ANSA-EAP

A burning issue
I’ve been warned.  Winter time in Denmark is extremely, sometimes unbearably, cold.  So when I stepped out of the airport, with four layers of clothing, I expected no less.

Under the freezing weather of Copenhagen, a burning issue was subject of intense negotiations:  climate change.  Annually, a conference of the parties (COP) is held by the United Nations Framework on Climate Change Convention (UNFCCC) to discuss vital issues on climate change.  The fifteenth Conference of the Parties (COP 15) was historic not only for the unprecedented gathering 60,000 people, but for the raison d’être it was convened for: for the Parties to forge a deal based on a shared vision for long-term cooperative action.  The timing was perfect.  The second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol is ending in 2012, necessitating an agreement that will bind countries to new greenhouse gas reduction commitments of Annex 1 Parties for the next four years. In addition, global warming is increasing at a rate faster than projected in the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), giving rise to a sense of urgency to set high carbon emissions targets and to fasttrack support for developing countries most vulnerable to the impact of climate chance through adaptation fund and technological and capacity building assistance.
 
Bella Center in the outskirts of Copenhagen, the capital city of Denmark, is home to COP 15.  It houses both the negotiations of 190 countries party to the UNFCCC, called “Parties” and activities of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and intergovernmental organizations (IGOs), collectively called “Observer Organizations.” In twelve days, it has transformed into a huge labyrinth. To get in, you need to patiently stand in long queues.  For newcomers, entrance is restricted without declaring your presence at the registration desk and claiming your badge, your passport to the winding halls of the Center.  Once inside, the exhibit area floods your senses.  You’re thrust into a place filled with people milling around, tarpaulins and posters on walls, publications, flyers and brochures neatly stacked on booths.  Without a clear and solid mental map of the whole place, it’s easy to feel lost and disoriented.  The walls on the side turned out to have doorways to conference rooms where numerous side events are conducted starting from 9 in the morning until 9:30 in the evening.  Beyond the exhibit and side events hall is a wide corridor leading to another dimension: a common area sprawled with tables and chairs fit for small group meetings, eating lunches, working with laptops, and essentially chatting and networking with old and new partners. This common area branches out to the Global Consortium, two plenary halls (Tycho Brahe and Karen Blixen), numerous delegation offices, and the Media Center.  In the periphery are all kinds of services: food, printing, internet browsing, photocopying, medical assistance, information, foreign exchange, technical assistance, and courier.
 
COP 15 is the culmination of a series of negotiations that took place in Bonn (Germany), Bangkok (Thailand), and Barcelona (Spain) in 2009.  On the negotiating table, State Parties attempt to agree on a number of issues, most contentious of which are: how much carbon emissions should be reduced by developed countries, how much funds should be raised to support the adaptation of developing countries vulnerable to climate change impact, and who should manage the adaptation funds and what mechanisms should be in place ensure its accessibility.  Even the threshold of temperature at which to limit GHG emissions is also a subject of much debate.  Some aim for 2°Celsius, considered by many as the “point of no return.” Crossing this line meant irreversible ecological damages. Others who are extremely vulnerable to sea level rise push for a 1.5° limit.  In striking an agreement, State Parties ultimately aim for one that is legally binding to all members, a lesson learned from the Kyoto Protocol.
 
It is therefore not surprising that prior to COP 15, many analysts made fearless forecasts that no deal will come out of Copenhagen.  From a political standpoint, it is an arduous task to find a common ground for differing, sometimes conflicting, national interests of 190 State Parties.  These interests are strongly grounded on the Parties’ respective geographical, economic, political and social conditions.  Based on these conditions, countries would view climate change in varying degrees; to some important or urgent, while in others, a matter of life and death.  Small island states, for example, would push for emission cuts to limit temperature rise to 1.5° to avert the threat of their islands beings swallowed up a rise in sea level.  A 1.5 degree limit consequently requires higher targets that may be too steep for developed countries to meet, without suffering economic setbacks.
 
