Summit reaches a ‘shared vision’ for reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050
Reuters in Toyako – Updated on Jul 09, 2008
G8 nations, papering over deep differences, said yesterday they would work towards a target of at least halving global greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, but emphasised they would not be able to do it alone.
In a communique released during their summit in Hokkaido, northern Japan, the Group of Eight leaders agreed that they would need to set interim goals on the way to a “shared vision” for 2050, but they gave no numerical targets.
Mention of mid-term goals was an advance from last year when the G8 agreed only to “seriously consider” a goal of halving emissions by mid-century.
But calling on countries involved in UN negotiations on climate change to also “consider and adopt” the 2050 goal satisfies the United States, which has said it cannot agree to binding targets unless big polluters such as China and India rein in their emissions, too.
Dan Price, assistant to the president for international economic affairs, described the G8 declaration on climate change as “an excellent discussion and an excellent declaration”, and he said that “significant progress” had been made.
Mr Price said the statement reflected that “the G8 alone cannot effectively address climate change, cannot effectively achieve this goal, but that contributions from all major economies are required”.
But critics outside the rich nations’ club slammed the deal. Environmental campaign group WWF said the leaders had ducked their responsibilities.
“The G8 are responsible for 62 per cent of the carbon dioxide accumulated in the Earth’s atmosphere, which makes them the main culprit of climate change and the biggest part of the problem,” WWF said shortly after the G8 statement was issued in Toyako, Sapporo. “WWF finds it pathetic that they still duck their historic responsibility.”
The European Union and Japan had been pressing for this year’s summit to go beyond just “considering” the 2050 goal, and Brussels had wanted clear interim targets as well.
South African Environment Minister Marthinus van Schalkwyk said he feared this year’s communique was a step backwards.
“While the statement may appear as a movement forward, we are concerned that it may, in effect, be a regression from what is required to make a meaningful contribution to meeting the challenges of climate change,” Mr Van Schalkwyk said.
The UN-led talks aim to create a new framework for when the Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012 and are set to conclude in Copenhagen in December next year.
The G8 comprises Japan, Britain, Canada, Germany, France, Italy, Russia and the US.
Global warming ties into other big themes such as soaring food and fuel prices being discussed at the three-day summit at a plush mountain-top hotel near Sapporo, where 21,000 police have been mobilised.
In another statement released on the second day of the summit, the leaders expressed strong concern about high food and oil prices, which they said posed risks for a global economy under serious financial strain.
The group also called for “countries with sufficient food stocks to make available a part of their surplus for countries in need, in times of significantly increasing prices and in a way not to distort trade”.
The G8 summit wraps up today with a major economies meeting, comprising the G8 and eight other big greenhouse gas-emitting countries, including India, China and Australia.
A matter of wording
The precise wording of the G8 statement on climate change was a result of much debate – and its scope remains open to interpretation. Critics say the statement leaves G8 nations too much leeway with regard to taking concrete action. The following is one of the statement’s key portions.
“We seek to share with all Parties to the UNFCCC [United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change] the vision of, and together with them to consider and adopt in the UNFCCC negotiations, the goal of achieving at least 50 per cent reduction of global emissions by 2050, recognising that this global challenge can only be met by a global response, in particular, by the contributions from all major economies, consistent with the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities.”