Outline of Copenhaguen Accord

2 degrees Celsius The three-page-long text only "recognises" the need to limit global temperatures to rising no more than 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, but does not require that this happen.

Most developing countries - the hardest hit by global warming - have been pushing for an upper limit of 1.5 degrees as 2 degrees of average change still results in growth of up to four degrees in some parts of the planet.

 

No figures for GHG limitation: No numerical target for reducing GHG emission: GHG emissions should be reduced by at least 50% by 2050 to achieve the target of 2 ° C. The Copenhagen deal sets no year for a peak in emissions, although its implementation is to be reviewed by 2015.

Funding: the industrialized countries pledged to provide aid amounting to $ 10 billion (6.9 billion euro) per year in 2010, 2011 and 2012 for poor countries. The long-term goal is bring this  aid to $ 100 billion by 2020.

 

Developing countries will report on a national level every two years on the steps they have taken on a voluntary basis to reduce their GHG emissions. Mitigation actions carried out with international support will be entered in a registry and are subject to international measurement, reporting and verification. This point will be detailed in the following negotiations

 

No agreement on the REDD program designed to protect the tropical forests of the planet. Note that this REDD program is not perfect; it could legitimise some practices that are damaging for the environment, for the people or, consequently for the economy of a country.

 

Following: the Accord does not set a deadline for forming an internationally binding treaty. Among the Decisions of the COP, Parties were able to agree to continue the negotiating process of the Ad-hoc Working Groups on Long-term Cooperative Action (LCA) and on the Kyoto Protocol into next year.  Notably, a proposal to hold permanent negotiations in Geneva, Switzerland, for the coming year received some support. This format would resemble that of other complex international negotiations, and is favoured by many developing countries because it would allow them to access support from their permanent missions in Geneva, where many have standing economic, social and environmental negotiating capacity.

 

 

 

The following risk is that United States are now using strong-arm tactics to bully the developing world into backing a plan that completely undermines the existing UN process.

This failure is a challenge. The fight is not over. We must work harder, by solidarity and for our children and our planet. Our campaign will continue until we get a satisfying deal for people living in Africa and elsewhere.