Climate change: common but diferentiated responsibility

I'm not sure how long it took to conceive the words "common but differentiated responsibility" but they are front and centre of any developing country conversation on climate change - in plain English - it's everyone's problem but the developed nations caused it so they can pay the lion's share to resolve the problem.

This is true but the dynamics of energy consumption are now pushing the other way. By some estimates, China will exceed the United States' emissions within this decade. India already contributes 5% of GHG emissions (the UK produces 2%). More importantly, there is huge opportunity for growth in energy consumption in the developing world. Over half the energy consumed in India is still traditional biomass. Almost 80% of the anticipated growth in coal consumption over the next 25 years is expected to come from China and India. China and India have the greatest potential growth in car ownership etc etc - the superlatives are easy to find.

It is true - climate change can not be addressed without India and China being on board. And, China and India are much more critical than most other parts of the developing world. India's greenhouse gas emissions are close to the total for the whole of Latin America. Africa's greenhouse gas emissions are insignificant with the exception of South Africa. The only other countries that are beginning to gain visibility as large emitters are the big oil producers - Saudi Arabia, Iran etc.

Unsurprisingly, the view from China and India is echoed in the words common but differentiated responsibility. They do not doubt the issue (and in many ways are already taking more action than the U.s. - China's car emission standards are tighter than the U.S. for example) and this is key. The developed world has no moral standpoint on which to meaningfully bring developing countries to the negotiating table whilst the U.S. remains officially skeptic. The position of world leadership comes with a price - that price is often having to be the first mover...it sort of defines the word "leader" doesn't it.

We should all be a little careful - there are alternatives to the Kyoto approach floating around that are higher cost mitigation approaches for those economies that developed early and polluted heavily (e.g. UK, Germany, USA etc). The Brazilian Proposal suggests that responsibility for reduction should be directly proportional to each country's contribution to the problem. I guess it's a good job Brazil doesn't hold a position of hegemony in the global community.