By Bill Hallmark
REPORT FROM COP 15
COP 15 encompasses two meeting groups: (1) parties under the new convention, a binding treaty entered into after the Rio Earth Summit (Convention) and (2) parties under the Kyoto Protocol (KP). 194 countries are party to the Convention treaty including the US. The KP is a later treaty which the US signed but never ratified. No one expects the US Senate will ratify the KP and therefore the parties are looking for other solutions to involve the US in a binding commitment similar to the KP.
Yesterday and today formal meetings were suspended for consultations amongst a contact group to consider 12 proposed amendments to the KP and Convention protocols. Heavy negotiating must be taking place on how to handle these proposed amendments.
The contact group is negotiating the form that agreements coming out of Copenhagen would take. They fear that commitments made under the KP by the developed countries may be weakened in the process of ratifying a new treaty and therefore seek an examination of greater detail of all proposed amendments. Others think the formation of a contact group will take the focus off of completing the KP commitments.
All informal working groups continue to meet and work on assignments.
Saturday, December 12, 2009
Friday, December 11, 2009
Meeting Notes Summary - Dec. 10, 2009
Notes by Bill Hallmark
I. Low Carbon Asia – Visions and Actions
Three Japanese Institutes (The Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES), The Japan Center for Climate Change Action (JCCCA), and The National Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES) work toward the goal of setting Asia on a low-carbon development path, where it has historically been but deviated from because of accelerated development during the past years. One of their many approaches is to encourage and award local and regional ideas and initiatives.
II. AWG-KP - “Report to Civil Society”
(session: 5:00 – 6:00 pm)
“Town Hall” session by Kyoto Protocol Working Group (one of 2 ad hoc working groups, the other being the Bali Action Plan Working Group (AWG-LCA)). Issues addressed – and as yet unresolved:
• Base year for measuring reductions – 1990 (majority opinion) or 2005
• Commitment from (proposed) treaty implementation (2013): 5 vs. 8 yrs
• General frustration at lack of tangible progress in face of dwindling time.
• US role at Kyoto Protocol negotiations – attend meetings in non-party role.
• Process for reaching agreement: “non-paper” discussion proposal, followed by party negotiations to reach consensus.
• Technical and political disputes currently prevent AWG-KP from adding additional gases to list of green house gases.
I. Low Carbon Asia – Visions and Actions
Three Japanese Institutes (The Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES), The Japan Center for Climate Change Action (JCCCA), and The National Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES) work toward the goal of setting Asia on a low-carbon development path, where it has historically been but deviated from because of accelerated development during the past years. One of their many approaches is to encourage and award local and regional ideas and initiatives.
II. AWG-KP - “Report to Civil Society”
(session: 5:00 – 6:00 pm)
“Town Hall” session by Kyoto Protocol Working Group (one of 2 ad hoc working groups, the other being the Bali Action Plan Working Group (AWG-LCA)). Issues addressed – and as yet unresolved:
• Base year for measuring reductions – 1990 (majority opinion) or 2005
• Commitment from (proposed) treaty implementation (2013): 5 vs. 8 yrs
• General frustration at lack of tangible progress in face of dwindling time.
• US role at Kyoto Protocol negotiations – attend meetings in non-party role.
• Process for reaching agreement: “non-paper” discussion proposal, followed by party negotiations to reach consensus.
• Technical and political disputes currently prevent AWG-KP from adding additional gases to list of green house gases.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Meeting Notes Summary - Dec. 9, 2009
Notes by Judith Auld
(1) SBI (Subsidiary Body on Implementation)
Contact Group on progress on the implementation of decision 1/CP.10
Chair Thinley Namgyel – Bhutan.
The Chair proposed to have delegates consider the text produced by SBI and to reach draft conclusions by Sat 12 Dec 09. The process lacked transparency. Previous text submissions (including by G77) had not been shared and there was inadequate communication on how to critique content under review. Meeting ended early.
(2) AWG-KP (Active Working Group – Kyoto Protocol)
11.30am-1pm
Contact group on the scale of emission reductions (aggregate & individual) by Annex 1 Parties to Kyoto Protocol
Co-Chair Gertraud Wallansky – Austria
Objective was to discuss transparency of country pledges. As with the 3 official informal group meetings reported yesterday, these 2 official informal group meetings started late, got bogged down in process and exchanges between parties, and did little to progress the substance of the topics to be discussed. The meeting ended with little discussion to move forward.
(1) SBI (Subsidiary Body on Implementation)
Contact Group on progress on the implementation of decision 1/CP.10
Chair Thinley Namgyel – Bhutan.
The Chair proposed to have delegates consider the text produced by SBI and to reach draft conclusions by Sat 12 Dec 09. The process lacked transparency. Previous text submissions (including by G77) had not been shared and there was inadequate communication on how to critique content under review. Meeting ended early.
(2) AWG-KP (Active Working Group – Kyoto Protocol)
11.30am-1pm
Contact group on the scale of emission reductions (aggregate & individual) by Annex 1 Parties to Kyoto Protocol
Co-Chair Gertraud Wallansky – Austria
Objective was to discuss transparency of country pledges. As with the 3 official informal group meetings reported yesterday, these 2 official informal group meetings started late, got bogged down in process and exchanges between parties, and did little to progress the substance of the topics to be discussed. The meeting ended with little discussion to move forward.
Ken Cloke's Diary - Day 5
Copenhagen Diary:
Reflections from Inside the Climate Change Conference
by Ken Cloke
Entry 5: Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Today is my last day at the UN conference, and my last diary entry from the United Nations proceedings. Tomorrow and Friday, over 60 mediators from 20 countries will gather in a seminar MBB is co-hosting with Nordic Mediators to develop a multi-year strategy for promoting mediation and supporting its use in resolving climate change disputes.
