Global climate crisis: more and more false solutions
JAKARTA. UN Climate Change Conference 2009 which took place on 7-19 December 2009 ended with the recognition of “Copenhagen Accord” by COP 15th Session, which is not legally binding as expected by some countries. Major negotiations which became a means of gathering of negotiators from governments and social movements from 193 countries, failed to produce a substantial point to overcome the global climate crisis.
Since the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, there is no progressive improvement to cope with global climate crisis. Earth’s temperature and sea levels continue to rise. Negotiations on climate change that have been done so far, not yet reached significant results.
Developed countries or the so-called Annex-1 are clearly a major contributor to these failures. Copenhagen Accord is getting weaker because developed countries do not express a concrete commitment to reduce emissions significantly, while they demand developing countries to reduce emissions by the same percentage. This is clearly not fair for developed countries to be free of historical responsibility and their carbon debt. Developed countries should reduce emissions minimum of 40% in 2020. While reducing emissions for developing countries, depending on their ability and willingness, since they are entitled to an opportunity to build their economy. Developed countries have experienced first stage of industrialization that had been started since the industrial revolution, which was also the first large-scale emission occurred in the earth.
Injustices against developing countries became more apparent, when the conference was about to end and before the accord was agreed, Danish Prime Minister held a meeting of 26 leaders in the last two days to arrange the Copenhagen Conference Accord. This is done as an attempt to avoid a total failure of COP 15 to the exclusion of the actual negotiations. Those 26 leaders who were invited to this meeting by Danish Prime Minister are not representatives of each state, only a chosen few specific countries. Of course this led to many prejudices of the countries that are not invited to the meeting.
Role of Indonesia
Indonesia, which was considered as an intermediary between developed and developing countries in the negotiation, did not play a role as representatives of developing countries. Indonesian delegation was quite satisfied with the results achieved. In this negotiation and in the G-20 meeting in Pitssburgh U.S.A., President SBY has promised to reduce emissions by 26% from the year 2005 emissions levels, or by 41% if accompanied by financial support from developed countries. With this commitment, Indonesia claimed to be the first developing country who voluntarily committed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
At the same time, the Government of Indonesia (GOI) continues to produce domestic policies that contrary to the commitment. For example, the GOI has reserved the natural forest area 17.91 million hectares to be converted into development areas outside the forestry sector. The government also plans to expand oil palm plantation area of 26.7 million hectares in 17 provinces which will convert natural forests that remaining in Indonesia. In addition to the projects above, the GOI will also encourage the use of coal, especially for the 10,000 MW project Phase II. From these facts, it was apparent that emission reduction commitments that were expressed by the president are only lip service. What is needed is concrete action to address climate change which prioritized to the interests of the people of Indonesia.
While the delegation thought that they was brought to Indonesia’s success in the climate change negotiations, to include 2 points of Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation Plus (REDD Plus) in the text of Copenhagen Accord as a mechanism to mobilize financial resources from developed countries. In fact, REDD plus mechanism will not be able to reduce greenhouse gas emissions if not accompanied by substantially reducing emissions by Annex-1 Countries. The text will not be guaranteed rights and access to small communities that are vulnerable to regional resources, resulted agricultural areas and forests are threatened.
In fact, the intention of the GOI to “sell” the forests already seen before REDD plus scheme was included in the Copenhagen Accord. A number of projects on behalf of the pilot project has been implemented in Indonesia with the issuance of the Minister of Forestry Regulation No. 68 2008 about implementation of REDD demonstration activity. In Ulu Masen, Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam, approximately 750,000 hectares of land should not be lived and cultivated again by the people. In Muara Jambi, the farmers had to fight to protect their 101,000 hectares agricultural land which claims as conservation area in a carbon trading scheme.
In the second week of December 2009, the Ministry of Finance also released a “Green Document” on the Economic and Fiscal Strategic Policies for Climate Change Mitigation in Indonesia. This document established concrete strategies for forestry and land conversion as one of the major contributors to emissions in Indonesia, and also for the energy sector, it is expected to be a strategic framework for long-term climate-related policy making. But predictably, this document is used for merely a tool of legitimacy to get international investments in clean energy and forestry sector. This gives the impression that the GOI is more interested in helping rich countries to avoid their obligations and assist private companies to make money rather than making efforts to save the earth.
Solution
Concrete solutions at the global level, climate change negotiations should produce a binding agreement (with legal consequences) for both developed and developing countries. There must be concrete emission reduction targets.
Another proposed solution is a carbon debt repayment from developed countries to developing countries, as well as changes in the development model which only pursuing economic growth to development that puts human welfare and nature conservation in the first position.
One concrete solution that should be done by the GOI is to support the implementation of sustainable agriculture which is managed by millions of small farmers. Sustainable agriculture can reduce greenhouse gas emissions and help millions of small peasant families. Sustainable agriculture also contribute to cool down the earth by using farm practices that keep CO2, and reducing energy use in agriculture can reduce emissions up to 44-57 %. The GOI must also committed to the use of clean energy such as wind, geothermal, sun and wave energy and does not support wrong clean energy, such as agrofuel. Of course, all above national solutions must be accompanied with the support of the GOI for global solutions to climate change that fair and not only put the interests of developed countries.
The global climate crisis is really affecting the people, especially in rural area. Therefore, reducing the impact of climate change should be the main agenda of the GOI and also become a movement of people doing real solutions. Do not let other issues covering this problem, because there is no other planets for us all, the inhabitants.