As the biggest environmental meeting in history opens in Copenhagen, the scientific case for a global agreement to fight man-made climate change remains overwhelming. The furore over alleged data manipulation, following the theft of e-mails from the University of East Anglia, has stirred up the sceptics (and shaken some scientists) but Climategate does not alter the real issue – that, despite many uncertainties, the risks of catastrophic change justify decisive global action to cut carbon emissions.
While political realities will not allow the negotiators to conclude a full-scale treaty in Copenhagen, they need to put in place the mechanisms to agree a binding deal next year. The conference must achieve a spirit of genuine progress – over and above the inevitable horse-trading and political fudging – which will convince not only politicians but also billions of individuals around the world that the fight against global warming is worth joining. Business planning, too, requires a predictable path to a decarbonised global economy.
Copenhagen has to make progress on several complex issues: emissions targets for developing and developed countries; financing adaptation and mitigation in poorer nations; technology transfer arrangements; and a governance structure to ensure compliance with agreed carbon targets. It would make sense to decant the more successful outcomes of Kyoto, such as its monitoring mechanism, into a new agreement – carefully relabelled, of course, for US consumption.