4 reasons INDCs alone won't help in climate change
For more than two decades the world has been talking about climate change and the need to act upon it, but has miserably failed to resolve differences on how to move ahead. All this while, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions have continued to rise and warm up the planet.
The science of climate change is amply clear: if the world wants to avoid catastrophic impacts of climate change, it would have to limit the temperature rise to two degree or less from the pre-industrial era. It means we have a definite target if want to avoid doomsday scenario. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, scientific arm of the United Nations, has calculated the carbon budget of the world based on past and present emissions.
Also read: Climate change summit must reflect the new world order
Now it is time for policymakers and politicians to act. The Paris round has begun with a glimmer of hope because for the first time since climate talks began, almost all parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change have a national plan to control GHG emissions in the form of "Intended Nationally Determined Contributions" or INDCs.
These plans outline actions countries intend to take between 2020-30. America has pledged to reduce emissions in 2025 by 26-28 per cent of the 2005 level, while China plans to peak emissions by 2030 and increase share of non-fossil fuels to around 20 per cent. India has promised to reduce emission intensity of its GDP by 33-35 per cent by 2030 from the 2005 level. All these plans cover a period up to 2030 because it is hoped that by then a legally-binding treaty would be in place.
Also read: Why Indian submission at Paris Climate Change Conference is unique
INDCs appear as a good first step, but there are several caveats. First, we must remember that these are only pledges and not firm commitments. Second, they are conditional, in the sense that a number of actions are subject to developing countries getting additional finance and necessary technologies from developed nations. Right now it is unclear how this will happen. Third, the cumulative effect of actions pledged in INDCs does not appear to be good enough. A synthesis of the pledges prepared by the UN shows that limiting global average temperature rise to two degree would depend on emission reductions before and after 2030 and also by the long-term policy changes. Independent researchers have calculated that even if all INDCs are translated into reality - which is highly unlikely - the world is all set to see temperature rise of 2.7 degrees.
Fourth, national pledges bring all countries on one footing, irrespective of their past contributions to emissions or their state of development. This is unjust and inequitable. Between 1850 and 2011, America, EU, Russia and Canada together have emitted 50 per cent of the world's carbon dioxide. In comparison, China has emitted 10.7 per cent and India 2.8 per cent. The industrially developed should be made to reduce emissions drastically and also help the least developed make the shift. If Paris can succeed in addressing all these issues, it will be a breakthrough deal.