Huang Weiman: Who pays climate loss?

Outside the wall

Huang Weiman

The carbon dioxide accumulated from the industrial revolution in the atmosphere mainly comes from continuously promoting industrialized developed countries. This is a conclusion of data certification.The statement of developed countries owed many "climate debts", and in many climate -related discussions, it has gradually become a general understanding.

Now this is even extended into another discussion: As long as it is a rich country, there will be more contributions to moral obligations to help other countries with limited capabilities adapt to climate change.

A comprehensive report released by the Intergovernmental Climate Change of the United Nations (IPCC) this week, summarizing the contents of various related reports at the SixtH Assessment Report stage before, and rarely focused on how to ensure the "climatejustice".UN Secretary -General Gutres has continued to emphasize at a press conference that countries that have been affected by the most serious climate disaster are often not the culprit of climate warming, but the victim.

He also pointed out that the time -climate bomb ticking is sounding. Although all countries should speed up climate change, wealthy countries should press the "fast -forward button" to achieve net zero emissions.At the same time, he proposed for the first time that he hoped that developed countries would achieve net zero emissions as much as possible in around 2040. Earlier than the last period of 2050 in the general country, and called for a donation of the global "Loss and Damage" fund within this year, it must be finalized within this year.The details of compensation have provided their required funds for the "extremely vulnerable" country that faces the impact of climate change.

However, exploring the so -called climate justice also means that global warming into ethics and political issues.The complexity covered by this is even more prominent between Asian countries.

In the past, he had not been included in the agenda at the climate conference, nor did he have internationally recognized definition of loss and damage. He finally obtained face -to -face at the COP27 climate conference held in Egypt last year.However, after more than 200 countries agree to set up a loss and damage fund, let's not talk about how to mobilize funds to developed countries, who should bear responsibility and who should get compensation.A transitional committee of these details has a complete list of members until this week.The reason for this is that there are two Asia -Pacific "developing countries" seats in many countries.

It is worthy of fun that in the final list of the United Nations, it is determined that six Asia -Pacific countries are determined to divide these two seats.Including: China and India, which are the first of the world's major economies, faced with serious climate disaster problems, and in recent years, the Philippines and Pakistani, which has spoken on climate justice in recent years, and are still defined as South Korea in developing countries in the ranks of rich countries.With Saudi Arabia.

For such fierce competition, Egypt's chief climate consultant Mohamed NASR said at a press conference earlier that many Asian countries hope to sit in front of the negotiating table because countries have a position on the issues of losses and damage issues.The views are "very strong".

Taking China as an example, its position becomes delicate because it is a developing country and the dual identity of the world's second largest economy.China is also the country with the largest greenhouse gas emissions around the world. As a result, more and more voices have questioned whether China should be attributed to the ranks of developed countries, or at least it should be more active to contribute and even play a leading role.

Next, the positions of members of the transitional committees such as China and South Korea in the position of loss and damage are believed to have important reference significance for Singapore, especially for the discussion of "the rich country should be responsible for climate disaster."Facing a lot of pressure.Youth Organization Singapore Youth for Climate Action (Syca) has recently expressed dissatisfaction with the explanation of the sustainable development and the environment of the environment, Fu Haiyan.

Fu Haiyan explained in the question of Congress to explain the position of Singapore as a developing country. For the first time, Singapore also mentioned that Singapore is also a "potential claimant", which attracted Syca to publicize a public statement.The organization has strongly accused Singapore of "there should be a limited extent when considering its own national interests", "using these funds to reflect that we do not care about the affected by neighboring countries", hoping that the government has clarified that it has no intention of claiming.

In this regard, the Sustainable and Environment spokesman has responded, saying that Syca's statement is not completely correct. Relative that the minister only explained that Singapore is currently a position that Singapore is currently defined as developing countries, and emphasizes that the present currentDuring the stage, the discussion of the losses and damage funds who will donate, who will claim the conclusion on the premature premature.

The author believes that both the examples of China or Singapore show that the level of development between Asian countries is uneven, and the viewpoints are very diverse. The economic pressures faced by countries in terms of climate adaptation and slowing are also different.Therefore, based on the concept of the rich country, it is to determine who should be more responsible for climate warming, but it is too simple to simplify the problem.Singapore often reiterates that he is a low -lying island country surrounded by the sea, and the bills to pay in response to the rise of the sea are not small.

Asia, these wealthy or economical "developing countries", many of them are politically unwilling to make too early promises, or directly carry climate disasters.Standing together and claiming the developed countries that are truly responsible.At the same time, in addition to the lack of losses and damage funds, these countries can also give neighboring countries directly through different channels such as debt reduction, technical transfer, knowledge sharing, or humanitarian assistance.

It is not wrong to solve climate problems, and pursuing justice is also a wonderful ideal, but in negotiations and negotiations and negotiations of climate loss and damage, perhaps Asian countries should adhere to the principle of unbearable conspiracy, so as to strive for the most conducive to the most beneficial benefitSolve the better results of problems.The general public should not be stamped up by the "rich country payment theory", but should be more intelligent to understand the importance of still observing its changes.

The author is the assistant director of the editorial department of Eco-Business, an editorial department of regional environmental media and consulting companies

Both the examples of China or Singapore show that the level of development between Asian countries is uneven and the viewpoints are very diverse. The economic pressures faced by the climate adaptation and slowing of the climate are also different.Therefore, based on the concept of the rich country, it is to determine who should be more responsible for climate warming, but it is too simple to simplify the problem.