This morning began with a bang. The Guardian in England leaked a copy of a secret Danish government memorandum promoting an agreement that seemed to many delegates to promote US global interests and to take several steps backwards from what they had hoped would emerge from the conference. The G 77 nations are quite upset and talking about a walkout. Nonetheless, several of our members had a lengthy, very useful conversation with the Sudanese leader of their delegation about the possible uses of mediation to resolve climate change disputes.
The architecture, in this regard, is worth noting. The U.S. has a posh pavilion inside the delegates’ area advertising all the things it is doing to promote environmental practices. Next to it, the E.U. has a beautiful, tastefully decorated common area with a large eating area and café. Sandwiched in a corner a few feet away are two tiny, utilitarian, undecorated rooms that serve as headquarters for both China and the G 77.
I did two televised interviews today, both of which went pretty well. Our basic position is simple and unassailable, so most of the questions revolved around how mediation works and how the conference might have been organized more effectively.
This caused me to reflect on the fact that large political meetings like this one are often arranged hierarchically, bureaucratically and autocratically (even when they adopt a formally democratic official language); around narrow, technical topics that make it difficult for anyone to have authentic, meaningful conversations; entirely in large groups that do not allow for honest inter-personal dialogue; based on formal, arcane procedures that tie conversations in knots; and are increasingly pointless, ineffective, and unnecessary.
I’m sure the idea of breaking up into small groups to discuss problems in diverse teams; or participate in open and honest dialogue; or collectively brainstorm solutions; or use professional facilitators, negotiators, conflict coaches, mediators, conflict resolution consultants and systems designers, never occurred to them.
The difficulty, unfortunately, is not only that the process being used is outmoded and ineffective from the perspective of experienced professional mediators, facilitators and process designers, but that adopting an adversarial, competitive style of negotiations, as countless cases demonstrate, can only lead to agreements that are half-hearted, uninspiring, and insufficient to solve the problem.
As a result, here is where I believe we stand, one-third of the way through what can only be regarded, on the basis on hard scientific data, as the most important meeting – not merely of this decade, or this century, but in the history of the entire human race:
It is abundantly clear to all the delegates that imaginable and unimaginable disasters of immense proportions will occur if they allow greenhouse gas concentrations to exceed 350 parts per billion. It is equally clear that most of the proposals being advanced by the major players as the basis for an agreement, including the Danish proposal, do not come close to what is necessary to keep us from exceeding that limit.
This was most movingly apparent in conversations I had yesterday and today with representatives of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), who put up a stiff fight today against “business as usual” conversations that will end up with most of them sinking slowly into the sea, perhaps within decades. They spoke passionately today about the complete destruction of their homelands and ways of life, and there was hope today that they will be able to mobilize sufficient support to strengthen the outcome.
Possibly the least understood element in the negotiations that also poses the greatest threat, in my view, to successful efforts to curb global warming, is carbon trading, or what is sometimes referred to as “cap and trade.” As the Third World Network rightly points out, carbon trading is actually a form of derivatives trading, like those that led to the current financial crisis. These markets are small today, but if the U.S. government and Wall Street investors have their way, they may well turn into a trillion dollar industry.
Not only are derivatives poorly regulated, especially internationally, and prone to corruption, they are plagued with widespread conflicts of interest, their markets are dominated by speculators who are more interested in short-term profits than genuine environmental outcomes, and they are likely to produce “subprime” carbon and financial bubbles that could jeopardize years of progress.
Carbon trading benefits only bankers, speculators, and polluters, who would like to see as little regulation as possible. In my view, they are more likely to create an excuse to profit from the problem, than a real reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.
Having said this, I want to be clear that these are my personal views. MBB has not taken a position on any of these issues, in hopes of convincing delegates that mediation can be useful in securing and enforcing agreements.
So here is the bottom line. As H. G. Wells noted over a century ago, “Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe.” We have little time left to make a difference. On one hand, there is ample cause for hope. Never before have so many people around the world been mobilized so broadly, effectively, and passionately about this issue. On the other, we are confronted with outmoded problem solving styles, institutions and attitudes that are keeping us from moving forward. The choice is now ours. We can either join together to make a difference -- all of us, working together, and systematically transform these styles, institutions and attitudes -- or we will lose, and that is not an option you or I should be willing to accept. So do something, and do it now. Join MBB, or any other active organization, and help tip the balance.
Love to all,
Ken
Reflections from Inside the Climate Change Conference
by Ken Cloke
Entry 5: Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Today is my last day at the UN conference, and my last diary entry from the United Nations proceedings. Tomorrow and Friday, over 60 mediators from 20 countries will gather in a seminar MBB is co-hosting with Nordic Mediators to develop a multi-year strategy for promoting mediation and supporting its use in resolving climate change disputes.
This morning began with a bang. The Guardian in England leaked a copy of a secret Danish government memorandum promoting an agreement that seemed to many delegates to promote US global interests and to take several steps backwards from what they had hoped would emerge from the conference. The G 77 nations are quite upset and talking about a walkout. Nonetheless, several of our members had a lengthy, very useful conversation with the Sudanese leader of their delegation about the possible uses of mediation to resolve climate change disputes.
The architecture, in this regard, is worth noting. The U.S. has a posh pavilion inside the delegates’ area advertising all the things it is doing to promote environmental practices. Next to it, the E.U. has a beautiful, tastefully decorated common area with a large eating area and café. Sandwiched in a corner a few feet away are two tiny, utilitarian, undecorated rooms that serve as headquarters for both China and the G 77.
