The role of young people in Latin America and the Caribbean in National Contributions
hace 11 year
The power to alter the destiny of a planet
The last chapter of our history begins with the industrial revolution. And it is probably the story of how one species has the power to alter the destiny of a planet. The industrial revolution was the engine of economic growth for nations. The social benefits and improved quality of life for huge populations are undeniable, however, the externalization of social and environmental impacts has consequences, today, that threaten the very sustainability of the human species.
Many speak of us being in the Anthropocene Era, an era dominated by human activity. An era where we humans are a global force that is altering the Earth's natural cycles and putting pressure on our planet's ability to sustain the lives of 7 billion humans and future generations.
The negative impacts of human activity are felt not only on a local scale, but also on a global scale: the planet's temperature continues to rise and is on a dangerous trajectory, we are losing biodiversity at accelerated rates, ocean acidification is a threat to marine ecosystems, and so on. In other words, we have crossed several planetary boundaries, beyond which a high level of uncertainty prevails and a hostile scenario for human development is very likely.
Humanity needs to return to a sustainable path. A stable climate is one of the conditions for sustainable development. Below we look at some of the challenges to stop dangerous human interference in our climate system.
A world of 1.5°C or 2°C degrees?
Today there is sufficient evidence that we are facing a climate change of anthropogenic origin. Since the beginning of industrialization, global temperature has increased by 0.8°C due to anthropogenic greenhouse gases (mainly generated by human activities such as burning fossil fuels and land use change through deforestation and agriculture).
The goal of limiting temperature increase to below 2°C is the most important political goal in climate change negotiations. But the discussion centers on whether this is an acceptable target. The underlying issue: What is considered an acceptable temperature increase and a temperature increase that is dangerous for the climate system?
Even though the 2°C limit is the official target since COP16 in Cancun, about 2/3 of countries demand a 1.5°C target as a more appropriate limit to avoid dangerous interference in the climate system.
In 2011 the same Christiana Figueres, secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, stated that the world should be aiming to limit global warming to 1.5°C, rather than the weaker 2°C target because 2°C represents the limit point beyond which the effects of climate change are catastrophic and irreversible, and 1.5°C provides greater certainty. As we know, at COP16, countries committed to a temporary target of 2°C, but also undertook to review the relevance of this target until 2015.
Only at the current 0.8°C increase can the impacts of climate change be felt, for example, in the accelerated melting of the Arctic and the deterioration of corals, which are highly sensitive to temperature increases. The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) points out that a 2°C warmer world endangers various systems such as glaciers and coastal ecosystems; places species at risk of extinction (10% of Sub-Saharan ecosystem species, for example); increases the frequency of droughts and heat waves; represents a risk to crops in many areas of the world, putting pressure on food security. Many of these impacts are a risk to small island states, indigenous communities and currently poor populations.
The question of 1.5°C or 2°C is also a question of how much risk we are willing to take as a human society How much are we risking by crossing irreversible tipping points? How much are we willing to expose ourselves to the most severe impacts of climate change? How much are we willing to expose the most vulnerable populations of the planet and future generations?
The 1.5°C and 2°C trajectory
The difference between 1.5°C and 2°C is a matter of time. Do we want to limit the temperature increase in 2100 to 1.5°C or 2°C?
Having a high probability of limiting global warming to less than 2°C means that greenhouse gas emissions need to be reduced very rapidly in the coming years and decades, and should reach zero around mid-century. The margin for delay is smaller if we are talking about a 1.5°C target in the long term.
In other words, it is clear that it is not enough to stabilize emissions or reduce emissions growth, since we will have to reach zero at some point. So if zero emissions or negative emissions are required for either goal, the question is when. And the answer is the sooner the better.
What this means for our societies is a major challenge. The IPCC's 5th report notes that “to stabilize the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, we need sharp reductions of these gases, eventually to zero or less than zero, and reducing emissions to such a magnitude requires large-scale transformations in human societies, from the way we produce and consume energy to how we use land. The more ambitious the goal, the faster this transformation must occur.”.
This is a point where global articulation is necessary, as limiting global warming to 1.5°C or 2°C requires the political decision of all countries. But there is a gap between what is recommended by science, the political feasibility of adopting these recommendations and the challenges of implementation in national realities.
