The revelation by the World Meteorological Organisation that the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere hit a record high in 2014 for the 30th year in a row is yet another indication of the ineffectiveness of the present global efforts to contain climate change. But what is truly worrisome is the grim fact that the action proposed to be taken by different countries during the next 20 to 30 years is also insufficient to keep global warming within the internationally agreed limit of two degrees Celsius. This is clear from the intended nationally determined contributions, or INDCs, declared by over 160 countries prior to the forthcoming 21st Conference of Parties (COP-21) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change at Paris from November 30 to December 11. Even if the countries fulfil their promises, the global average temperature may still rise by between 2.7 degrees Celsius and four degrees Celsius by the end of this century. Fresh evidence from recent scientific studies shows that a two-degree Celsius surge in temperature would submerge land at present occupied by some 280 million people while a rise of four degrees Celsius would inundate areas currently home to about 600 million people - including densely populated deltas in South Asia. Little wonder, therefore, that many countries, notably small island nations, want the global warming threshold to be revised to 1.5 degrees Celsius.
Given these unnerving portents, many industrialised countries' unwillingness to do more to mitigate global warming deserves condemnation. Too few of their INDCs set meaningful targets for climate action. Strangely enough, they are wavering even in contributing the pledged amounts to the Green Fund mooted at the Copenhagen summit in 2009 to assist poor nations to switch to clean technologies. The Fund, aimed at raising $100 billion a year by 2020, has only $5.83 billion in its kitty, against the promised amount of $10.2 billion. The US has already expressed its inability to provide the pledged $3 billion by December. Nor did the European Union's finance ministers, who met recently, spell out a firm roadmap for delivering their share to the Fund. With carbon trading to generate finance for climate action having already collapsed and the Green Fund a virtual non-starter, there is at present hardly any meaningful mechanism in place to enable developing countries to play a worthwhile role in global climate action.
Nevertheless, it is still possible that the leaders of 190-odd countries, who will assemble at Paris for COP-21, may come to some kind of an agreement just to avoid another fiasco. But the accord is unlikely to be perfect. It may also not be binding in nature. Unfortunately, most countries are against even an external review or monitoring of their implementation of the declared INDCs. The Obama administration in the US understandably prefers an accord that can be enforced through an executive order rather than putting it before a hostile Senate. Besides, some key issues, including that of fairness and equity, are yet to be resolved satisfactorily. For this, the developed nations would have to acknowledge their historic responsibilities and agree to take climate mitigation obligations accordingly. In any case, a positive outcome at Paris would indeed be an achievement, even if it does not match the pacts signed at Rio de Janeiro in 1992 and Kyoto in 1997. What is important is that that it should not meet the same fate as the earlier accords, which generally failed to achieve their stated goal.