I did two televised interviews today, both of which went pretty well. Our basic position is simple and unassailable, so most of the questions revolved around how mediation works and how the conference might have been organized more effectively.
This caused me to reflect on the fact that large political meetings like this one are often arranged hierarchically, bureaucratically and autocratically (even when they adopt a formally democratic official language); around narrow, technical topics that make it difficult for anyone to have authentic, meaningful conversations; entirely in large groups that do not allow for honest inter-personal dialogue; based on formal, arcane procedures that tie conversations in knots; and are increasingly pointless, ineffective, and unnecessary.
I’m sure the idea of breaking up into small groups to discuss problems in diverse teams; or participate in open and honest dialogue; or collectively brainstorm solutions; or use professional facilitators, negotiators, conflict coaches, mediators, conflict resolution consultants and systems designers, never occurred to them.
The difficulty, unfortunately, is not only that the process being used is outmoded and ineffective from the perspective of experienced professional mediators, facilitators and process designers, but that adopting an adversarial, competitive style of negotiations, as countless cases demonstrate, can only lead to agreements that are half-hearted, uninspiring, and insufficient to solve the problem.
As a result, here is where I believe we stand, one-third of the way through what can only be regarded, on the basis on hard scientific data, as the most important meeting – not merely of this decade, or this century, but in the history of the entire human race:
It is abundantly clear to all the delegates that imaginable and unimaginable disasters of immense proportions will occur if they allow greenhouse gas concentrations to exceed 350 parts per billion. It is equally clear that most of the proposals being advanced by the major players as the basis for an agreement, including the Danish proposal, do not come close to what is necessary to keep us from exceeding that limit.
This was most movingly apparent in conversations I had yesterday and today with representatives of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), who put up a stiff fight today against “business as usual” conversations that will end up with most of them sinking slowly into the sea, perhaps within decades. They spoke passionately today about the complete destruction of their homelands and ways of life, and there was hope today that they will be able to mobilize sufficient support to strengthen the outcome.
Possibly the least understood element in the negotiations that also poses the greatest threat, in my view, to successful efforts to curb global warming, is carbon trading, or what is sometimes referred to as “cap and trade.” As the Third World Network rightly points out, carbon trading is actually a form of derivatives trading, like those that led to the current financial crisis. These markets are small today, but if the U.S. government and Wall Street investors have their way, they may well turn into a trillion dollar industry.
Not only are derivatives poorly regulated, especially internationally, and prone to corruption, they are plagued with widespread conflicts of interest, their markets are dominated by speculators who are more interested in short-term profits than genuine environmental outcomes, and they are likely to produce “subprime” carbon and financial bubbles that could jeopardize years of progress.
Carbon trading benefits only bankers, speculators, and polluters, who would like to see as little regulation as possible. In my view, they are more likely to create an excuse to profit from the problem, than a real reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.
Having said this, I want to be clear that these are my personal views. MBB has not taken a position on any of these issues, in hopes of convincing delegates that mediation can be useful in securing and enforcing agreements.
So here is the bottom line. As H. G. Wells noted over a century ago, “Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe.” We have little time left to make a difference. On one hand, there is ample cause for hope. Never before have so many people around the world been mobilized so broadly, effectively, and passionately about this issue. On the other, we are confronted with outmoded problem solving styles, institutions and attitudes that are keeping us from moving forward. The choice is now ours. We can either join together to make a difference -- all of us, working together, and systematically transform these styles, institutions and attitudes -- or we will lose, and that is not an option you or I should be willing to accept. So do something, and do it now. Join MBB, or any other active organization, and help tip the balance.
Love to all,
Ken
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Documents Team Events for Wednesday Dec 9
Good Morning!
We will be meeting again on Wednesday AM in the meeting room near the "Climate Kitchen" from 9:00 - 10:00 AM.
Bill and I have been through Wednesday's schedule and would like to make the following requests for meetings to report on:
1.) Conference of the Parties (Open Meetings) per Wednesday AM schedule on Daily Programme. As many as possible.
3.) Any and all RINGO events.
2.) Side Events - Found in the Long White Book "Side Events and Exhibits"
Page 20 event 9.
Page 22 events 2, 4, & 8
Please follow your instincts. If you find yourself in a meeting that looks to be giving no good information, please move on, explore, and learn from somewhere else.
NEW STUFF! Coming On-Line Wednesday:
We will be meeting again on Wednesday AM in the meeting room near the "Climate Kitchen" from 9:00 - 10:00 AM.
Bill and I have been through Wednesday's schedule and would like to make the following requests for meetings to report on:
1.) Conference of the Parties (Open Meetings) per Wednesday AM schedule on Daily Programme. As many as possible.
3.) Any and all RINGO events.
2.) Side Events - Found in the Long White Book "Side Events and Exhibits"
Page 20 event 9.
Page 22 events 2, 4, & 8
Please follow your instincts. If you find yourself in a meeting that looks to be giving no good information, please move on, explore, and learn from somewhere else.
NEW STUFF! Coming On-Line Wednesday:
- FLICKR Photo Site -Stay tuned
- Video and Interview start-up - Stay tuned to Danny.
- Diary Writer to Replace Ken
- PR Energy and Brainstorming
- Potential for first round of consolidated notes from North American Team.
Please keep passing those notes, blogs, etc... thru Bill and I.
