World Bank president celebrates 'game changer' Paris talks

The president of the World Bank has hailed the deal struck in Paris on climate change as a “game changer” that will set the world on a new course of economic growth and cooperation.

Jim Yong Kim told the Guardian the Paris accord would redefine what economic development means for the future, by ensuring that the need to invest in a low-carbon future was included in plans for economic growth and lifting people out of poverty.

“This is extraordinary,” he said. “It’s a game changer. I could never have imagined that we would get there. It forces us to rethink what we. [The deal included] the first official link between climate change and poverty. I feel better about my children’s future than I did.”

Nicholas Stern, the UK’s former government adviser and leading climate economist, said that businesses around the world would have to take note.

“This gives us a strong sense of direction [on investing in a low-carbon economy],” he said. “This is a big change.”

Lord Stern praised the French hosts of the talks for “bringing a great openness, expert diplomacy and mutual respect to the talks”, which are the culmination of more than two decades of international conferences on the climate, often fractious and marked by discord and recriminations.

The final deal was agreed by 196 countries and marked the biggest ever meeting of heads of state and government, with 150 turning up for the start.

World leaders hailed the agreement, struck after marathon fortnight-long negotiations in the French capital. The US president, Barack Obama, said the deal would create “more jobs and economic growth driven by low-carbon investment”, while India’s prime minister Narendra Modi declared that “climate justice has won and we are all working towards a greener future”.

Ban Ki-moon, the secretary general of the UN, which brokered the deal, said: “This is a monumental triumph for people and planet. Climate change is the defining challenge of our time. I have listened to people – the young, the poor, the vulnerable from every corner of the globe. We have heeded their voices, as was our duty.”

The French president, François Hollande, was visibly relieved at the outcome. “You’ve done it!” he told the delegates.

 “Never will I be able to express more gratitude to a conference. You can be proud to stand before your children and grandchildren.”

At Paris, governments agreed to set limits on greenhouse gas emissions in order to limit future global warming in line with scientific advice, as well as providing financial assistance to poor countries to help them cut carbon and cope with the effects of climate change.

As well as nations setting out their own targets on reducing emissions, governments have collectively agreed to limit warming to below 2C, which scientists say is the threshold of safety, beyond which the effects of climate change – droughts, floods, heatwaves and sea level rises – become catastrophic and irreversible.

Crucially, they agreed to work on ways to limit warming further, to no more than 1.5C. This pledge, a major sticking point at the conference, was key to gaining the support of small islands and low-lying countries, which risk being deluged by sea level rises if warming rises above 1.5C. However, scientists have warned the lower target will be hard to reach.

Although the pledges on national emissions targets enshrined in the deal do not add up to enough to avoid 2C of warming – scientific analyses suggest they will lead to warming of about 2.7C – there is a provision for reviews every five years of those goals that could lead to them being ratcheted up in future.

At least $100bn (£66bn) a year must be provided from rich countries to developing ones, including funding from taxpayers and private sector cash, by 2020. Beyond that, more must be provided, though the amount has not been specified.

While there were dissenting voices, and some countries and civil society groups had wanted stronger targets and more cash for the poor, there was overwhelming support for it as a historic step.

The past history of climate change talks, including the Kyoto protocol of 1997 that was rejected by the US, and the Copenhagen summit of 2009 that ended in scenes of chaos and bitterness, did not bode well for these talks.

But, observers said, in recent years the science of climate change has become clearer, the effects are being felt – such as in the Cumbria floods recently – and there is greater public support for action.

Some of the biggest sticking points of the talks were over the differences between developed and developing countries, the poorest of which have done the least to cause climate change but are likely to be worst hit by its ravages.

For the first time, developed countries have agreed strong language on helping poor countries to adapt to climate change, and countries affected by climate-related disasters have been promised aid.

This did not go as far as the “compensation and liability” that some poor countries wanted from the rich, which have had greater emissions historically, but it was enough to reach a compromise.

“Every country gave something and every country came home with something [from their original negotiating stances],” said one official. “There was political will and a spirit of unity.”























source : http://www.theguardian.com/

Tweet

Subscribe to receive free email updates: