10.05.2013 Views

Carmen Bunzl - Universidad Pontificia Comillas

Carmen Bunzl - Universidad Pontificia Comillas

Carmen Bunzl - Universidad Pontificia Comillas

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Chapter 5. Conclusions 226<br />

is clear that a second step is required. The potential shape and structure of an<br />

international agreement – its architecture – needs to be agreed on.<br />

The new climate change agreement must be first of all, effective – in the<br />

sense that it measures up to what science has declared needs to happen.<br />

Secondly, it has to be equitable in the sense that every country does its fair<br />

share, based on the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and<br />

capabilities. Thirdly, the Copenhagen agreement has to make economic sense –<br />

climate change is an environmental issue, but it clearly calls for an economic<br />

answer. The course of our carbon emitting economies has to be steered into a<br />

low emissions direction; it is about rewarding change and innovation.<br />

This study has intended to present the most prominent actual proposals<br />

regarding the future climate change regime in chapter 2, and its implications for<br />

countries – who are the real negotiators – in chapter 3. In addition, a case study<br />

of Spain has been carried out in chapter 4: both detailed data on the current<br />

situation regarding climate change and its implications under different EU<br />

internal burden sharing approaches were presented. In this chapter, the most<br />

relevant themes regarding the future climate change architecture are discussed<br />

and some key expected elements of the future climate change regime outlined.<br />

2 Bali: Conclusions and the way forward<br />

One of the main factors to bring about the success of the 2007 Bali<br />

Conference was a change of strategy by developing countries. Under the<br />

traditional strategy, developing countries had insisted that Annex-I countries<br />

should take the lead. In Bali, they showed an unprecedented willingness to take<br />

up an active role in the fight against climate change, willing to do more, to<br />

contribute with their fair share. China, South Africa and Brazil all played<br />

leading roles; the Indian position evolved from a full-on opposition to<br />

negotiations for developing country mitigation, to one of acceptance at the end.<br />

The main excuse presented by some industrialized countries for not taking<br />

Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería ICAI <strong>Carmen</strong> <strong>Bunzl</strong> Boulet Junio 2008

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!