We are all doing great! Thanks - Mark & Bill
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
MBB Press Release
Mediators Beyond Borders Press Release
Mediation can help now to stop the consequences of climate change: wars, starvation, and displaced populations.
we are calling on all delegates to include a mediation provision in the climate change treaty to be negotiated in Copenhagen in December. If conflicts around climate change cannot be resolved peacefully,there will be increased armed conflict, many deaths,and children will starve.A new report states: We find strong historical linkages between civil war and temperature in Africa, with warmer years leading to significant increases in the likelihood of war. When combined with climate model projections. Of future temperature trends, this historical response to temperature suggests a roughly 54% increase in armed conflict incidence by 2030, or an additional 393,000 battle deaths. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences http://www.pnas.org/Another report states: climate change's impact on agriculture predicts 25 million more malnourished children around the world by 2050, compared to a scenario with no global warming. Countries in sub-Saharan Africa are particularly vulnerable. International Food Policy Research Institute http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/pr21.pdf
Kenneth Cloke, president of Mediators Beyond Borders, says, “Conflict over climate change policies and programs is inevitable. Allowing the conflicts to persist without resolution, however, is not an option. Mediation is a superior, cost-effective, and efficient process for resolving these kinds of conflicts. We cannot let populations die and children starve over these disputes.”
Cloke went on to say, “Mediation is a process where respected, trusted, and experienced neutrals assist parties in negotiation make the best decisions and choices they can. Mediation usually results in better agreements and working relationships than arbitration or even straight diplomatic negotiation.” Currently, the Kyoto Protocol includes negotiation, conciliation, arbitration, and judicial options, but not mediation .
Over 40 international Mediation organizations from every continent, and 200 prominent mediators from around the globe support MBB’s language. Article 14 of the 1992 UNFCCC negotiated in New York and Rio de Janeiro, which is reaffirmed in Article 19 of the Kyoto Protocol, states: “… in the event of a dispute between any two or more Parties concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention, the Parties concerned shall seek a settlement of the dispute through negotiation or any other peaceful means of their own choice.”
Mediators Beyond Borders is proposing: Reaffirming the principles set forth in Chapter IV, Articles 33-38 of the UN Charter governing the peaceful settlement of disputes, the parties agree that the parties to any dispute resulting from the interpretation or implementation of this treaty “shall first seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.”
In the event that efforts to reach a solution are unsuccessful, parties are encouraged to use mediation to settle their disputes at all stages, including before, during and after conciliation, arbitration, and actions before the International Court of Justice.
Mediation shall be conducted in accordance with procedures to be adopted by the Conference of the Parties as soon as practicable, in an annex on mediation.”
MBB is seeking to actively engage in conversations with delegates in order to understand their concerns about adopting the suggested language and welcome the opportunity for dialogue
Mediation can help now to stop the consequences of climate change: wars, starvation, and displaced populations.
we are calling on all delegates to include a mediation provision in the climate change treaty to be negotiated in Copenhagen in December. If conflicts around climate change cannot be resolved peacefully,there will be increased armed conflict, many deaths,and children will starve.A new report states: We find strong historical linkages between civil war and temperature in Africa, with warmer years leading to significant increases in the likelihood of war. When combined with climate model projections. Of future temperature trends, this historical response to temperature suggests a roughly 54% increase in armed conflict incidence by 2030, or an additional 393,000 battle deaths. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences http://www.pnas.org/Another report states: climate change's impact on agriculture predicts 25 million more malnourished children around the world by 2050, compared to a scenario with no global warming. Countries in sub-Saharan Africa are particularly vulnerable. International Food Policy Research Institute http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/pr21.pdf
Kenneth Cloke, president of Mediators Beyond Borders, says, “Conflict over climate change policies and programs is inevitable. Allowing the conflicts to persist without resolution, however, is not an option. Mediation is a superior, cost-effective, and efficient process for resolving these kinds of conflicts. We cannot let populations die and children starve over these disputes.”
Cloke went on to say, “Mediation is a process where respected, trusted, and experienced neutrals assist parties in negotiation make the best decisions and choices they can. Mediation usually results in better agreements and working relationships than arbitration or even straight diplomatic negotiation.” Currently, the Kyoto Protocol includes negotiation, conciliation, arbitration, and judicial options, but not mediation .
Over 40 international Mediation organizations from every continent, and 200 prominent mediators from around the globe support MBB’s language. Article 14 of the 1992 UNFCCC negotiated in New York and Rio de Janeiro, which is reaffirmed in Article 19 of the Kyoto Protocol, states: “… in the event of a dispute between any two or more Parties concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention, the Parties concerned shall seek a settlement of the dispute through negotiation or any other peaceful means of their own choice.”
Mediators Beyond Borders is proposing: Reaffirming the principles set forth in Chapter IV, Articles 33-38 of the UN Charter governing the peaceful settlement of disputes, the parties agree that the parties to any dispute resulting from the interpretation or implementation of this treaty “shall first seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.”
In the event that efforts to reach a solution are unsuccessful, parties are encouraged to use mediation to settle their disputes at all stages, including before, during and after conciliation, arbitration, and actions before the International Court of Justice.
Mediation shall be conducted in accordance with procedures to be adopted by the Conference of the Parties as soon as practicable, in an annex on mediation.”
MBB is seeking to actively engage in conversations with delegates in order to understand their concerns about adopting the suggested language and welcome the opportunity for dialogue
Letter from Kenneth Cloke
-
Global climate is inherently unpredictable and subject to continuous environmentally induced changes. These changes can produce disastrous consequences for the earth’s peoples. The potential consequences are so severe that it makes sense for us to take steps that can mitigate their potential impact. Even those who question the human causes of climate change can agree with these statements.
We can also agree that climate changes are already causing increased conflicts, due to increasing competition for scarce resources, famine, displacements, water shortages, loss of land and the rapid melting of glaciers and ice masses.
