This report analyzes submissions made by Latin American countries to the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action (AWG-ADP) and compiles the experiences of the first intercessional meeting of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) held in May, 2012, in Bonn, Germany. It is intends to provide analysis of the compiled data and the possible scenarios for the 2012 climate negotiations.
More than 40 high level officials and experts from various Latin American countries met in Lima this month to debate the importance of public policies on climate change in the region, with a particular focus on the agricultural and forestry sectors, using as its basis a report prepared by the Latin American Platform on Climate.
The Petersberg Climate Dialogue is a space where Ministers from around the world can come together to participate in the international climate negotiations in support of the UNFCCC. Supported by the German and Mexican governments, the dialogue was launched in 2010 with the goal of restoring the confidence that had been lost in the COP15 meeting in Copenhagen, as well as to prepare for the COP16 in Cancun. Germany has been particularly active in driving forward the dialogue. The objective of the Petersberg Climate Dialogue is to contribute to the United Nations climate negotiations without any whole or partial attempt to substitute them. The Dialogue is an informal exchange of opinions between countries looking for key leverage points in the negotiations in order to strengthen trust between countries to push the negotiations forward.
Following the global climate negotiations at the Bangkok intersessional meeting in September 2012, many questions are being asked in preparation for COP18 in Doha. Can we find any logical relationship between developed countries’ claims that this was an informal session, meaning “no-negotiation-text” was required as a result of Bangkok, while we read there is a major shrinking of the Arctic sea ice?
For many years now, climate change negotiations are not delivering what the world needs in order to stay below an increase of 2ºC. The influence of inaction and lack of ambition or compromise from developed countries means new big emitters are not willing to move forward.
This collaborative project between the Centro de Ciência do Sistema Terrestre (CCST) of the Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais (INPE), Brazil, and the Met Office Hadley Centre, UK, published in April 2011 offers an assessment of the impacts of climate change on Brazil and the effects of deforestation on the Brazilian climate and the Amazon. The study suggests that deforestation could cause temperatures to warm over Amazonia, while the reducing effect on rainfall could lead to drier conditions than those experienced previously. The project makes three crucial contributions in support of Brazilian involvement in the international climate negotiations and in support of INPE´s research endeavors: building capacity within Brazil for policy-relevant climate change assessments; generation of specific policy-relevant information relating to issues of adapting to climate change and assessing risks of dangerous climate change across Brazil; and improving the scientific collaboration on assessing the impacts of climate change in key sectors of society and economy.
This article featured in the North American Congress on Latin America written by Jim Shultz and published in 2010 describes the World People’s Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth held in Cochabamba, Bolivia, in April 2010. The conference called on wealthy nations to acknowledge and pay a "climate debt" to the countries on the blunt end of climate change as well as for an international tribunal empowered to consider the responsibility of countries and corporations that have contributed to the climate crisis and to enforce penalties and action against them. The author questions how the demands produced by the Conference might be integrated into global decision making on climate and how civil society advocating for greater action can move beyond producing statements and achieve real change.
Tuesday, 04 September 2012 18:06

Chasing Ice

Written by
By Guy Edwards and Susanna Mage* In an op-ed in The New York Times, Anita Isaacs suggests that Ecuador’s decision to grant WikiLeak’s founder, Julian Assange, asylum has little to do with UK-Ecuadorian relations or human rights. Ms. Isaacs argues that Ecuador’s President, Rafael Correa, is trying to bolster domestic support in the run up to a presidential election, antagonize the U.S., and position himself as a potential contender for the leadership of Latin America’s Left, given the declining health of Venezuelan President, Hugo Chávez.