{"id":247,"date":"2015-12-15T11:10:56","date_gmt":"2015-12-15T11:10:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.swarthmore.edu\/cop21\/?p=247"},"modified":"2022-03-09T21:39:19","modified_gmt":"2022-03-09T21:39:19","slug":"reflections-on-the-cop-outcome","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.swarthmore.edu\/cop\/2015\/12\/15\/reflections-on-the-cop-outcome\/","title":{"rendered":"Reflections on the COP Outcome"},"content":{"rendered":"

In the three days since negotiators reached an agreement in Paris, I\u2019ve seen the deal heralded as everything from <\/span>\u201cthe world\u2019s greatest diplomatic success\u201d<\/span><\/a> to <\/span>\u201cjust bullshit\u201d<\/span><\/a>. There seems to be little consensus as to whether COP-21\u2019s outcome <\/span>was phenomenal, devastating, or even meaningful whatsoever. Personally, I<\/span>\u2019m happy (and, frankly, somewhat surprised) to see language regarding a 1.5 degree goal, loss and damages, an<\/span>d human rights <\/span>make it into the text. At the same <\/span>time, I know that current INDCs still add to 3+ degrees of global warming from pre-industrial levels and that the legal status of the agreement is still uncertain in many countries (including the U.S.). B<\/span>ut overall, I align with commentators who claim the deal was <\/span>better than expected<\/span><\/a>. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

To be clear, I didn\u2019t expect much from the outcome document. Heading to the conference, I tried to eschew any belief that the parties would reach a deal at<\/span> all. I anticipated that the process would be slow, opaque, and potentially inconclusive. I<\/span> knew that the COP was a fundamentally political undertaking and that the negotiators faced immense institutional inertia in attempting to reach an agreement. In this respect, the proceedings presented many pleasant surprises. I was excited to see shifts towards transparency and accommodation for all parties, regardless of delegation size. Developing countries still faced undue barriers in comparison to their developed country counterparts, but structural elements like the Paris Committee and <\/span>Indaba meetings<\/span><\/a> gave me hope for an increasingly inclusive COP process in the future.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

After reading the final text, I can\u2019t say I feel excitement or despair or even anything in between. Mos<\/span>tly, I just feel relief. Even though I don\u2019t think we know yet what this text means for decarbonization, fossil fuels, or the environment as a whole, I\u2019m thrilled that the UN successfully provided a space for 196 countries to reach a substantive agreement. This agreement offers a clear focal point for further civil society movements, scientific research, and political negotiations around the world. All of these element<\/span>s together will determine the trajectory of international climate change policy in the future. For no<\/span>w, the UNFCCC has served its purpose by providing an integral first step that will catalyze countless subsequent actions.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Last Wednesday night, when an agreement seemed to be a distant if not impossible prospect, I feared what an inconclusive COP would mean for both the future of the environment and the viability of UN processes as a whole. It\u2019s my opinion that the global nature of climate change requires a global, intergovernmental solution. Nations don\u2019t bear the brunt of global warming equally, but climate change undoubtedly affects the lives and livelihoods of every person on the planet. If governments can\u2019t all come together to do something at COP, I thought, what chance do they have of addressing other issues<\/span> like peacekeeping or refugee crises, wh<\/span>ere the moral imperative for action i<\/span>s considerably murkier? Luckily, the parties managed to reach an agreement. And I left the conference with hope, which is, upon reflection, better than expected.<\/span><\/p>\n

-Anita Desai<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In the three days since negotiators reached an agreement in Paris, I\u2019ve seen the deal heralded as everything from \u201cthe world\u2019s greatest diplomatic success\u201d to \u201cjust bullshit\u201d. There seems to be little consensus as to whether COP-21\u2019s outcome was phenomenal, devastating, or even meaningful whatsoever. Personally, I\u2019m happy (and, frankly, somewhat surprised) to see language … Continue reading Reflections on the COP Outcome<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.swarthmore.edu\/cop\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/247"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.swarthmore.edu\/cop\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.swarthmore.edu\/cop\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.swarthmore.edu\/cop\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/6"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.swarthmore.edu\/cop\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=247"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.swarthmore.edu\/cop\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/247\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":249,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.swarthmore.edu\/cop\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/247\/revisions\/249"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.swarthmore.edu\/cop\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=247"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.swarthmore.edu\/cop\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=247"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.swarthmore.edu\/cop\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=247"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}