These conflicts extend to the negotiation and acceptance of numerous solutions currently being proposed and implemented, which will delay by years, if not decades, their impact on the climate.
At Mediators Beyond Borders, we are witnessing an increased level of environmentally induced conflicts. The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences) states, in an article by Marshall B. Burke, Edward Miguel, Shankar Satyanathd, John A. Dykemae, and David B. Lobell http://www.pnas.org/, we find strong historical linkages between civil war and temperature in Africa, with warmer years leading to significant increases in the likelihood of war. When combined with climate model projections of future temperature trends, this historical response to temperature suggests a roughly 54% increase in armed conflict incidence by 2030, or an additional 393,000 battle deaths.
This is unfortunately only one of many examples of conflict related to climate change.
We desperately require immediate solutions -- not only to climate problems -- but to the ways we resolve the conflicts that are caused and aggravated by them; conflicts that reduce our ability to reach and implement agreements designed to alleviate the problem.
Our experience demonstrates that mediation is a powerful and effective way of addressing and impacting conflicts generated by Climate Change. For this reason, Mediators Beyond Borders is urging delegates to include mediation in the language of the Climate Change treaty and in the process of negotiations that lead to it. We know from years of professional experience that mediation can add significant value to the process of these negotiations.
Mediators Beyond Borders is the only Mediation or Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) NGO granted Observer Status at the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference, and our proposal to include mediation has been endorsed by over 40 ADR organizations.
Mediators Beyond Borders is working globally in many areas of conflict. For example, in Liberia, rehabilitating, reintegrating, and restoring the lives of Liberia’s former child soldiers: in Israel, – leveraging expertise and experience to offer guidance and empower local Muslim, Jewish and Christian Israelis in developing their mediation capacities; and in many other countries as well.
Kenneth Cloke
President, Mediators Beyond Borders
Ken Cloke's Diary - Day 4
Copenhagen Diary:
Reflections from Inside the Climate Change Conference
by Ken Cloke
Entry 4: Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Today has been very interesting, with several significant breakthroughs. We began with a meeting of the MBB team at 9, where we discussed what happened the day before, and reiterated the fact that we are in Copenhagen not representing only MBB, but mediation as a process, and mediators everywhere. We see this is a long-term process of education and support for climate change collaboration.
We also spent some time talking about strategy. Our idea is to focus attention on the delegates, and there seem to be several ways of reaching them. First, they have different colors on their badges and have to walk through a common walkway that weaves through the building. Second, there is the main hall where they meet, and especially during breaks we can go up to them and strike up a conversation. Third, we can visit the places where they eat lunch, which are in a different area that where most of the NGO representatives eat theirs. Fourth, we can go and knock on the doors to their offices. Not every country has an office, but those that do are often in their offices during breaks in the official sessions. That, of course, is when much of the horse-trading takes place, and when we can meet them.
So far, we have made contact with representatives from Australia, Austria, Botswana, Brazil, China, Egypt, Greece, India, Malawi, Mexico, Nigeria, Norway, Tonga, Turkey, the Pew Foundation and the World Bank. Most of the people to whom we have spoken are quite receptive to the idea of mediation, wish it was already being practiced, and can imagine using it if they can’t reach an agreement with traditional negotiation techniques.
We all understand, however, that these traditional techniques have many limitations and often favor the wealthier and more powerful nations and commercial interests, including coal, oil, and other unsustainable industries. Lots of secret deals can then be struck that are far from transparent, benefit local elites, and do not serve the interests of smaller, poorer, or less powerful constituencies. These negotiations follow the rules of power, which make it more difficult to sustain implementation in the long term.
Reflections from Inside the Climate Change Conference
by Ken Cloke
Entry 4: Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Today has been very interesting, with several significant breakthroughs. We began with a meeting of the MBB team at 9, where we discussed what happened the day before, and reiterated the fact that we are in Copenhagen not representing only MBB, but mediation as a process, and mediators everywhere. We see this is a long-term process of education and support for climate change collaboration.
We also spent some time talking about strategy. Our idea is to focus attention on the delegates, and there seem to be several ways of reaching them. First, they have different colors on their badges and have to walk through a common walkway that weaves through the building. Second, there is the main hall where they meet, and especially during breaks we can go up to them and strike up a conversation. Third, we can visit the places where they eat lunch, which are in a different area that where most of the NGO representatives eat theirs. Fourth, we can go and knock on the doors to their offices. Not every country has an office, but those that do are often in their offices during breaks in the official sessions. That, of course, is when much of the horse-trading takes place, and when we can meet them.
So far, we have made contact with representatives from Australia, Austria, Botswana, Brazil, China, Egypt, Greece, India, Malawi, Mexico, Nigeria, Norway, Tonga, Turkey, the Pew Foundation and the World Bank. Most of the people to whom we have spoken are quite receptive to the idea of mediation, wish it was already being practiced, and can imagine using it if they can’t reach an agreement with traditional negotiation techniques.
We all understand, however, that these traditional techniques have many limitations and often favor the wealthier and more powerful nations and commercial interests, including coal, oil, and other unsustainable industries. Lots of secret deals can then be struck that are far from transparent, benefit local elites, and do not serve the interests of smaller, poorer, or less powerful constituencies. These negotiations follow the rules of power, which make it more difficult to sustain implementation in the long term.
Meeting Notes Summary - Dec. 8, 2009
Meeting of the SBI
10:00 am -13:00 pm
Notes by Gordon LaForge
Meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Implementation – focus: technology sharing and financing. Negotiations focused on the financial mechanism through which funding is transferred from developed countries to developing countries towards efforts to cut carbon emissions. The developed and developing world are at odds over the issue of financing. The rich countries think the mechanism is more or less fine and they’re willing to contribute a modest increase to its stores. The poor countries think it needs an overhaul and a substantial amount of funding from the rich world.
