Amidst the Modi-Obama atmospherics, the prospect of India ceding ground in the UN climate change talks to be held in Paris this December has been overlooked. The ‘fact sheet’ issued by the White House promises support for India’s clean energy initiatives, but does not acknowledge India’s basic stand in climate talks — the undeniable need for common but differentiated responsibility (CBDR) between the developed and developing world in view of the former’s overwhelming contribution to the stock of emissions in the atmosphere. Read along with the draft finalised at the Lima preparatory meet held in December, CBDR looks all set to be buried in Paris. CBDR was the cornerstone of the Kyoto Protocol which defined a mandatory emissions reduction regime for the advanced countries between 1998 and 2012 (to which the US, however, refused to be a signatory). To be sure, the stage for this was set at Lima. The Lima draft reads like a deceptive, last flicker, speaking of a “commitment to reaching an ambitious agreement in 2015 that reflect the principle of CBDR…in the light of different national circumstances.” The last bit can go against India, with the developed world likely to argue that India, like China, is no longer a poor country requiring unbridled development space. The changed “circumstances” explain China’s pact with the US late last year. It remains to be seen whether India unveils an emissions reduction plan by March, as was generally agreed at Lima, cutting across the developed-developing divide. In any case, the pressure on India, the third largest annual emitter of greenhouse gases after the US and China, to agree on an emissions reduction targets will mount.
All this is no reason for India to go on the defensive. CBDR, despite its sound underlying logic, has increasingly come under challenge since 2008, with the developing world today accounting for two thirds of incremental emissions. This means that cuts by the advanced countries alone will not suffice to freeze the stock of greenhouse gases at a certain level, beyond which climate change spins out of control. The point is to substitute CBDR with a more comprehensive principle. One such is carbon budgeting, where country rights to the atmosphere are determined by both stocks and flows and responsibilities apportioned accordingly. Besides, the US must be called into question for triggering a global oil glut and asking the developing world to cut emissions at the same time.
There are some major takeaways for India from the bilateral climate agreement. India’s renewables programme, not just nuclear but also solar power, is set to receive US financial and technological support. India’s answer to climate change is geared around increasing the proportion of renewables in energy use, with the accent on private participation. While the thrust is laudable, a climate change policy should encompass other elements as well — reduced reliance on coal, promotion of mass transport over personal vehicles, and efficient water use, to state just a few. Between pacts and policies, and the ground reality, lies a huge gap that needs to be bridged.