•    HOME   
•    NEWS   
•    BUSINESS   
•    INTERNATIONAL   
•    TECH   
•    SPORTS   
•    LIFE & TIMES   
•    OPINION   
•    MY JAKARTA   
•    BLOGS   
•    EYEWITNESS   

Given the “failure” of the climate change conference in Copenhagen last year, there is widespread skepticism that a legally binding agreement can be reached at the Cancun summit later this year. Both India and China have expressed their concerns over the possibility of reaching a strong international agreement anytime soon, contributing to a pessimistic atmosphere.

While the UN secretary general welcomed the Copenhagen Accord as an essential starting point for setting a road map on carbon emission targets, he also acknowledged that more needs to be done.

The accord, while endorsing the soon-to-expire Kyoto Protocol, underlined the fact that for many countries climate change is still not considered a major challenge.

The secretariat for the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change clarified the outcome in a statement: “Since the Conference of the Parties neither adopted nor endorsed the accord, its provisions do not have any legal standing within the UNFCCC process even if some parties decide to associate themselves with it.

The accord is a political agreement rather than a treaty instrument.”

In other words, the accord has no bite. This is further emphasized when we note that of the 192 members of the UNFCCC, only about 100 have signed it.

That said, some big numbers were announced. The accord recognized the target of limiting global temperature increases to 2 degrees Celsius of pre-industrial levels and promised to help developing countries cope with climate change by providing up to $100 billion by 2020 — and $30 billion over the next three years — to tackle floods, droughts and rising sea levels.

But while climate change negotiations might be making gradual progress, a path to a legally binding protocol still seems distant.

It is not surprising that not all nations are on the same page regarding the issues of carbon and greenhouse gas emissions, particularly since developed and developing nations have travelled along very different historical routes.

The two groupings feel they have different responsibilities and obligations while fighting climate change. Nonetheless, both should equally comply with carbon emissions targets. Collective emissions are an unwanted gift to a collective world.

While it is true that developing countries, with few technological means at their disposal and with often larger populations that are dependent on climate-sensitive natural resources, struggle to find a balance between development and low emissions, some are already significantly out of kilter.

It might be surprising to learn that Indonesia ranks as the third largest global emitter of greenhouse gases after the United States and China, due primarily to deforestation and forest fires.

Deforestation contributes one-fifth of the world’s carbon emissions. Many forget that forests play an important role in the global carbon cycle owing to their ability to absorb carbon dioxide.

A 2007 study by the World Bank and the British government’s Department for International Development highlights the fact that we cannot ignore the effects of deforestation on climate change, especially in Indonesia, which annually contributes more than 2.5 billion tons of greenhouse gases from the forestry sector alone.

But it is not all bad news in Indonesia. Indonesian energy, agriculture and waste emissions are incredibly small compared to the United States and China. And the government announced its commitment to reduce carbon emissions by 26 percent by 2020, saying that this could reach 41 percent with international assistance.

In doing so, Indonesia has aligned itself with those states supporting stronger commitments to the fight against climate change. Brazil and South Africa are also targeting carbon emission cuts of up to 40 percent.

This could prove particularly important in putting pressure on rich nations before the talks in Cancun, where strong impetus is needed to set a strong climate agenda for the years to come.

Norway offered to provide financial backing to Indonesia’s additional carbon cuts and the two countries recently agreed on a $1 billion, two-year logging moratorium.

Others have also spoken about 70 programs aimed at reducing the number of carbon emissions in the forestry sector and have agreed to set up a system to monitor emission cuts.

Even so, in order to meet international carbon emission cuts, Indonesia is faced with a series of challenges.

The first comes from programs in the Reduction of Emissions From Deforestation and Forest Degradation initiative. REDD is a global program aiming to provide compensation through a global carbon market for countries that reduce their emissions by stopping deforestation and land degradation.

Indonesia does have a number of policies and regulation for forestry management, but these are poorly enforced.

If no action is taken, the effects of global warming are likely to contribute to drying up our rainforests and peat swamps, increasing the number of fires contributing to forest depletion.

The second challenge is posed by the increasing use of biofuel technology for both domestic consumption and export demand. Biofuel production has become the main driving force for deforestation in Indonesia.

Fortunately the European Union has recently assured Indonesia it will continue buying crude palm oil, with the caveat that it must be “produced under environmentally friendly principles.” This could prove both a great opportunity for producers and a great challenge to forest conservation.

Demand for bio-fuels is expected to rise in the foreseeable future, so the issues will become even more acute.

A lack of support for renewable energy is the third challenge. Currently there is little investment or incentive to support the development of renewable energy like hydro, geothermal, biomass, solar and wind or wave power.

Clean energy production methods have great potential in Indonesia, but not enough has been done to promote their wider use. Indonesia has one of the largest geothermal energy capabilities and the government only recently stated its goal of becoming the leader in geothermal production.

Nothing has been said about its solar, wind or wave power potential — this from the world’s largest archipelago.

While China, India and Indonesia are the largest and fastest growing sources of greenhouse gases in Asia, it is China and India that have increasingly invested in renewable energy.

Indonesia has to do more, and indeed wants to do more. If no action is taken, the consequences of climate change could affect the nation through increasing global temperatures, changes in the seasons, droughts and extreme weather.

These factors could lead to the loss of people’s livelihoods and food security, depletion of natural resources, decreased agricultural productivity, declining levels of drinking water and more vector-born disease.

All this would have repercussions on economic development and poverty reduction, and could increase tensions over resource usage, leading to internal strife.

Carbon emissions do not respect borders, and it is the most vulnerable populations in the developing world that usually pay the biggest price through environmental degradation.

With the shadow of Copenhagen looming over climate change, many say a breakthrough at Cancun is unlikely. Will Indonesia help prove them wrong?



Akira Moretto is an associate consultant at Strategic Asia, a Jakarta-based consultancy promoting cooperation among Asian countries.