Government decisions put the world on a trajectory towards 3°C or 4°C
According to the Climate Action Tracker, current policies put the world on a trajectory toward a 3.6°C or 4.2°C temperature increase, while projected commitments that governments are presenting since 2015 would limit the temperature increase to 2.9 to 3.1 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.
In other words, both current policies and national contribution trajectories are not consistent with a trajectory that limits the temperature increase to 1.5°C or 2°C.
The Window of Opportunity: COP21 and National Contributions
It is important to understand where we are in the history of the negotiations. We have moved from the Kyoto Protocol mechanism, where commitments were predefined for each country, to a “pledge and review” system where countries submit their commitments in the form of “Intended Nationally Determined Contributions” (INDCs) or Nationally Determined Contributions as we will call them.
National Contributions represent the political decision of countries regarding the efforts they will make to reduce their GHG emissions and adapt to the unavoidable impacts of climate change (important for vulnerable countries), and therefore form key parts of the new climate agreement to be agreed in Paris in December 2015 during COP21.
While this system gives political viability to the process, the aggregate effect (the sum) of the INDCs does not guarantee climate security. In other words, the challenge with these voluntary contributions is that adding up all the contributions may not be enough to keep us below 2°C or 1.5°C of global temperature increase. It all depends on the initial collective ambition of these contributions and a mechanism to raise ambition over cycles of years.
Through collective action and global efforts there is still an opportunity to not exceed a 2°C temperature increase, raise the collective ambition of contributions and avoid the most dangerous impacts of climate change. In the coming months countries can take important steps to embrace this opportunity and put the world back on a path to sustainable development through the development of strong and ambitious Nationally Determined Contributions and a legally binding global agreement at COP21.
Our role in climate change governance
As we have discussed, the struggle to achieve a sustainable development trajectory that does not interfere with our climate system is played out in the local and international arenas. Thus, it is important to recognize that the success of Nationally Determined Contributions lies in collective ambition and effective implementation. This scenario is of vital importance for youth participation, since climate change governance needs a critical and proactive civil society that supports its country's climate action, demands ambition where only the minimum necessary is being done, monitors the implementation process and feeds the countries' ambition mechanism that will be activated after COP21.
We are the generation that will live under the new global climate agreement, we are the generation that will see the emissions gap close or widen. We are perhaps the last generation on which success in stabilizing the concentration of emissions by 2100 depends. Our responsibility could not be more explicit - what we do today will determine not only the quality of life we and the people with whom we share our time, but the fate of our own species.
Ambassadors +1 will promote a response from young people for the climate we want
Peru, as the host country of COP20, demonstrated its active presence in the international climate debate and on this road to COP21 it has the task of continuing to demonstrate its leadership as COP chair, in its regional negotiating bloc AILAC, in Latin America and the Caribbean and in the international community. Taking advantage of the momentum generated in the country, the deployment of specialists, the networks generated and the availability of information, young Peruvians must assume the commitment and responsibility to participate with leadership in the governance of climate change, building bridges of learning and cooperation with other young peers in the AILAC countries and in Latin America and the Caribbean to advocate for ambitious Intended Nationally Determined Contributions on the road to COP21 and beyond.
Thus, from Generation +1, an initiative of Libélula Climate Change Management and Communications, “Ambassadors +1: commitments for the climate we want” is born, a platform to promote youth participation in the governance of sustainable development, with emphasis on the national and international climate change agenda. From this platform we will seek to empower 30 young people with knowledge, skills and opportunities to promote a vision of sustainability oriented to low-carbon and climate-resilient development in decision-making and public policies regarding Nationally Determined Contributions and a new global climate agreement.
From “Ambassadors +1: Commitments for the climate we want” we seek to catalyze a movement that responds to the challenge of raising the ambition of Nationally Determined Contributions and that lays the groundwork to facilitate and monitor the implementation of these Contributions after COP21. Some of the things we want to achieve together are:
- Position the importance of the National Contributions and the new climate agreement in the public opinion and stakeholders.
- Build a narrative of the youth position visible in statements and dialogue with other actors in society: decision-makers, politicians, entrepreneurs.
- Commit individually to reduce our emissions and contribute to the resilience of our communities.
- Engage societal actors (municipalities, schools, universities, etc.) with the measures of our National Contribution and with more ambitious (out of the box) measures.
If you want more information about “Ambassadors +1: Climate Commitments”, see the rules: http://bit.ly/1SbLKOJ
Apply here: http://bit.ly/1L3BiVq
← Previous
Next →
