Minister Michael
Frendo
Twenty
years ago, Malta raised awareness at the United Nations about the
seriousness and graveness of climate change, culminating with the
General Assembly declaring that “Climate Change is the Common
Concern of Mankind”. This eventually led to the adoption of the
Framework Convention on Climate Change and its Kyoto Protocol.
Being a ‘Common
Concern for Mankind’ means that we cannot tackle this subject in
isolation; developed countries should not lead policy to the
exclusion of developing countries, or vice-versa; or large States to
the exclusion of small States, particularly islands. Put simply,
anything dealing with climate change must be inclusive of
everyone’s participation because we can all make a positive
difference, and failing to do so, we all suffer the consequences.
While one should not
minimize the multifaceted challenges faced in tackling climate
change, including adaptation, mitigation, technology and finance,
one of the biggest hurdles to surmount is the willingness and
readiness of all multi-stakeholders to work in a partnership to
provide a coordinated leadership to pursue agreed objectives in
dealing with the negative impact of climate change.
Amb.
Michael Zammit Cutajar
Shaping
the response to Climate Change: The response involves economic
interest, building markets etc. In doing this, one aspect we all
share is that we are all vulnerable, even if climate changes are
positive. Nobody is immune. Thus, we should unite around a common
unified message of adaptation. Adaptation is something all of us
should be thinking of about now. It should take place here, now, and
it must come first. Keeping adaptation within manageable limits is
what mitigation should be about.
When we start to
develop a mitigation strategy, it has to be inclusive. Since it is a
global phenomenon, everybody is on the receiving end, so the
response has to be inclusive, effective and fair. It is not a
question of formula but of judgment. It must take into account what
each of us can do.
The argument about
historical responsibility and equity is a strong one, but the main
aim is to reduce emissions globally. And in the negotiation forum,
when we are talking about what to do and what the mitigation
strategy should be, there are many options.
Aubrey
Meyer
The
key thing is not well understood: the flow of emissions is like the
flow of an open tap of water. To reduce emissions, we must turn the
tap off. However, even with the tap off, emissions will not stop
completely.
We need to project
the future: as we stand, if we want to system to stablise and not
collapse, all emissions from fossil fuels should be reduced. The
world needs energy from other sources.
The next 18 months
ahead of us will be the most important 18 months of human history.
Aldo
Matteucci
The issues climate change poses are mostly political and economical, instead of being entirely scientific.
Negotiations and discussions are stalled because of four obstacles:
-
Paralysis by analysis – discussions in circles.
-
Counsel of perfection – by which discussions seek to be comprehensive, coherent, consistent etc
-
Negationism – looking a past actions, asking who should bear the brunt; and how will these affect future generations
‘War on Climate Change’ – we have made the whole issue a question of war.
Open
discussion
Replies by:
Andre
Stochniol
(Re:
shipping’s cooling effect)
Shipping should contribute a lot to reduction of emission. If we
know now the growth of emission, we calculate how much emissions are
above the target and we translate that in monetary value. We should
not reduce shipping; analogous as shooting oneself in the foot.
Shipping is the backbone of some countries.
Shipping has a
cooling effect because shipping emits large portions of the gasses
SO2 and NOx, both of which have cooling effects. However, shipping
must be made cleaner.
Allocation is one of
key problems, as it is practically impossible to allocate to
emissions to a particular country. On the other hand, who pays in
the end? The payer is the customer; the end-buyer of an imported
product..
We can only
dramatically reduce emissions if we opt for hydrogen transport. This
needs to be backed up by research.
Dr
Ilan Kelman
(Re:
Disaster management and volcanoes)
Two of the most successful volcanoes programmes are WOVO and VAAC -
superb examples of scientific and technical coordination. They are
considered as most successful because they do not involve diplomats
and politicians.
When diplomats and
politicians try to deal with disaster management, they may influence
the short-term actions and consequences, but not the long-term.
Scientists only have one tool. It may not be the most effective or
accurate, but it is the most adequate, even if I recognize
science’s limitations.
Aubrey
Meyer
(Re: climate change
diplomacy as a profession)
Before you engage in any role-play in this debate, use your
intelligence. Take a view of where the system is going as a whole.
