Podcast Summary
LSE: Public lectures and events
Episode: UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen
Date: December 3, 2009
Host: Justin Guest (A)
Guest: Dr. Stephanie Ricard (B), LSE Government Department
Episode Overview
This episode focuses on the prospects and challenges surrounding the upcoming UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, 2009. Host Justin Guest interviews Dr. Stephanie Ricard from LSE's Government Department, exploring expectations, the roles of key players (including developing nations and the US), the effectiveness of markets versus diplomacy, and the central obstacles hampering meaningful global climate action.
Key Discussion Points and Insights
1. Expectations for Copenhagen
- Environmentalists' hopes have been "dialed back."
- A binding agreement is not expected; instead, the best outcome would be a non-binding political consensus to maintain momentum for future discussions.
Dr. Ricard (00:26):
“Unfortunately, I think they know they're not going to get what's on their wish list... They know there's not going to be a binding agreement agreed upon at Copenhagen.”
2. The Role of Developing Countries (China and India)
- Engaging countries like China and India is crucial for meaningful progress.
- Developed nations have few remaining tools to persuade them, having already made significant concessions and investments.
- China and India have offered some commitments, but these are not substantial.
- The EU's attempts at “moral leadership” have thus far been ineffective.
Dr. Ricard (00:56):
“They don't have a lot of economic chips that they can use... We've seen China and India put some agreements on the table... they're not particularly concrete and they don't go as far as we would like.”
Dr. Ricard (01:33):
“The EU has tried to do it through moral leadership... but so far that's been unsuccessful.”
3. Market Mechanisms vs. Diplomacy
- There has been significant growth in markets for climate-friendly goods and emissions trading, especially in the EU.
- The EU hopes that early adoption of green policies will give them a competitive edge if others follow suit.
- However, the effectiveness of these market mechanisms depends on widespread international participation, which remains uncertain.
- The EU risks economic consequences, as some companies may withdraw investment due to its perceived “outlier” status on environmental regulation.
Dr. Ricard (01:54):
“It's particularly true in the EU... they're really hoping that when the rest of the countries sign on... they're going to already have made these progressive moves... The EU is really banking on these market pressures and saying we're going to have a competitive edge because we're doing it first.”
Dr. Ricard (02:37):
“That only works if other countries sign on. And right now, the EU is in a very precarious position already. Companies like Shell have said they're potentially going to withdraw... precisely because they're really only [the] block of countries that have gone as far.”
4. President Obama’s Potential Influence
- While President Obama’s attendance is “symbolic and important,” his negotiating power is restricted by US domestic politics.
- With the crucial Cap and Trade bill stalled in the Senate due to the health care debate, Obama’s ability to promise or deliver concessions is severely limited.
Dr. Ricard (03:05):
“I think he is doing something very symbolic by coming... but his hands are really tied by the U.S. congress, by the U.S. senate.”
Dr. Ricard (03:32):
“President Obama's ability to set the agenda or extract concessions is really limited precisely because of the domestic politics at home.”
5. Key Obstacles and Pessimism
- The main obstacle is the cost: both direct and indirect economic impacts on companies and countries.
- Specific contention revolves around how much developed countries will collectively contribute to help developing nations meet targets, adopt clean technologies, and mitigate effects of climate change.
- The economic crisis exacerbates divisions and makes financial agreements even more contentious.
Dr. Ricard (03:54):
“The key obstacle is, of course, the size of the emission reductions, but really it's about cost and about money... That's the main barrier, both in terms of the cost to the companies domestically... but also the cost to the countries.”
Dr. Ricard (04:20):
“How much money are the developed countries going to pool together to assist the developing countries... has been a particularly divisive issue.”
Notable Quotes and Memorable Moments
- “Expectations have really been dialed back.” – Dr. Ricard (00:28)
- “The EU has tried to do it through moral leadership... but so far that's been unsuccessful.” – Dr. Ricard (01:33)
- “The EU is really banking on these market pressures and saying we're going to have a competitive edge because we're doing it first.” – Dr. Ricard (02:21)
- “He's doing something very symbolic by coming. And that's an important symbolic step...” – Dr. Ricard (03:07)
- “It's really about cost. That's the main barrier...” – Dr. Ricard (03:57)
- “That debate about how much money to pool together and where to get that money from has been a particularly divisive issue.” – Dr. Ricard (04:32)
Timestamps for Important Segments
- 00:26 – Hopes and expectations for Copenhagen
- 00:56 – The challenge of involving China and India
- 01:54 – Market forces vs. diplomatic efforts
- 02:51 – President Obama's role and limitations
- 03:54 – Main obstacles and the question of funding
Tone and Language
The discussion maintains an analytical, measured, and realistic tone, with Dr. Ricard candidly addressing the limitations and challenges the conference faces. The host maintains a sense of curiosity and engagement, guiding the conversation through practical challenges and global policy dynamics.
In summary:
This episode provides a realistic, skeptical yet nuanced exploration of the prospects for meaningful action at the Copenhagen Climate Conference, highlighting the interplay between political will, economic realities, and international cooperation. It stresses the importance of both symbolism and substance while underpinning the need for global consensus and shared sacrifice—a message that continues to resonate in climate diplomacy discourse.