G77 and China emphasized how critical technology sharing and finance are for combating climate change and for sustainable development. They believe that developed countries have skirted their responsibility and failed to meet their technology and finance obligations to the developing world. Grenada and Algeria endorsed this statement.
The Global Environmental Facility (GEF), the intergovernmental financing arm of the UNFCCC, reported on specific projects and financing figures. China emphasized the need for “significant increase” in the financial support given by the developed world, and that structural changes were necessary. Representing the EU, Sweden responded that they support the GEF and are committed to adequate replenishment of its funds. Representing the African nations, Algeria voiced its support for China.
10:00 am -13:00 pm
Notes by Gordon LaForge
Meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Implementation – focus: technology sharing and financing. Negotiations focused on the financial mechanism through which funding is transferred from developed countries to developing countries towards efforts to cut carbon emissions. The developed and developing world are at odds over the issue of financing. The rich countries think the mechanism is more or less fine and they’re willing to contribute a modest increase to its stores. The poor countries think it needs an overhaul and a substantial amount of funding from the rich world.
G77 and China emphasized how critical technology sharing and finance are for combating climate change and for sustainable development. They believe that developed countries have skirted their responsibility and failed to meet their technology and finance obligations to the developing world. Grenada and Algeria endorsed this statement.
The Global Environmental Facility (GEF), the intergovernmental financing arm of the UNFCCC, reported on specific projects and financing figures. China emphasized the need for “significant increase” in the financial support given by the developed world, and that structural changes were necessary. Representing the EU, Sweden responded that they support the GEF and are committed to adequate replenishment of its funds. Representing the African nations, Algeria voiced its support for China.
Documents Team Events For Tuesday Dec 8th
Hi Everyone!
Bill and I have been through Tuesday's schedule and would like to make the following requests for meetings to report on:
Bill and I have been through Tuesday's schedule and would like to make the following requests for meetings to report on:
1.) Conference of the Parties (Open Meetings) per Tuesday AM schedule on Daily Programme. As many as possible.
2.) Side Events - Found in the Long White Book "Side Events and Exhibits"
- Page 18 events 2, 3, 4, and 9.
- Page 20 events 1 & 3
Please cover the meetings that interest you and do your best to coordinate with your team so we cover as many events as possible. If you come upon meetings and events that look important to you, please follow your instincts.
We will be meeting again on Tuesday AM in the meeting room near the "Climate Kitchen" from 9:00 - 9:30 AM to cover a brief agenda:
- Posting and Editing of outgoing info
- Note Taking
- Other Sub-teams coming on board
See you all soon!
Mark and Bill
Monday, December 7, 2009
Ken Cloke's Diary - Day 3
Copenhagen Diary:
Reflections from Inside the Climate Change Conference
by Ken Cloke
Entry 3: Monday, Dec. 7, 2009
This morning we began. The MBB team met early in a room we were able to secure – everyone is working beautifully and some UN staff complained that there are so many people in MBB who seem to be responsible for different things! Excellent!
The mood here has shifted significantly, and the prevailing opinion seems to be that President Obama’s decision to speak to the delegates in week 2 rather than week one is a sign that an agreement might actually be possible. Given the current optimism on reaching an agreement, it seems unlikely that we will be able to convince the delegates to add mediation to the treaty language. They are focused on the few issues they have to resolve to get an agreement, and we will have to think about how to encourage them to use mediation to make their agreements stick going forward.
The new President of the 15th Conference of the Parties (COP 15) is a Dane, Connie Hedegaard, and she is completely determined to produce an agreement. She said: Dear negotiators! This year, you have had weeks of extra negotiating time. Since June, you have worked with negotiation text. Preparations have been unparalleled! … Therefore: Compromise! Agree! Find concrete solutions! Use every skill available to pave the way for ministers and leaders to finalize the deal!
The process being used here is roughly meditative and broadly based on consensus, and altogether it is a remarkable exercise in international political decision making, including all the difficulties, inefficiencies, and remarkable break-throughs that we so often experience in mediation.
Listening to the delegates, one hears indications of small concessions and willingness to move forward, and as flawed and insufficient as these measures are, there is no disagreement about the consequences of doing nothing. These consequences were described in detail this morning. They include:
• Disappearance of sea ice
• Greater frequency of hot extremes, heat waves and heavy precipitation
• Increase in tropical cyclone intensity
• Decrease in water resources in semi-arid areas including the Mediterranean Basin, western United States, southern Africa and north-eastern Brazil
• Eventual elimination of the Greenland ice sheet, and resulting rise in sea level of about 7 meters (about 23 feet)
• 20 to 30% of species at risk of extinction if average global warming exceeds 1.5 to 2.5 degrees C
• Heavy rainfall in some areas and far less in others, including the Monsoon season
• Increasing acidification of the world’s oceans, leading to a massive die-off of marine life
• Significant life threats to at least 20% of the world population, or about 2 billion people
In short, the science of global warming is “unequivocal” and clear in its minimal anticipations. In order to avoid these consequences, global CO2 emissions need to peak no later than 2015, a mere 5+ years from now.
Our MBB team has been circulating throughout the conference, meeting people and talking about why mediation and other conflict resolution techniques can help. We are scheduling a press conference and will issue a statement in which we volunteer to mediate any disputes that arise during the conference.
Sunday, December 6, 2009
IMPORTANT UPDATES
A few Important Updates!
