|
Fri Dec 18, 2009 at 11:13:32 AM PST
|
|
| Below, you'll find the draft language of the ag agreement for Copenhagen. Anything in brackets is tentative. It's pretty similar to the previous draft from a few days ago. My take on this (which you can see in full here) is that this paves the way for the U.S. to basically continue business as usual AND for the expansion of industrial ag to the developing world. I say this because the emphasis here is on productivity (yield) and efficiency. That's typically a justification of industrial ag. Furthermore, while they call for sustainability, there are any number of nasty agribiz companies who call their products sustainable when they really aren't.
In addition to this, there's the issue of ag offsets, which Annie Shattuck of Food First writes about, saying:
This comes at the same time that radical proposals to subsidize soil carbon storage (likely through 'biochar', RoundUp Ready GM crops and industrial tree plantations) with carbon offsetting schemes made it back into the draft after having been presumed dead. The proposals would allow wealthy countries to buy carbon credits through the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) instead of reducing emissions at home.
The inclusion of agriculture in the CDM is extremely problematic - transaction costs to participate in the program are high, giving structural advantage to large-scale industrial technologies like GM monocultures. Moreover, a recent civil society study of CDM projects found that 75% did not provide any emissions reductions whatsoever.
All in all - with this along with the bombshell dropped yesterday that the U.S. is shooting for a 3 degree Celsius global temperature increase and 550 ppm CO2 - this is very bad. (Developed countries were previously talking about a 2 degree increase, which Africa was calling a death sentence and developing nations were advocating "1.5 to stay alive." And, of course, the science says we need 350 ppm, NOT 550!)
I've heard via Amy Goodman's show Democracy Now that the U.S. is more or less trying to bribe their way into getting what they want by calling for very lax carbon limits and then offering up $100 billion in aid to developing nations. Developing nations all want a stronger agreement BUT with $100 million per year at stake, they also fear that those who give into the U.S. will get the money - and those who don't, won't. |
| Jill Richardson :: The Most Recent Copenhagen Draft for Ag |
Draft agriculture COP15 decision
Cooperative sectoral approaches and sector-specific actions in agriculture
[The Conference of the Parties,
Reaffirming the objective, principles and provisions of the Convention, in particular its Article 2, Article 3, paragraphs 1 and 5, and Article 4, paragraph 1(c),
Bearing in mind the need to improve the efficiency and productivity of agricultural production systems in a sustainable manner,
Recognizing the interests of small and marginal farmers, the rights of indigenous peoples and traditional knowledge and practices, in the context of applicable international obligations, and taking into account national laws and circumstances,
Recognizing that cooperative sectoral approaches and sector-specific actions in the agriculture sector should take into account the relationship between agriculture and food security, the link between adaptation and mitigation and the need to safeguard that these approaches and actions do not adversely affect food security,
[Affirming that cooperative sectoral approaches and sector-specific actions in the agriculture sector should not constitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination or a disguised restriction on international trade,]
- Decides that all Parties, with respect to the agriculture sector and taking into account their common but differentiated responsibilities and their specific national and regional development priorities, objectives and circumstances, [shall][should] promote and cooperate in the research, development, including transfer, of technologies, practices and processes that control, reduce or prevent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases, particularly those that improve the efficiency and productivity of agricultural systems in a sustainable manner and those that could support adaptation to the adverse effects of climate change, thereby contributing to safeguarding food security and livelihoods;
- [Affirms that cooperative sectoral approaches and sector-specific actions in the agriculture sector should not constitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination or a disguised restriction on international trade;]
- Requests the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice to establish, at its thirty-second session, a programme of work on agriculture to enhance the implementation of Article 4, paragraph 1(c), of the Convention, taking into account paragraph 1 above;
- Invites Parties to submit to the secretariat, by 22 March 2010, their views on the content and scope of the work programme;
- Requests the secretariat to compile these views into a miscellaneous document for consideration by the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice at its thirty-second session.
|
|
|
