.
A new report analyses how the transition to a low-carbon economy – and the minerals and metals required to make that shift – could affect fragility, conflict, and violence dynamics in mineral-rich states.