THE latest round of United Nations talks aimed at reaching an ambitious and effective new treaty on the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions wrapped up Friday in Bonn, Germany. The meeting was attended by more than 4,000 participants in 180 countries, including government delegates, representatives from business and industry and environmental organizations.

 In an exclusive interview with BusinessMirror correspondent Imelda V. Abaño on the sidelines of the climate-change talks in Bonn, Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), outlines the current state and direction of climate-change negotiation ahead of December’s summit in Copenhagen.  Mr. De Boer is flying to Manila this week to attend the high-level dialogue on climate change and energy security organized by the Asian Development Bank (ADB).  In 2007 in Bali, the 192 parties of the UNFCCC committed themselves to launching negotiations on strengthened action against climate change. This process is to culminate in an ambitious negotiated outcome at the end of 2009, which needs to enter into force before January 2013.

Mr. De Boer, despite skepticism on having a new deal in Copenhagen, what is the current state of the climate-change negotiations? What are the biggest issues that need to be resolved to make progress on climate change?

An ambitious and effective agreed outcome in Copenhagen is in sight. However, a key challenge of Copenhagen will be to ensure that the deal is equitable for all. I am confident that there will be a deal in December. There has to be a deal.

The big achievement of the Bonn climate meeting is that governments have made it clearer what they want to see in the Copenhagen agreed outcome. But having said that, a certain amount of engineering has to be done. So every final little detail of how the agreement will work in practice might be finalized in Copenhagen. However, key issues such as long-term goals for slashing emissions and avoiding dangerous climate-change impacts, adaptation, as well as the introduction of a technology-transfer mechanism to allow developing countries to move towards low-carbon economies, were some of the challenging issues.

What if the world failed to seal the deal?

If the world fails to act on climate change, it is going to dramatically affect everyone’s lives. The challenges facing Asia to fight climate change are enormous and cost a lot. So it’s a unique opportunity, and that means over the coming months we have to find answers to the four essentials in order to achieve an international agreement in Copenhagen:

1. How much are the industrialized countries willing to reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases?  

2. How much are major developing countries such as China and India willing to do to limit the growth of their emissions?

3. How is the help needed by developing countries to engage in reducing their emissions and adapting to the impacts of climate change going to be financed?

4. How is that money going to be managed?

I see a political willingness to support the Copenhagen process and there is a growing public concern that is driving that political momentum.

Science tells us that reductions in the order of -25 to -40 percent over 1990 levels are needed by 2020 and that emissions need to peak in the next 10 to 15 years. At the same time, adapting to the inevitable consequences of climate change is a global priority, especially for the poorest and most vulnerable people.

Is the current global financial crisis likely to threaten a new global agreement on climate change?

It will certainly have an impact on it and on our climate policies, but I don’t think it’s going to threaten a global agreement on climate change. The financial crisis should not be an excuse to slow down action on climate change. Investors should see the crisis as an opportunity for green growth. The business sector will have to work together with the government to explore ways in which they can reduce the cost of production, reduce the energy bill, grow their companies and contribute to combating climate change at the same time. I think that is possible. On the other hand, it is in the interest of decision makers to develop a strong policy on climate change. Everyone is confronted with high energy bills, everyone wants to avoid the impact of global warming, so it is the responsibility of the politicians to act on this.

You are attending a high-level dialogue on climate change in Asia and the Pacific in Manila organized by the Asian Development Bank. What message are you relaying to Asian leaders ahead of this year’s international climate meeting in Copenhagen? How important is it for Asian countries like the Philippines to engage in the process?

The Asian region stands to be impacted by climate change very badly if we fail to do something about climate change. Countries like the Philippines, where a lot of very small islands are at risk from sea-level rise, will be greatly devastated. Storms are becoming more extreme and you are seeing flooding in those areas. We are also seeing certain diseases where they haven’t occurred before. So in terms of health, social stability and economics, Asia potentially can be negatively impacted. And that’s why I think it’s important for Asian countries that we reach an agreement to address adaptation, funding mechanism, technology transfer, among other things.

I believe that a good climate agreement in Copenhagen can help to fuel clean economic growth in Asian countries like the Philippines. So I see [my attendance at] this ADB meeting as an important opportunity to look at how climate change could impact Asia and how Asia can use climate change policy to foster economic growth.

My main message, in short, is that Copenhagen is an opportunity Asian countries cannot afford to miss. That there has to be an agreement in December.

What needs to be achieved in 2009 for Copenhagen to be a success?

To my mind, there are four political essentials that have to be in place by Copenhagen to unleash ambitious action through a strong agreed outcome. These essentials are the critical elements of a new deal that have to be resolved this year.

First of all, I think that we need clarity on by how much are industrialized countries willing to reduce their emissions? Second, I think we need clarity on how much major developing countries like China and India are willing to do to limit the growth of their emissions. Third, I think we need clarity on finance that’s going to the essential to help developing countries engage both to reduce their emissions and adapt to the impacts of climate change. And fourth, we’ll need decisions on how that money is going to be managed.

Some countries are saying nothing will happen in the negotiations in Copenhagen because of the United States’ silent position. Are you optimistic about the US commitment?

The US has changed dramatically since US President Barack Obama came to power. The US wanted to show leadership, they are actively involved in the discussion, they are acting on climate change both at home and internationally, and most important, the US has indicated that they want to be part of future discussions.

We are, therefore, delighted to see the US back in the international climate-change process.

How important is it to take action sooner rather than later to address climate change? What are the costs of inaction?

According to the 2006 Stern review on economics by British economist Lord Stern, the costs of strong action are much lower than the costs of inaction or the costs of delay. In short, it is much cheaper to act on climate change. It is important to act early because most of the CO2 emissions come from the energy sector from power generations, from factories from power plants. The more conventional power plant and factories you continue to build, the longer they will be around and the more difficult it would be to change the direction of emissions. So what I am saying is that we need early actions to make sure that change happens.

Beyond Copenhagen, how do you see the outlook for the new climate-change agreement?

A long journey. I think that we are taking another step in Copenhagen on the journey to address climate change. The scientific community has said that by the middle of the century we need to reduce global emissions by 50 percent. I don’t think that Copenhagen is going to give us the final answer on how to do that. So I am sure that Copenhagen will be followed by two things: one, I hope there is action to address climate change; and second, a next round on international negotiations will take the next step in this journey.