& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Copenhagen and beyond

Mohammad Reazuddin
The outcome of the Copenhagen Summit is just a few loose pillars on which we have to build our safe home. We will have to make sure that these pillars get tightened as quickly as possible, by making a legally binding agreement. The 193-nation conference ended with delegates simply "taking note” of a US led climate deal that included limiting temperature rises to less than 2’C. The vast majority countries wanted a legally binding treaty to protect the planet.
The deal forged by President Barak Obama with China and several other countries sets up the first major program of climate aid. But it offers few specifics and nothing more than the already pledged emission curb. The next 12 months leading up to the next meeting in Mexico will show whether the process is able to regain some of the hopes that were invested in it before Copenhagen.
It is imperative that all nations act now to make the Copenhagen Accord a stepping-stone to a new climate treaty that will replace the Kyoto Protocol. The good thing in the Copenhagen Accord is that now all major emitting countries will have to commit to taking action and solidify the agreement, and by the end of January 2010 those commitments will be brought forward and established officially in the Accord (appendix i& Appendix ii).
Countries representing more than 85% of the global warming pollution will commit domestically and internationally to reduce their emissions. The ball is now clearly in the court of the developed nations to live up to their historical responsibility to the disadvantaged
nations to cut back the greenhouse gas emissions and help them adapt to climate change.
The reporting of emissions and nationally appropriate mitigation actions every two years, as well as the international consultation under defined guidelines, will hopefully add transparency to developing country commitments, as well.
On "Adaptation" the Accord recognises enhanced action and international cooperation. It identifies the least developed countries (LDC's), small island states and Africa as the most vulnerable countries, who are in the need of urgent assistance.
However, it did not outline measures or specify any dedicated fund for meeting adaptation needs by these counties. This is clearly a drawback. Establishment of an Adaptation Fund and channeling around $50 to 100 billion per year was a demand of the most vulnerable countries including Bangladesh. This has not been met.
The Accord provides that the rich countries will contribute $30 billion of climate aid over the next three years and $100 billion a year from 2020 to developing countries. But this money is not for adaptation alone. Again, it does not speak anything for the period from 2012 to 2020 -- whether the flow of money would be there or not.
Under the current funding pledge, during 2010 to 2012, the adaptation activities are likely to get a smaller share as mitigation, afforestation, REDD plus, technology transfer and capacity building activities will also be funded from this fund. This scenario shall also be the same when there will be $100 billion from the year after 2020, as the funds, basically are directed to lure China, India and similar
other countries for their mitigation action and tech transfer activities.
A good portion of the fund shall be dedicated to Indonesia, Brazil and some other Latin American countries for their afforestation and REDD plus activities. A very small fund will be left for adaptation and capacity building activities, for which all the vulnerable countries including Bangladesh will compete. This is what the reality is on adaptation front.
In the future, negotiations towards COP 16, to be held in Mexico, LDCs should therefore again raise the demand for an earmarked Adaptation Fund with predictable and sustained financing. If most vulnerable countries like LDCs cannot achieve this, they will be loosing the battle in the long run, as bulk of climate aid money in the current arrangement under Copenhagen Green Climate Fund will go for mitigation.
Bangladesh, as the most vulnerable country, can take the lead in this respect. In the meantime, Bangladesh can prepare itself to access the fund; whatever is available now. through submission of projects. We have a good number of identified projects in our National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPA) and we have also long list of programs in our National Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan (NCCSAP).
While we will prepare ourselves for the post Copenhagen negotiations, we must parallely prepare ourselves to develop full range of projects based on NAPA and NCCSAP. so that we can readily submit when the opportune moment come.
In Copenhagen, Bangladesh has been made a showcase of climate change impacts and vulnerable population. It has both positive and negative impacts. The perceived negative impact is that many foreign investors may not take the risk of investment in Bangladesh. The positive impact is, lots of sympathies have been generated among rich nations to support Bangladesh.
We must exploit their sympathies and intentions to support bilaterally. Our leadership has been able to draw’ admiration for its positive work including announcing the strategy for low carbon development, massive afforestation efforts, establishing an 'Adaptation Fund' from its own resources, developing a National Climate Change Strategy & Action Plan, among others. This has boosted the country's image.
We must maintain the momentum and seize the current and future opportunities.
The writer Is a former Director of the Department of Environment
***In Copenhagen, Bangladesh has been made a showcase of climate change impacts and vulnerable population. It has both positive and negative impacts. The perceived negative impact is that many foreign investors may not take the risk of investment in Bangladesh. The positive impact is, lots of sympathies have been generated among rich nations to support Bangladesh.***