This is not a paywall.

Register for free to continue reading.

The news sucks. But your reading experience doesn't have to. Help us improve that for you by registering for free.

Please create a password or click to receive a login link.

Please enter your password or get a login link if you’ve forgotten

Open Sesame! Thanks for registering.

First Thing, Daily Maverick's flagship newsletter

Join the 230 000 South Africans who read First Thing newsletter.

A South African Hero: You

There’s a 99.7% chance that this isn’t for you. Only 0.3% of our readers have responded to this call for action.

Those 0.3% of our readers are our hidden heroes, who are fuelling our work and impacting the lives of every South African in doing so. They’re the people who contribute to keep Daily Maverick free for all, including you.

We need so many more of our readers to join them. The equation is quite simple: the more members we have, the more reporting and investigations we can do, and the greater the impact on the country. We are inundated with tip-offs; we know where to look and what to do with the information when we have it – we just need the means to help us keep doing this work.

Be part of that 0.3%. Be a Maverick. Be a Maverick Insider.

Support Daily Maverick→
Payment options

Leaked documents stir a boiling pot at Copenhagen clima...

Business Maverick

Business Maverick, Politics, Sci-Tech

Leaked documents stir a boiling pot at Copenhagen climate conference

The just-leaked working paper at the Copenhagen climate conference, apparently produced by Denmark, the host country delegation, is generating a storm of criticism from developing countries and NGO climate activist leaders. Opponents are arguing that this draft  – if it were accepted as the basis for formal negotiations - would seriously shift more of the burden of dealing with the effects of climate change onto poorer, less-developed nations.

At the heart of this growing conflict – originating out of two different draft texts attributed respectively to Denmark and China – is a determination by the more impoverished states to take on a smaller burden than more industrialized countries in the effort to slow global warming. These nations argue the crisis is not primarily of their making and that redress should not come at the expense of efforts to industrialize and increase their national economies.

Activists and representatives from the poorer nations are charging that Denmark is attempting to pre-empt the entire tenor of the ongoing negotiations via a draft prepared even before the conference had actually been convened.

This Danish draft appears to lessen distinctions between what developed and developing nations must do to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. The draft would apparently allow richer nations to cut fewer emissions even as poorer nations would have to deal with tougher limits on their emissions of greenhouse gases – and accept more conditions on any money made available to them to adapt their economies to deal with greenhouse gas emissions.

Meanwhile, a sketchier counter-proposal, apparently the work of the Chinese delegation, would extend the about-to-expire 1997 Kyoto Protocol. This agreement required 37 industrial nations to reduce their emissions of the gases blamed for global warming by an average of 5% by 2012, in comparison to their 1990 levels. This Chinese proposal would add new, even deeper targets for the industrialized world for five to eight more years. On the other hand, the developing countries, in this case including China, would have another, separate agreement that spells out how they would take action on greenhouse gases – but, crucially, not in legally binding way.

While there is a growing storm over the Danish working paper (the kind of thing that in conference-ese is sometimes called a “non-paper”, shorthand for a proposal being floated without formal advocacy or ownership by a delegation) veteran conference observers note that drafts like these are often put forward in a complex, international conference like this one – especially as the conference’s horse-trading gets more intense. In fact, the two drafts were not official conference papers – and some observers argue that this public anger may be an attempt by the Group of 77 (now representing 120 poorer, less-developed nations) to gain leverage against the richer nations, as the conference really begins to take hold.

By J. Brooks Spector

Read more: AP

Photo: Activists from Christian Aid dressed as clocks hold a globe at the UN Climate Change Conference 2009, also known as COP15, in Copenhagen December 9, 2009. REUTERS/Keld Navntoft


Please peer review 3 community comments before your comment can be posted