First, for anyone planning on attending the meeting at Tina's house today, the meeting time is 2pm. Please follow the link below if you would like directions to her home, via public transport, from the Bella center. The route has been mapped out using http://www.rejseplanen.dk/ If you are traveling from a location other than the Bella Center, simply chance the departure address. Tina's address is Høyrups Alle 33, 2900 Hellerup, Gentofte. Use this for the "to" box.
http://www.rejseplanen.dk/bin/query.exe/en?REQ0JourneyStopsS0ID=A%3D1%40O%3DBella%20Center%40X%3D12581931%40Y%3D55638796%40U%3D86%40L%3D900000099%40B%3D1%40p%3D1259841700%40&REQ0JourneyStopsZ0ID=A%3D2%40O%3DH%F8yrups%20Alle%2033,%202900%20Hellerup,%20Gentofte%40X%3D12582533%40Y%3D55739223%40U%3D103%40L%3D901570276%40B%3D1%40p%3D1256734668%40&date=06.12.09&time=14:00×el=arrive&start=1&
If you have any difficulty, or have any questions, please call or email me. My Danish number is +45 52423547
Second, for logistics and updates we have set up both a blog and a twitter account. The blog can be found at http://mbbcopenhagen.blogspot.com/ (here)
The Twitter is http://twitter.com/MBBCopenhagen
You are not expected to sign in or follow either, although it may be a good idea. More so, the idea is that you will check both locations VERY REGULARLY (every hour) upon your arrival to find the most updated information about meeting locations, scheduling, etc. You are welcome to email me with questions, but please check both the blog and twitter first for an answer before doing so.
Do not fear if you do not have a mobile phone or laptop! There are a number of computers throughout the Bella Center, upon which you can check your email, the blog an the twitter account for updates and to check in with myself, and your team leaders.
Please check in again soon for more updates and a MEETING LOCATION within the Bella Center. I will hopefully have a secured location soon. Stay tuned!
Kindly,
Camelia
First, for anyone planning on attending the meeting at Tina's house today, the meeting time is 2pm. Please follow the link below if you would like directions to her home, via public transport, from the Bella center. The route has been mapped out using http://www.rejseplanen.dk/ If you are traveling from a location other than the Bella Center, simply chance the departure address. Tina's address is Høyrups Alle 33, 2900 Hellerup, Gentofte. Use this for the "to" box.
http://www.rejseplanen.dk/bin/query.exe/en?REQ0JourneyStopsS0ID=A%3D1%40O%3DBella%20Center%40X%3D12581931%40Y%3D55638796%40U%3D86%40L%3D900000099%40B%3D1%40p%3D1259841700%40&REQ0JourneyStopsZ0ID=A%3D2%40O%3DH%F8yrups%20Alle%2033,%202900%20Hellerup,%20Gentofte%40X%3D12582533%40Y%3D55739223%40U%3D103%40L%3D901570276%40B%3D1%40p%3D1256734668%40&date=06.12.09&time=14:00×el=arrive&start=1&
If you have any difficulty, or have any questions, please call or email me. My Danish number is +45 52423547
Second, for logistics and updates we have set up both a blog and a twitter account. The blog can be found at http://mbbcopenhagen.blogspot.com/ (here)
The Twitter is http://twitter.com/MBBCopenhagen
You are not expected to sign in or follow either, although it may be a good idea. More so, the idea is that you will check both locations VERY REGULARLY (every hour) upon your arrival to find the most updated information about meeting locations, scheduling, etc. You are welcome to email me with questions, but please check both the blog and twitter first for an answer before doing so.
Do not fear if you do not have a mobile phone or laptop! There are a number of computers throughout the Bella Center, upon which you can check your email, the blog an the twitter account for updates and to check in with myself, and your team leaders.
Please check in again soon for more updates and a MEETING LOCATION within the Bella Center. I will hopefully have a secured location soon. Stay tuned!
Kindly,
Camelia
Ken Cloke's Diary - Day 2
Copenhagen Diary:
Reflections from Inside the Climate Change Conference
by Ken Cloke
Entry 2: Sunday, December 6, 2009
This morning, we travelled by bus and tram to the Bella Center to register for the Conference. The lines were not too bad, and it was all efficiently administered by our Danish hosts. Still, we have been notified that if more than 15,000 participants register by Monday there will be rationing. Already there are 5,000 press representatives and they have stopped registering more. Several of our members who went to register in the afternoon got trapped in the Bella Center due to a bag that had been left and resulting bomb threat.
In the afternoon and evening, 22 of us met at Tina’s for a wide-ranging discussion of how to influence delegates. We are a great group and the energy is amazing. At the meeting we each talked about why we came, and the responses were beautiful. Everyone is inspired by what we have created and clear about our mission. We all feel we are representing an idea whose time has come.
The central problems are where to meet, how to communicate with each other, and how to convince delegates that mediation is a useful tool in confronting climate change conflicts, without slipping into the kind of advocacy that seeks short-term advantage through pressure and manipulation.
I said I thought the highest form of advocacy happens when the person you are speaking with understands the idea without any sense that you advocated for it. Even those who oppose mediation should be seen as contributing directly to our future efforts by offering us ways to improve the breadth and effectiveness of our explanation.
I also said that standing directly behind us are dozens of family members and friends, hundreds of MBB members, thousands of mediators, and people all around the world whose lives will be better because of our efforts.
We are all aware that tomorrow the real work begins, and that we need to mediate our way into the mediation process – but this is what we do all the time, so I think it will come naturally to us.
I also worked today on the following letter we are sending to newspapers and blogsites. If you know someone to send it to, please feel free to pass it on.