With an eye on education, I can safely say that both scientists and
diplomats need to talk to each other.
They started off
brilliantly in 1992. Tragically, all has been ruined by a noisy
debate (economics). Make the education process a function of that.
Dr
Simone Borg
Seventeen
years ago, in 1990, Diplo invited me to talk on CCD. Seventeen years
later, the discussion is still valid. Back then, it was Professor
David Attard who gave it a legal impetus: Malta introduced the
common concern (originally common heritage) to the UNGA.
This did not mean a
watering down of common heritage concept. The Maltese delegation
worked very hard to come up with name for draft resolution: the
common concern concept. It promoted the idea that common concern is
a problem for all humanity, not just some states; any state could
claim interest even if not directly effective; it would not only
affect us but future generations.
Martin
Galea
What
parameters does industry need to change itself?
1st parameter: We need to have level playing field. Incorrect for
Europe to take on one level, while rest of the world takes on
another. President Barroso has already made this point.
2nd parameter: problems need to be diffused to all consumers.
Industry driven by market forces; change should be driven by
consumers
3rd parameter: improve our technology.
Who are the players:
1. ourselves; 2. consumers; 3. governments.
A report (source from speaker) stated that 60% of all emissions are
dictated by consumers, so consumers play a fundamental part. They
must be informed of the consequences of their purchasing power. They
need to have more access to products having lower carbon output.
The government also
has a major role to play. The government needs to put in fiscal and
other incentives to change the situation. It also needs to set out a
framework by which the industry can work. It should also fund
research and innovation.
The EU’s emission
trading scheme needs to be extended downwards to more industries.
Such an EU initiative needs to be extended to major stakeholders
such as the US and China.
As regards industry,
we need to have our own educational process and carbon emission
statement. Companies must conduct research to meet the
government’s framework. Companies which already work hard should
also be rewarded (ex, through consumers’ custom).
Martin
Scicluna
Advocacy
is the name of the game. Advocacy lies at the heart of diplomacy.
Firm, honest diplomacy, I would suggest, is also fundamental to the
success of an NGO. Advocacy, in the diplomatic context, means to
give active verbal support for a cause, normally governments or
legislators – on behalf of a particular interest or cause.
The role of NGOs is
to safeguard the rich heritage and natural environment of their
countries. In the case of climate change, to safeguard the future of
the planet. To do this effectively they must be prepared to speak
truth unto power – however unpalatable that truth may sometimes be
to those in power. To fail to do this in the face of any government
neglect of our environment would be to betray the very purpose for
which the NGOs were set up.
Paul
Mifsud
Global
warming will create upheaval in the Mediterranean but especially in
the southern area. It is expected to have negative effect on the
natural resources, and cause extreme meteorological events. It
therefore calls for an urgent need for adaptation and mitigation
measures.
There is a strong
parallel between environmental, disaster and climate change
diplomacy. Climate change offers an opportunity for dialogue and
cooperation, new relations, and rapprochement
Dr
Claude Heimo
Climate
change has both the potential to unite the international community,
as well as the possibility of drawing deeper lines between
countries.
Diplomats are
increasingly confronted with environmental and climate change
issues; they are required to contribute to the formulation of
policies and positions. The principle challenge for the diplomat is
to engage all participants across sectors, and to ensure they
contribute to the process.
While education is
required under Articles 4 and 6 of the Convention, so far, little
attention has gotten into education and training to assist
diplomats.
Climate change poses
a conceptualization difficulty when of the amalgamation of so many
different issues. A further difficulty is that any discussion on
environmental issues will undoubtedly be met with some controversy.
Climate change
education must make certain that the diplomat can understand the
transborder issues and their extent.
Dr
Alex Sceberras Trigona
Small
states have had a major role in international affairs. The concept
of the common heritage of mankind was launched by Malta, which faced
a tough negotiation period in 1981-1982 (when President Reagan
started changing bits and pieces of what was already formulated).
Malta’s
contributions led to the Law of the Sea, which is a staple in
international law. For those who view the US as still dragging its
feet, the Law of the Sea is not only international law but also has
the strength of customary international law.
