The two-week-long UN Climate Change Conference in Bali that forged a schedule ended on December 15. At the meeting, the markedly different stances pitted the US against the EU and developed countries against developing countries. This meeting was colored by both negotiation and compromise. All the global NGOs poured into Bali and urged the attending statesmen to take measures against climate change. On December 19 Yang Ailun, a member and project director with Greenpeace China shared with China.org.cn her experiences and impressions concerning the meeting.
China.org.cn: The conference was supposed to conclude on December 14, but concluded one day late. Many people say the Bali Roadmap was derived from compromises made by many parties. Is the outcome different from the expected one? Are you satisfied with the results?
Yang: The roadmap was truly gained from compromise but it holds more than meets the eyes. We are happy that the delegates agreed to negotiate by 2009 for a new and more comprehensive global treaty to replace the Kyoto Protocol. But what is disheartening is that the roadmap doesn't include a concrete target for greenhouse emissions. It was previously expected that the developed countries could commit themselves to cuts of 25 percent to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020, or that global greenhouse gases emission could be reduced by more than 50 percent by 2050. Yet these figures are not seen on the roadmap. The only consolation is that it is listed as a footnote. This note mentions the figures in reference to newly released research by an ad hoc intergovernmental team on climate change. On the first day, the developing countries struck an active and open pose at this meeting in an effort to make some sense. They demonstrated that they were willing to do more for climate change but only with the aid from a global protocol. Such a proactive demonstration came as a surprise for the developed countries. For China, technological help from developed countries is significant in fighting climate change. The developed countries are obligated to offer their environmental cleaning technology.
China.org.cn: On the last day of the conference, the developing countries cried for a revision of an important clause concerning technology transfer and capital. What do you think of the issue and why did it become a focus for debate?
Yang: The negotiation on technology transfer was definitely not clear sailing. The US and some other developed countries dragged their feet in negotiations with developing countries. They acted as spoilers in the technology issue and an embarrassing deadlock followed. At this point, the NGOs pointed out that the EU had failed to play a leading role at the meeting. When the conference ran into the second week, the NGOs complained to their ministers who had newly arrived and these ministers wielded some power over the EU. With the help of the EU, who, by the way, had no fundamental dispute with China regarding technological issues, negotiations resumed. Eventually, the developing countries made commitments to "measurable, reportable and verifiable" emission cuts, a surprising move for the environmental protectionists. But such commitments came on the premise that they would get "measurable, reportable and verifiable" technological and financial help from their richer, developed brothers.
China.org.cn: As you just said the technology transfer agreement had two breakthroughs: the Global Environment Fund (GEF) under the World Bank will promote the strategic project for transferring energy conservation and advocate environmentally-friendly technologies from developed countries to developing countries. Also, the technology transfer expert group under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) will work out an effective mechanism to help widely transfer technologies based on their analysis of existing or potential fund raising channels. What kind of effects do you expect from these two things by the end of 2009?
Yang: The first phase is a short term one. After the Bali Conference, the GEF under the World Bank will accept this task and put the strategic project on its agenda and undertake various consultancies in all fields, which will take about 6 months. Then the GEF will tell the world that they have set up a short-term fund association, designating which countries will provide funds for this association and how it will operate. As a global fund, it may achieve some positive effects in the short-term. But in fact, wide technology transfer must rely on the active participation of private enterprises. This is what the second feature covers. The technology transfer experts under the UNFCCC will act as a think tank over the following two years. They will find out how to establish the most effective mechanism to transfer technologies and how to mobilize all the related parties. They will form a plan by June 2009 and then they will clarify what's to be done next. Finally, we will further discuss how to conduct technology transfers at the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in December 2009. Indeed the time is quite limited.
