The past two months have been a roller-coaster ride for India in terms of its stance on climate change. And talks to be held in Copenhagen this December have been surrounded by controversy -- be it the failed talks in Barcelona or India taking its own emission cuts before the summit. Many believe the talks will fail. However, Rajendra K Pachauri, Chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and Director-General of The Energy and Resources Institute (Teri), remains hopeful. He tells Leslie D’Monte and Kirtika Suneja that though issues may extend beyond Copenhagen, it is important for countries to try and get an agreement there. Edited excerpts:
Will we see an agreement in Copenhagen?
We expect something concrete to come out of the talks. Though things don’t look bright at this point of time, we do hope there will be some movement, with some degree of compromise. We expect things to gather momentum, as there is a lot of awareness among people across the globe regarding climate change. Also, there is a lot of pressure from some countries in particular. Things will not stop at Copenhagen and momentum may pick up.
I would like to see the US on board. We hope to come closer to getting it, as the Senate Committee has approved the Kerry-Boxer Climate Bill. It is important for us to see that we get an agreement at Copenhagen. There might be a lot of finger pointing because of which the spirit and resolute desire may get dissipated. So, we must treat Copenhagen as an (opportunity to get an) agreement.
What if no agreement is reached?
We would like to see every major country in the world to be part of the agreement but if talks fail at Copenhagen, then it will not be the end of the world, as the extent of awareness among the public is very high and increasing. However, my despair is on the grounds of the valuable time that we are losing. The sooner we put our act together, the better.
Where is the stumbling block?
The US is the stumbling block and unless they lead and establish themselves, other countries will not be encouraged to move ahead. It is the negotiations season and people are going to say things, but I would not worry too much about that, as delegates do come up with various statement. Some are perennial sinners who continue to sin. The US is hiding behind its own actions.
What should be the stance of developing nations, then?
The divide between the rich and poor nations or developed and developing world is always the stumbling block, and it is nothing new. However, recently the African nations made their presence felt and asserted themselves for the first time, when they boycotted the Barcelona talks. That is a good thing and even India must do what is good for itself and the rest of the world. India is doing its bit and should tell this to others. We must go ahead with the National Action Plan on Climate Change ( NAPCC) and use it as a basis to tell other countries that they should do their bit. So, developed countries should do what is good for them and rest of the world, while the developing nations must do so for themselves.
Do you feel the environment ministry is moving away from India’s stance on climate change and G-77 principles?
No. I do not think so. I'm aware of reports to this effect, but it is a misperception that the minister diluted the G-77’s principles. The government has to be active and what environment minister Jairam Ramesh is doing is good, as we have to establish that India is a deal maker and not a deal breaker. We have to engage with all players across the spectrum. We are working on the principle of common but differentiated responsibility. If we are doing things that are good for us, then we must tell the whole world about it and not be bashful of proclaiming so. There have been no differences between the points of view of the government and that of Teri.
What should businesses do to fight climate change?
Businesses must anticipate the new laws of the future than being caught on the wrong footing. They want to make profits but governments are also to be blamed for it, as it is they who must introduce laws, rules, incentives and disincentives. So, it is a shared responsibility between businesses and governments and, hence, a failure on both fronts.
With India’s National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) comprising eight missions, what else are we required to do?
India is not required to decrease pollution or emissions as per the Kyoto Protocol but the responsibility is on the shoulders of the developed nations.
How distant or close is the scare about climate change?
Climate change is a serious problem and it is already here. Sea levels are rising and agriculture is being impacted, apart from other extreme events. So, we can’t ignore the challenge of climate change and if we continue with our business-as-usual approach, then there will be severe impacts on businesses, too. So, businesses should adapt themselves to the impact of climate change because their employees will be impacted if there is an increase in heat waves or sea levels rise. They also need to use energy efficiently and move to low-carbon technologies, because that is the wave of the future. If the world is moving in that direction, then they must also move, else they will lose market share.
But the ministry believes the Himalayan glaciers are not melting...
This is scientifically unacceptable and we do not do pussyfooting around such facts. I have made my stance clear on the subject, that this is nonsense.
