The past fortnight has brought to the fore noteworthy, but not entirely independent, developments in matters relating to global warming. Firstly, countries are saying and agreeing to one thing, and doing another. Secondly, help to developing countries has hitherto not received adequate attention, but a start may have been made. Finally, the unglamorous task of monitoring and verification of emissions needs to develop credible and ascertainable methodologies to impart confidence in the veracity of estimates.

The Bali conference had sought to finalise an agenda on the basis of which countries are committed to negotiating a new agreement to be concluded by 2009. The conference took place against the backdrop of the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (FAR-IPCC), which emphasised that greenhouse gases (GHGs) should peak by 2015 and that emission cuts by 2020 of 25-40 per cent by rich countries are needed to prevent the possibility of a 4 degree centigrade rise in global temperatures. The Kyoto Protocol (KP) binds signatories to reducing emission of GHGs by at least 5 per cent below 1990 levels over the period 2008-2012.

It is helpful to assess the progress at Bali in terms of meeting long, medium and short-term challenges of global warming. It is also apposite to gauge evolution in this subject area in the light of recent occurrences that are symptomatic of the hype and insincerity of national governments. Starting with the long-term objective of cutting emissions in consonance with FAR-IPCC, the Bali talks failed to agree on specific targets because the US was against them. At the same time, the US was forced to drop its demand that emission targets for developing countries should be part of the road map, as also its opposition to developing countries’ demand for technological and financial help.

... contd.