We Are Far From Consensus

The ambitions of COP-15 were probably unrealistic.

Question: Many have declared Copenhagen a failure. What do you think the outcome means for sustainability? Gro Harlem Brundtland: I think the ambitions ahead of Copenhagen certainly were not fulfilled. They were probably in a way, unrealistic in the sense that we knew that the distance between different countries and groups of countries was great in many cases. However, those interested in finding a way ahead for the climate had a conviction that a legally binding agreement is what we need. So, there was a push for many different sources of getting to that point, and many countries had that on their agenda. When that didn't happen, it should not maybe have been as much of a surprise as it may have been to some people because the distances you could see in the months and even the year ahead where really great. But what happened in Copenhagen as the days went by and very little happened, desperation of course, started to be felt and the fact that leaders were there and that several of these leaders were willing to put their heads together and to spend the time at that level helped us overcome what could have become a real backlash. Now there is a potential to move forward. People have learned, leaders have learned from what happened.  They have heard each other, seen each other, worked together and I think they are more aware than before they came to Copenhagen of what it will take to find solutions that can protect our planet and humanity against the catastrophe that I think more and more leaders are aware is coming unless we work together. Question: How will the world deal with countries whose interest sets are so far outside of the consensus as it now stands? Gro Harlem Brundtland: We don't have a consensus at the moment, except on a few things where leaders agreed in Copenhagen. They agreed that the ambition and the responsibility must be to avoid more than the 2 degree Celsius increase in average global temperature before 2050. And that in itself means that many countries, all countries in some way or form have to be contributing to a major change because this is not going to happen with business as usual. And I think most leaders in Copenhagen were aware that this aim and this commitment of 2 degrees only in increase cannot be reached without a lot of things happening, and within the first few years they have to be set on the right pattern. So, in a way, there still is a bit before we can talk about a consensus with regard to who commits to what, in what timeframe, and not only with regard to reducing emissions, but with regard to helping poor countries adapt and poor countries change their development pattern with the support of the rich countries. Question: What are some alternatives to the Copenhagen format that might help us arrive at a stronger consensus? Gro Harlem Brundtland: Well, I think first of all, we have to realize that we are far from consensus in many aspects. Or what needs to be agreed. There is consensus on the 2 degree goal of avoiding, having more increase in global temperature than 2 degrees by 2050. But with regard to how you get there and what responsibility each country has to contribute to such a result, there is not a lot of consensus at the moment. Then you have only a few countries that are outside of even that common goal and some of the other principles which are not made in any detail, and I think those countries that are more on the outside of the broader framework, they will gradually come along. The point is, those who were in that room and willing to sign up to an accord, they still have a lot to do before they agree on who should do what. There's a lot of need for coming more closely together than what was the case in Copenhagen, which led to an inability to share the burden, to share the contributions and to agree on how this should be done in practice. One thing that is quite clear, is that as long as the promised funding is not in any way computized and detailed that the rich countries agreed to put into the basket and it was the $30 billion in the first three years, and up to $100 billion per year by 2020. This is generalized numbers. They are generalized numbers and the countries that are looking for where they can trust that that money is forthcoming; they are not convinced because of long historic conditions about promises not having been followed up. They are not ready, at this generalized level to accept it as a reality. So they will be looking for institutions, more concrete promises and systems that show them that these monies are real. Recorded on February 26, 2010