China.org.cn: The US finally joined the Bali roadmap under great pressure from around the world, including NGOs. But some people said that the US simply joined the Bali roadmap due to national politics. In fact, the Bush administration has been planning to hold a climate change meeting in January. The conflict between the EU and the US got very intense. The EU asserted that if the US refused to make some concessions on climate change in Bali then they would not attend the January meeting. But some other people claimed that all relevant parties finally reached a common consensus at the Bali conference and even pulled the US into its roadmap on account of their respective domestic demands as well as many other international factors.
Yang: The US joining in the Bali roadmap constituted the final achievement of the Bali conference. People have lost faith in the Bush government and tend to place their hopes on the next president. They do hope that the next president will incorporate climate change into his big vision. The US always has an illusion that it leads the whole world. But today it found out that with regard to climate change, the UN has been doing a good job and the EU has assumed a leading position with the active participation of developing countries. It seems that the U.S has been left out and this must hurt. So starting from October 2006, the US started planning to organize 15 major economies to discuss how to deal with climate change. At the crucial moment of the Bali negotiation, the U.S invited the countries present to meet in Hawaii to discuss how the US dealt with climate change. Many African countries and island countries in the Pacific Ocean all expressed their aversion to this proposition. These countries may be destroyed due to climate change. Without participating in the UN negotiations their voices could not be heard. The EU also stood out and threatened not to attend the climate change talks hosted by the U.S next January. Under this pressure, the US delegates finally gave in and said they would join in the consensus. At that moment I felt that everyone present became very excited.
China.org.cn: The Bali roadmap finalized an agreement that a new emission reduction treaty would be made at the end of 2009 to replace the Kyoto Protocol that expires in 2012. But it failed to specify any emission targets. So there are views that think the Bali roadmap lacks substantial provisions. What steps will Greenpeace take to promote all involved parties to reach detailed emission targets?
Yang: I think that the EU has always supported emission reduction goals with specified standards. In fact, developing countries believe that both the short-term and long-term goals should be established, because combating climate change is every nation's historical responsibility. Developed countries must lead the way in reducing emission and take most of the responsibility. But the US only focuses on the long-term goal of 2050 rather than what developed countries can do before 2020; this was one of the points in the dispute of the conference.
The biggest achievement of the Bali roadmap is that developing countries have promised to take on great responsibility regarding climate protection, far beyond anyone's expectations. Given that, none of the developed counties can honorably shrink from their duty. Considering that developing countries, with less contribution to the rising emission around the world, can make such promise, world opinion will not allow developed countries to move backward in this regard.
China.org.cn: The Earth belongs to all human beings. As we all know, China has set the target of reducing energy consumption per unit of GDP by 20 percent between 2005 and 2010. Xie Zhenhua, the head of the Chinese delegation to the conference and senior official with the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), said this directly. What do you think about China's efforts toward saving energy and reducing emissions?
Yang: The target was proposed in China's 11th Five-Year Plan (for the 2006-2010 period); I think that it has been well accomplished. China has learned that energy conservation and emission reduction do make sense, that they are meaningful for the environmental protection of China and the world. It is also beneficial for improving China's energy security and economic competitiveness. So China has more confidence talking about how developing countries should participate in dealing with climate change at this conference.
China.org.cn: We all know that China is the largest developing country in the world; can you give some suggestions for creating a balance between economic development and environmental protection in China?
Yang: We must work out a new way of sustainable development instead of "pollution first and treatment later". The energy structure should be optimized through improving energy efficiency and developing renewable energy. China is very rich in renewable energy resources, so we can develop clean production. The two ways are very important and closely related.
China.org.cn: Do you think that traditional Chinese ideas would create obstacles to energy conservation and emission reduction? How do you and your colleagues promote this program?
Yang: I don't think so. I think many Chinese people would like to change their living habits to improve their environment. About 80 percent of Chinese urban residents would prefer to change their life styles to fight against climate change, according to a recent survey by the BBC. This survey proves that Chinese people have environmental awareness.
(China.org.cn by He Shan, Zhang Ming'ai & Yang Xi, December 21, 2007)