Mediation and Climate Change
By Kenneth Cloke, President, Mediators Beyond Borders
Global climate change is widely regarded by scientists as non-linear, “chaotic,” inherently unpredictable, and subject to a wide range of environmental impacts. These changes can create disastrous consequences for the earth’s diverse life forms, including us. The potential consequences are so severe that it makes sense for us to take steps to mitigate their impact.
Even those who question the human role in bringing about climate change may agree with these statements.
They may also readily agree that climate changes are already resulting in increased conflicts, due partly to increased competition for scarce resources, and resulting in famine, displacement, shortage of potable water, loss of arable land, and vulnerability to extreme weather conditions.
These conflicts extend to the negotiation and implementation of solutions to these problems, including those currently being proposed and implemented in Copenhagen. Political conflicts over climate change will delay by years, if not decades, the effectiveness of solutions to the problem, thereby causing more conflicts, and so on.
Marshall B. Burke, Edward Miguel, Shankar Satyanathd, John A. Dykemae, and David B. Lobell, in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, (go to: http://www.pnas.org/) conclude as follows:
We find strong historical linkages between civil war and temperature in Africa, with warmer years leading to significant increases in the likelihood of war. When combined with climate model projections of future temperature trends, this historical response to temperature suggests a roughly 54% increase in armed conflict incidence by 2030, or an additional 393,000 battle deaths.
We desperately need immediate solutions -- not only to climate change problems -- but to the ways we resolve the conflicts that are caused and aggravated by them; conflicts that reduce our ability to reach and implement agreements that can alleviate the problem.
At Mediators Beyond Borders (MBB), we believe that mediation and alternative dispute resolution are powerful and effective ways of reducing and resolving the conflicts being generated by climate change.
For this reason, we are urging delegates to include mediation in the language of their climate change treaty, and in the negotiations leading up to it. This proposal has been endorsed by over 40 leading conflict resolution organizations, and by 160 practitioners from around the world.
More tomorrow.
Love to all of you,
Ken
Reflections from Inside the Climate Change Conference
by Ken Cloke
Entry 2: Sunday, December 6, 2009
This morning, we travelled by bus and tram to the Bella Center to register for the Conference. The lines were not too bad, and it was all efficiently administered by our Danish hosts. Still, we have been notified that if more than 15,000 participants register by Monday there will be rationing. Already there are 5,000 press representatives and they have stopped registering more. Several of our members who went to register in the afternoon got trapped in the Bella Center due to a bag that had been left and resulting bomb threat.
In the afternoon and evening, 22 of us met at Tina’s for a wide-ranging discussion of how to influence delegates. We are a great group and the energy is amazing. At the meeting we each talked about why we came, and the responses were beautiful. Everyone is inspired by what we have created and clear about our mission. We all feel we are representing an idea whose time has come.
The central problems are where to meet, how to communicate with each other, and how to convince delegates that mediation is a useful tool in confronting climate change conflicts, without slipping into the kind of advocacy that seeks short-term advantage through pressure and manipulation.
I said I thought the highest form of advocacy happens when the person you are speaking with understands the idea without any sense that you advocated for it. Even those who oppose mediation should be seen as contributing directly to our future efforts by offering us ways to improve the breadth and effectiveness of our explanation.
I also said that standing directly behind us are dozens of family members and friends, hundreds of MBB members, thousands of mediators, and people all around the world whose lives will be better because of our efforts.
We are all aware that tomorrow the real work begins, and that we need to mediate our way into the mediation process – but this is what we do all the time, so I think it will come naturally to us.
I also worked today on the following letter we are sending to newspapers and blogsites. If you know someone to send it to, please feel free to pass it on.
Mediation and Climate Change
By Kenneth Cloke, President, Mediators Beyond Borders
Global climate change is widely regarded by scientists as non-linear, “chaotic,” inherently unpredictable, and subject to a wide range of environmental impacts. These changes can create disastrous consequences for the earth’s diverse life forms, including us. The potential consequences are so severe that it makes sense for us to take steps to mitigate their impact.
Even those who question the human role in bringing about climate change may agree with these statements.
They may also readily agree that climate changes are already resulting in increased conflicts, due partly to increased competition for scarce resources, and resulting in famine, displacement, shortage of potable water, loss of arable land, and vulnerability to extreme weather conditions.
These conflicts extend to the negotiation and implementation of solutions to these problems, including those currently being proposed and implemented in Copenhagen. Political conflicts over climate change will delay by years, if not decades, the effectiveness of solutions to the problem, thereby causing more conflicts, and so on.
Marshall B. Burke, Edward Miguel, Shankar Satyanathd, John A. Dykemae, and David B. Lobell, in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, (go to: http://www.pnas.org/) conclude as follows:
We find strong historical linkages between civil war and temperature in Africa, with warmer years leading to significant increases in the likelihood of war. When combined with climate model projections of future temperature trends, this historical response to temperature suggests a roughly 54% increase in armed conflict incidence by 2030, or an additional 393,000 battle deaths.
We desperately need immediate solutions -- not only to climate change problems -- but to the ways we resolve the conflicts that are caused and aggravated by them; conflicts that reduce our ability to reach and implement agreements that can alleviate the problem.
At Mediators Beyond Borders (MBB), we believe that mediation and alternative dispute resolution are powerful and effective ways of reducing and resolving the conflicts being generated by climate change.
For this reason, we are urging delegates to include mediation in the language of their climate change treaty, and in the negotiations leading up to it. This proposal has been endorsed by over 40 leading conflict resolution organizations, and by 160 practitioners from around the world.
More tomorrow.
Love to all of you,
Ken
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Posts
