Day 2: Agriculture and ALBA's position in Durban

This entry will cover 2 items:

1)   Why agriculture can’t be ignored in COP17 (but will)

2)   Venezuela, Bolivia, Cuba, Ecuador, Dominica and Nicaragua: COP17 positions

 Quick summaries: 

1) http://ag4impact.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/victim-and-culprit-why-cop-17-cant-ignore-agriculture/

This item is from the ‘Agriculture for Impact’ NGO blog, a subsidiary of the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation.

The author states, rightly so, that agriculture is a victim and culprit of climate change. African farmers are being severely affected by changes in climatic conditions. Industrial agriculture, on the other hand, emits high amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. The entire agricultural sector emits up to 30% of GHGs every year (IPCC).

There are currently no mechanisms in the climate regime that reward farmers for mitigating their emissions, or provide funding for farmers affected by climate change.

Durban, I believe, will not see the incorporation of agriculture into the Convention or any next text. It is a complex issue that is surrounded by food security concerns, hence any restrictions on production would raise concerns amongst certain groups. There should be an acknowledgement at a bare minimum, however I believe this is highly unlikely.

2)   ALBA’s position in COP17 - http://unfccc4.meta-fusion.com/kongresse/cop17/templ/play.php?id_kongresssession=4281&theme=unfccc

30 minute video from the head negotiator for Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua, Ecuador, Cuba and Dominica.

They speak as the ALBA group (South American states) and have some key messages:

·      They support a 2^nd commitment period

·      They wish to push the Green Climate Fund and oversee the development of it throughout COP17

·      They don’t believe a new text is an efficient way of dealing with climate change, it would just be handing the 1^st world a blank check for mitigation requirements

·      KP has all that we need in terms of mechanisms and regulations

·      G77 fully supports a 2^nd commitment period

·      When asked about China and India, they said that yes, they are high polluters, but that the developed world pledges are absolutely pathetic and that the developing world is already mitigating significantly more.

The ALBA is usually very vocal about their positions, so it will be interesting to follow their role in the climate negotiations.