From an economic perspective, Bjorn Lomborg, director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center, wrote in TIME that we hit a dead end because the “solution costs more than the problem it’s meant to solve.” Damage costs under a status quo is estimated at $3 trillion a year, but to impose taxes on carbon emitting fuels to meet the 2-degree goal, will reduce world GDP by 12.9% in 2100, equivalent to $40 trillion a year. (TIME, 14 December 2009)
 
Burned bridges?
 
Observer organizations are composed mainly of non-government organizations.  UNFCCC has a total of 985 registered NGOs and 67 IGOs.  Despite outnumbering their government counterparts, they do not share the same privileges accorded to the latter.  They observe only in plenary sessions and are entirely off-limits to closed-door sessions. Yet, their role in COP 15 is no less important.  They are a rich source of information on vital climate change issues.  Their presence and networks serve as watchdogs when governments tend to slacken on their responsibility to reach an agreement. And most important of all, their burning passion for their advocacy, manifested through side events, colorful and creative gimmicks, and peaceful rallies and demonstrations, give COP 15 the jolt it needs when negotiations turn sluggish.
 
As what happened on two separate occasions. On December 12, a rally attended by thousands of people was held in Copenhagen to celebrate the Global Day of Action. What was originally a peaceful march became violent when masked protesters started throwing stones to City buildings.  As a result, almost 1000 activists were detained. (COP 15 News)  Four days later, on December 16, NGOs staged a walk-out of the Bella Center to join other protesters outside of the Center, giving rise to tensions among the protesters and the Danish Police.
 
The dynamics in Copenhagen had been a clear example of social accountability, of civil society engaging with governments, with climate change at the very heart of the issue.  Forewarned perhaps of a failed COP 15 or utterly frustrated at the pace of negotiations, the NGOs and CSOs have organized two demonstrations to intensify calls for governments to arrive at a climate deal designed to drastically cut GHG emissions and to accelerate the provision of funding and technological support to vulnerable countries.  These efforts, although held outside of Tycho Brahe Hall, are the civil society’s most pro-active way of reaching out and participating in the overall process of forging a historic agreement that could change the fate of the planet.
 
Yet a constructive society-government engagement could not be fully realized, at least not yet.  Concerned of the risks on the delegates’ security and the Bella Center’s overcapacity (the Center can only accommodate 15,000 persons), the UNFCCC enforced a new system on December 14 that further restricted the entry of NGOs in the Bella Center.  The outcome was a queue of people that zigzagged under the Bella Center Metro station.  It moved at an agonizingly snail pace that reaching the security checkpoint and the registration had to be endured by hundreds of people for long hours under Denmark’s freezing weather.  Implemented for days, the long wait outside of Bella Center drove people to stand in line for five (5) hours – sometimes more -- or to give up altogether and seek refuge in establishments just to shake off the cold that had seeped to the bones.
 
A cause for optimism
 
COP 15 officially closed on December 18, 2009.  Sadly, it was perceived to have failed in its objective.  Instead of a legally binding agreement that everyone hoped for, a few heads of state presented a draft agreement called the Copenhagen Accord that proved to be unsatisfactory to most State Parties.  But far from the spotlight is also a failure in the process of ensuring that the gap between governments and civil society is continually bridged.  In the final days of COP 15, the UNFCCC hardly gave the NGOs/CSOs access inside the Bella Center.  Logistical failure borne of designating a venue incapable of housing tens of thousands of people in an event considered a turning point in history is essentially a failure in bridging that gap.
 
So just like the Copenhagen deal, the wordsmithing of which will spillover to COP 16 in Mexico, much work needs to be done in fostering a constructive engagement in the Convention, especially in the coming years that the climate change issue will continue to heat up as global warming continues to escalate.  Fundamental in its success is the willingness of the government to be open for people’s participation and of the citizens to engage with the government, blanketed with mutual trust and openness.  It is and will be a challenge, but certainly not insurmountable.  Opportunities for mainstreaming social accountability abound at the global, national and local levels.