Climate change is posing unprecedented challenges in two ways. There is a growing body of knowledge on the consequences of climate change, and there is the imperative need to act on mitigation and adaptation due to related disasters.
The negotiations between parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) need to find of solutions to a series of issues. These include differentiation, which is closely related to the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, the legal nature of the agreement, the political balance between mitigation and adaptation, and ways to finance loss and damage. In any negotiation, groups build alliances to find consensus that would be the basis of an agreement.
“The solution to the problem of climate change extends beyond the inter-governmental process”
Of course, the solution to the problem of climate change extends beyond the inter-governmental process. It affects the everyday life of people, their livelihoods and economic stability, for developed and developing countries alike. The impact of climate change will deeply affect our ways of life, but so too will the solutions. That’s why many stakeholders have recognised this challenge as an opportunity to tackle climate change outside the formal UNFCCC process.
The alliances between the different stakeholders at all levels, both state and non-state actors, can give inputs that complement the inter-governmental process. These alliances should be at the heart of the development process, with inputs from all stakeholders recognised. We should foster the creation of more spaces for policymakers and environmental experts to exchange their concerns, and hopefully this will lead to new practices and paradigm shifts.
Climate change is a two-sided problem that has to be addressed from both ends. For many years, the identification of mitigation measures has shown progress and countries around the world are working on them to a varying extent. On the adaptation side, the need for peoples, ecosystems and economies to respond to the adverse effects of climate change means we must improve our resilience at all levels.
There is a causal relationship between mitigation and adaptation; the more we mitigate, the less adaptation will be required. There is, of course, a gap in terms of the timing as the causality is not immediate, the alliances between mitigation and adaptation experts can be win-win ones.
We can expect to see more alliances, and Peru’s contribution to the engagement with state and non-state actors is being made through the Lima-Paris Action Agenda (LPAA). Launched by the governments of Peru and France representing COP20 and COP21 presidencies, the LPAA aims to stimulate new initiatives, showcase existing partnerships and engage with the public sector to scale up finance for climate mitigation and adaptation.
IMAGE CREDIT: CC / FLICKR – Gerard Van der LeunThe post And it’s alliances that bridge the climate talks divide appeared first on Europe’s World.
What will India’s position be at the Paris conference? The fact is India is a victim of climate change, with unseasonal rain and weird, erratic weather resulting in huge crop losses. Farmers have been taking their own lives because they cannot face the prospect of penury and debt. It is time we should accept this changing weather as part of the catastrophic future that awaits us all. It means, too, that India must take a proactive position so the world understands that it has become a victim of climate change while the world continues to do too little to reduce greenhouses gases.
This doesn’t mean that India will not be part of the effort to reduce emissions. India should present its Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC) to demonstrate its own seriousness, but it is also clear that this target for emission reduction has to be based on an equitable sharing of the burden.
“India must take a proactive position so the world understands that it has become a victim of climate change while the world continues to do too little to reduce greenhouses gases”
The U.S.-China agreement on climate change is highly unfair and not at all ambitious enough. It puts the world at risk, for China and the U.S. have agreed to “equalise” emissions by 2030. In other words, China will be allowed to increase carbon dioxide emissions until then so as to reach the same level as the U.S. In turn, the U.S. will by 2025 reduce its emissions by 26-28% from its 2005 levels – when they peaked.
The Chinese will thus go from roughly 8 tonnes per capita of carbon dioxide now to 12-13 tonnes in 2030. The U.S. comes down from 17 tonnes per capita of carbon dioxide to 12-13 tonnes in 2030. The cake is being carved up in such a manner that each country would occupy equal atmospheric space by 2030. The U.S.-China deal makes it clear that each of the two countries get 16% of the atmospheric space.
This will leave little for the rest of the world’s economic growth. At this rate of emissions, there is no way the world can stay below the guardrail of a 2°C rise in temperature that would keep us all safe.
So what should India do? Its current per capita emissions are roughly 1.8 tonnes of carbon dioxide. New Delhi must argue that all countries, including India, agree to cut emissions, based on their past contributions so that all can share the common atmospheric space. It is what the Narendra Modi government has promised to do, and it is what must be supported internationally so that the rich world is taught to walk the talk and not just talk the talk.
IMAGE CREDIT: CC / FLICKR – Tawheed ManzoorThe post Answering the key question of what India wants appeared first on Europe’s World.
Un avis (n°15-88293) publié le 10/06/2015 au BOAMP porte sur la "réalisation d'un baromètre 'Image de la DGA dans les médias' pour les années 2015-2019".
Le titulaire devra réaliser un baromètre trimestriel selon cet avis.
Je ne sais pas si la DGA fait bien de s'intéresser à son image dans les médias. Personnellement, j'ai le sentiment qu'elle ferait mieux de s'interroger sur la façon dont elle communiqué avec ces mêmes médias et sur l'autonomie (discutable) que sa direction laisse à son service de communication pour répondre aux questions des uns et des autres.
Actualisation. Je viens de lire, après la mise en ligne de la première partie de ce post, sur ce même BOAMP que la DGA avait acheté des "formations "Mediatraining" au profit de la direction générale de l'armement (Dga) et autres entités du ministère de la défense soutenues par le service parisien de soutien de l'administration centrale (Spac)" (lire ici). C'est la société "PUBLIC VOICE, 9 rue Huysmans 75006 Paris" qui en est chargée pour un prix non communiqué. Il y avait donc du vrai dans ma remarque sur les carences de la DGA en matière de communication.
Comme les années précédentes, on n’échappera pas au sempiternel débat sur le sous-financement des surcoûts liés aux opérations extérieures menées par la France quand on arrivera à la fin de l’exercice budgétaire. En 2015, il faudra puiser dans la réserve de précaution interministérielle pour combler la différence, laquelle devrait être de l’ordre de plus de […]
Cet article Opérations extérieures : Un bilan globalement positif sur le plan militaire mais mitigé au niveau politique est apparu en premier sur Zone Militaire.
Mintegy nyolcvan előterjesztés szerepel a Magyar Nemzeti Tanács mai, hetedik rendes ülésének napirendjén. Ezek többsége az oktatás területéhez kapcsolódik, de szó lesz a kultúra és a tájékoztatás területén megvalósuló különböző pályázatok véleményezéséről is, valamint megválasztásra kerülnek az MNT Végrehajtó Bizottságának új tagjai, tekintettel arra, hogy Lovas Ildikó még áprilisban lemondott végrehajtó bizottsági tisztségéről, dr. Beretka Katinka pedig a közelmúltban tette meg ugyanezt.