Madrid Climate Agreement

Next year, agriculture is expected to play a greater role at COP26 in Glasgow, with the potential of the parties to make recommendations on action to combat climate change in agriculture. “I am very pleased that we have achieved this common goal of making Europe climate neutral by 2050,” said Mr Marin of the DW. “It would be easy to present this as the `end of negotiations`, as negotiations will remain an important modality for the parties in order to reach agreement on important issues in our future work. However, the focus and balance of our work will change and implementation will be at the heart of the concerns. These countries have called for particular emphasis on the fact that many industrialized countries have not kept their climate promises before 2020 and have argued that it was this failure that has so far removed the world from achieving its goal of avoiding dangerous warming. Jennifer Tollmann, Political Advisor for Climate Diplomacy, Risk and Security, E3G: “Governments will return home to face growing frustrations from youth movements, citizens and vulnerable communities suffering the effects of the climate crisis, and they will be held accountable. Countries still have an opportunity to show that they are committed to addressing the climate crisis by presenting improved climate commitments, coordinated with science, as soon as possible in 2020. There has also been some discussion about creating a new climate finance target, now that the deadline of “$100 billion by 2020” (agreed in 2009 at the Copenhagen COP) is almost over. The world`s poorest countries and those most affected by climate chaos are largely disappointed and have called for more action next year. MADRID – A round of international climate change negotiations was reached on Sunday by an agreement between countries to achieve more ambitious goals. However, the agreement failed to resolve key issues on the table, such as setting rules for the exchange of emission credits and helping developing countries to pay for climate damage. The first negotiations did not go smoothly. At first, the parties failed to draw up a text under consideration, in part on differences of opinion on the inclusion of human rights texts and on the just transition to rejection of discourse.

As important as it is, Article 6 has already been a persistent obstacle in the international climate agreement – it also worked overtime in the climate negotiations in Poland last year. Throughout the event, the strength of sentiment and “fundamental disagreements” between some of the central personalities were felt in the conversations, with speakers speaking of “very strong red lines”, the risk of “poison pills” in the text and the feeling that some were trying to impose “neocolonial” rules. “During the consultation over the past two weeks, we had a party that insisted that WIM operate exclusively under the Paris Agreement. Ironically or strategically, in 12 months, this part will not be a party to the Paris Agreement.

Comments are closed.