The Anthropocene: The Politics of a Changing Environment

The Paris Agreement offers its second Christmas gift, with Montenegro becoming the 172nd country to ratify ! This progression is a good sign for global environmental governance. Lets hope that in the New Year the globe continues to come together in the face of environmental danger. Figure 1 : Ratification tracker. 172 countries have ratified, 25 remaining.

I’d like to draw attention to a recent change in the Paris Agreement’s ratification status. The Democratic Republic of the Congo officially ratified the Agreement on the 13th December , bringing the total to 171 countries ! This progression is great, however, Russia, which is responsible for 7.53% of global emissions , is still missing. Let's hope that in the coming months, the 26 nations yet to ratify will step up to the challenge. For now though, I’ll take this as an early present and focus on having a festive time - Merry Christmas to you all!   Source:  http://www.iceconferences.com/Eco-Friendly-Christmas.html

I’ve been losing faith recently in our ability to alter our dangerous environmental path. However, a look at the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (or Montreal Protocol as it’s commonly known) offers hope for global governance, even if it did take place 30 years ago… The Montreal Protocol, signed in 1987, is commonly regarded as one of the most successful international environmental agreements. It centres around the use of ozone-depleting substances (ODSs), most significantly, chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs; Figure 1 shows a breakdown of CFC containing products). CFCs were developed in the 1920s as a safe alternative to ammonia , yet they proved to be not so safe for the ozone layer. For those interested in chemistry, take a look at Figure 2 to see how CFCs destroy ozone molecules.   Figure 1 : Products responsible for CFC production before the Montreal Protocol. Figure 2 : The chemical equation that takes place once CFC molecules ...

Last week I participated in a fake COP as part of my Global Environmental Change course at university and although playing devil's advocate as a fossil fuel lobbyist was pretty fun, by the end of the ‘conference’ we were on track for an almost 3-degree warming. This flagged up an important issue, that the Paris Agreement's ambitions to limit warming to 1.5 or 2 degrees are going to require some significant changes. So I thought I’d take a look at what the current NDCs might result in and what needs to happen.   Research surrounding COP21 targets is often conflicting. There have been suggestions that we have just a 5% chance of limiting warming to 2 degrees and only a 1% chance of achieving 1.5 degree warming . On top of this, as shown in Figure 1 , the target of net zero emissions by 2050 appears unlikely. However, since this research sparked headlines in July, it has been argued that even a ‘modest strengthening’ of the NDCs, which as I pointed out last wee...

I watched ‘ Guardians of the Earth ’ at a film screening this week and I have to say, I was slightly overwhelmed. The film focused on the Paris Conference, or COP21, as the ‘last attempt’ to salvage the Earth after 20 years of failed UN climate negotiations. Whilst the film was almost distressing in its highlighting of the complexity and urgency of the situation, the reaching of an agreement left viewers with a glimmer of hope. However, this is not fiction and the Paris Agreement might just be a big hint of the proactive international governance I was discussing in relation to the Arctic. As I said last week , I’ll therefore be having a look at what exactly COPs are, the problems they’ve faced, and why Paris might just be different Figure 1 : The leaders of COP21 celebrate after the passing of the Paris Agreement.  The COP journey to Paris has not been a smooth one. The Kyoto Protocol, for example, which emerged from the 1977 Kyoto COP, was  heralded as a s...

“It is all about politics. Climate change is the hardest political problem the world has ever had to deal with. It is a prisoner’s dilemma, a free-rider problem, and the tragedy of the commons all rolled into one” This quote from the Economist  explicitly links politics with climate change and indeed, the two frequently cross paths. C limate policy is an  increasingly prominent topic within foreign policy , yet is also  one of the most contentious . In light of this, and in preparation for next week, I want to take a quick look at whether international bodies really are the best way forward.   Criticism of such bodies often centre around their  lack of sovereign power  to implement agreements. It is therefore  essential that they are self-enforcing , failing in this and they risk non-compliance. Furthermore, global agreements are often hindered by the ‘ slowest boat ’ rule, as universal approval is needed for risk of losing legitimacy. ...