Thursday, December 17th, 2009 - Copenhagen
As the conference winds down, the countries of the world are scrambling to strike a deal.
The developing nations claim – correctly – that the industrialized nations have generated most of the pollution believed to be causing climate change. These developing countries believe the industrialized world should provide massive funding to mitigate or halt climate change.
The industrialized world claims – correctly – that enormous transfer of wealth guarantee nothing without better safeguards that monies will be spent efficiently and effectively.
Further complicating this dilemma is the fact that some large developing countries are extremely wealthy and are generating enormous amounts of pollutants themselves.
These are major sticking points, but there are many other challenges and nuances. For example, what is the role of indigenous peoples? If an enormous fund is established to protect the rainforests, does a piece of the action go to the Indians, or does all the money go to national government (or state governments? Or NGOS? etc. etc.) Can indigenous people negotiate conservation accords on their own (so-called “sub national rights”) or does everything have to go through national governments?
And what is the role of monitoring? Several governments, still smarting from a legacy of colonialism, loathe the concept of industrialized nations checking to see whether these developing nations are keeping their promises in terms of protecting forests or emitting pollutants. Industrialized nations argue that accepting major funding to modify carbon output or carbon capture means that you must agree to be monitored. The discussion continues…
Some of the best news of the conference comes from the technological world: we can remotely monitor down to the level of a single tree in many forests of the world. Yet agreements need to be reached on the role of monitoring if this technology is to prove as useful as it can be. And enhanced forest monitoring without enhanced forest protection would ultimately prove futile.
-Mark J. Plotkin, Ph.D.
Tuesday, December 15th, 2009 - Copenhagen
The nations of the world have assembled in Copenhagen for the United Nations Climate Change Conference, and the Amazon Conservation Team is honored to be in attendance. The sights, sounds, colors, hues, national dress and emotions combine into a crazy kaleidoscope reminiscent of the cantina scene in “Star Wars”.
Copenhagen is a warm and welcoming city, but is struggling to accommodate so many visitors. The lack of hotel rooms is so severe that some people have had to book accommodations in neighboring Sweden! And lines to register for the conference are so long that some attendees have waited over five hours to check in.
Nevertheless, there is much optimism that so many people have come from all corners of the planet to grapple with one of the greatest issues of our time. That same optimism is balanced by cynicism, nationalism, resentment, hostility and fear – the glass of progress here is both half full and half empty. That this conference is taking place is indeed a tremendous achievement; whether it will result in a sea change towards the issue of climate change is yet to be decided.
Last night, my colleagues and I attended a gathering organized by our friends from the Skoll Foundation. For me, the highlight was listening to a conversation on the future of the forest between former Vice President Al Gore and Chief Almir of the Suruí tribe in Brazil. The former VP cautioned Chief Almir to be careful, pointing out that forest protection could be a dangerous job. Chief Almir invited the Vice President to visit the Suruí territory in western Brazil and observe the work firsthand. And the Vice President congratulated the Chief and his partners at the Amazon Conservation Team for mapping and protecting the forest with the help of Google Earth.
-Mark J. Plotkin, Ph.D.
