| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
108874
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
COP16 of the UNFCCC at Cancun is regarded as a success, compared to the frustrating outcome at Copenhagen. However, the success part relates only to several issues of adaptation. The frustrating aspect is the mitigation part of the regime, which is the ultimate solution, but it remains as intractable as ever. This paper raises few queries including why there were some successes in adaptation, and not any in mitigation. The author argues that nothing positive in this regard at Cancun or any likelihood of its progress in the foreseeable future prodded the industrial countries to agree to some positive steps in adaptation. Still important issues regarding climate finance remain unresolved. Further, a realpolitik approach to upholding national interests and adherence to conventional sense of sovereignty by the major emitters, particularly by the US, stand in the way. The paper ends with a few suggestions on how to put pressure on the emission powers to listen to the call of the day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
104288
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
One year after the failure of the Copenhagen Climate Summit, the next conference of the parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol in December 2010 adopted the so-called Cancun Agreements. Thereby, the Cancun conference succeeded in keeping the UN climate process alive and averting serious damage to multilateralism more broadly. However, the Cancun Agreements fall seriously short of providing for effective action on climate change. The current weakness of the international framework reinforces the rationale for strengthening domestic EU climate policies. It also requires a further rethinking of the EU's international leadership strategy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
111961
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Much was at stake at the 2010 United Nations climate change conference in Cancún, Mexico. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was being challenged by the world's two largest greenhouse gas emitters, China and the United States, after these countries reached a tenuous backroom deal one year earlier in Copenhagen. Meanwhile, scientific studies were warning of serious and severe climate change. This article analyzes newspaper articles and television segments from the US media that appeared during the timeframe of the Cancún conference, focusing on two key facets of coverage that continue to be important as negotiations proceed: the economic impacts and opportunities that climate change creates and the role that China plays in negotiations. I also examine which sources were allowed through the news gates and which ones were marginalized. I find that the US media discussed economic opportunities more frequently than economic impacts and that the media treated China in an even-handed way. Established political actors dominated coverage, followed by representatives of nongovernmental organizations and the business community. Meanwhile, grassroots activists and indigenous voices were marginalized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|