By focusing on a technical definition of equity the approach continues to be to tweak a failing system arrived at in 1992 rather than develop a global vision for 2032.
The starting point should have been an assessment of how, despite the principles of the Convention and continuing growth of emissions in developed countries, half of humanity, which has yet to enjoy the benefits of industrialisation, urbanisation and increases in levels of income, finds itself in a situation where there is strong pressure on it to take on commitments to reduce increase in emissions of carbon dioxide. The question is whether a new paradigm is needed.
Clearly, the arguments that were made in the run-up to the climate treaty in 1992, subsequently over a 20-year period, and now being repeated are flawed.
We have adopted an ostrich-like attitude in clutching at the common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) principle as the global policy driver, even though it does not exist in this form. A compromise was made in the Climate Treaty in 1992, and we agreed to the addition of the words "and respective capabilities". Read the full report here.
Source: by Mukul Sanwal, Economic Times.
