By Suchin Gururangan
With harbor waters so clean the Danish swim in them, it’s no surprise that Copenhagen will be the site of the 2009 United Nations Conference on Climate Change in early December. One would think that the spirit of environmental initiative would pierce delegates’ talks among conference tables in such an eco-conscious surrounding, but recent developments have suggested otherwise. Instead, individual communities worldwide are emerging as the policy leaders when it comes to environmental sustainability.
World leaders are wreathed in uncooperativeness. According to Time magazine, China has vowed to fight climate change at its own pace, stating that its carbon emissions won’t begin to go down until 2050. The United States continues to make various promises without much detail, as the majority of Congress expresses doubt that climate change legislation will pass this year. In fact, leaders have been blatantly pessimistic about the Copenhagen Conference this year.
“I don’t think the negotiations have proceeded in such a way that any of the leaders think it is likely that we are going to achieve a final agreement in Copenhagen,” said Michael Froman, the U.S. deputy national security adviser for international economic affairs, in an interview with the New York Times.
This unaccommodating behavior is not a product of just national interests, as Froman suggests. The severe economic recession has caused international reluctance to sign onto any program that would pile on debt. Some leaders are skeptical of industrialized nations’ adherence to proposals and their willingness to help developing countries acquire renewable technology. Still other nations, particularly the United States, are too engulfed in issues like health care and the war in Afghanistan to put great effort into environmental reform.
Two Crucial Steps Needed for Climate Change Progress
How can a consensus be promoted? First, countries – especially the United States – must adopt a multilateral approach to solving these issues. In the past, the U.S. has acted arrogantly on the world stage, supporting unilateralism and infringing on other nations’ sovereignty in various world issues. With a new administration that has changed the tone of international diplomacy, the U.S. now has to take charge with a more internationally cooperative stance. But this also applies to other sovereign bodies like the European Union, China, and India – perhaps the most key players in this debate. The sustenance of our world depends on firm initiative, and cannot be limited by hollow guidelines and obstinacy.
Second, environmental scientists, brought together from various countries around the globe, should lead the debate. This would ensure that accurate, trusted information is injected into arguments and that ideology does not distort science. According to a Gallup poll conducted this year, only 39% of Saudi Arabians would say that rising temperatures are a result of human activities, while numerous studies worldwide have confirmed that global warming is directly related to increased fossil fuel usage. The same Gallup poll showed similar figures for various other Middle Eastern and African countries. It’s definitely possible that the misrepresentation of science, or lack thereof, on the part of political leaders has limited the probability of a consensus on initiatives. Furthermore, the countries that claim ignorance of climate change just happen to be rolling in riches of oil – mere coincidence? Pure science must be intertwined with a multi-lateral approach to prevent special interests from tainting the debate.
Local Governments Lead the Way
Even as nations squabble and initiative remains stagnant, local governments are promoting environmental regulation extensively. For example, the American college town of Chapel Hill in North Carolina has economically benefited from locally promoted environmental standards. Chapel Hill is ahead of many towns in terms of environmental sustainability, said Andrew Pearson, MBA, co-owner of ChapelHillRent.com, in a recent interview.
“As more and more businesses are using energy efficient technologies, local food sources and overall greener business practices, an ethic of sustainability is catching on,” Pearson said. “Even Chapel Hill landlords are going green, using no-toxin paints, installing high-energy windows and water-efficient toilets.”
Obviously, sustainability mainstays like energy conservation and buying local or green products all help cut carbon emissions and thereby help ease climate change. And a focus on local sustainability initiatives is occurring in cities around the world, including San Francisco and Portland in the United States, where high standards on business and construction and the promotion of locally grown food have made significant strides.
San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom’s goals are a great example of local initiative in environmental sustainability.
“Everything that I am focused on almost exclusively is the notion of environmentalism in an urban setting and changing the consciousness around what we consume, how we consume, what we distribute, what we waste, and the like,” he said in a seminar on www.longnow.org.
Portland mayor Sam Adams also commends environmental sustainability efforts in his community.
“I firmly believe that sustainability is a key to economic prosperity. In fact, I’ve made sustainability the centerpiece of my city’s economic development strategy,” he said in an April 2009 post on the Gas 2.0 blog.
As we examine the debate over climate change in the coming months, we must remember that sustainable enterprise may become one of the largest markets in this new century, as computers were in the 20th century. Local environmental regulations and initiatives are definitely growing, and leaders at the national level need to catch on. If the upcoming debate in Copenhagen is to produce any positive outcome, we must all break the shackles of reluctance and open the door to progress.
What Do You Think?
Can world leaders achieve real progress on climate change policy, or will local governments have to continue to lead the way?
