Skip to main content
  • Sections
  • Search

Center for Strategic & International Studies

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • Sign In

Topics

  • Climate Change
  • Cybersecurity and Technology
    • Cybersecurity
    • Data Governance
    • Intelligence, Surveillance, and Privacy
    • Military Technology
    • Space
    • Technology and Innovation
  • Defense and Security
    • Counterterrorism and Homeland Security
    • Defense Budget
    • Defense Industry, Acquisition, and Innovation
    • Defense Strategy and Capabilities
    • Geopolitics and International Security
    • Long-Term Futures
    • Missile Defense
    • Space
    • Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation
  • Economics
    • Asian Economics
    • Global Economic Governance
    • Trade and International Business
  • Energy and Sustainability
    • Energy, Climate Change, and Environmental Impacts
    • Energy and Geopolitics
    • Energy Innovation
    • Energy Markets, Trends, and Outlooks
  • Global Health
    • Family Planning, Maternal and Child Health, and Immunizations
    • Multilateral Institutions
    • Health and Security
    • Infectious Disease
  • Human Rights
    • Civil Society
    • Transitional Justice
    • Human Security
  • International Development
    • Food and Agriculture
    • Governance and Rule of Law
    • Humanitarian Assistance
    • Human Mobility
    • Private Sector Development
    • U.S. Development Policy

Regions

  • Africa
    • North Africa
    • Sub-Saharan Africa
  • Americas
    • Caribbean
    • North America
    • South America
  • Arctic
  • Asia
    • Afghanistan
    • Australia, New Zealand & Pacific
    • China
    • India
    • Japan
    • Korea
    • Pakistan
    • Southeast Asia
  • Europe
    • European Union
    • NATO
    • Post-Soviet Europe
    • Turkey
  • Middle East
    • The Gulf
    • Egypt and the Levant
    • North Africa
  • Russia and Eurasia
    • The South Caucasus
    • Central Asia
    • Post-Soviet Europe
    • Russia

Sections menu

  • Programs
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Analysis
    • Blogs
    • Books
    • Commentary
    • Congressional Testimony
    • Critical Questions
    • Interactive Reports
    • Journals
    • Newsletter
    • Reports
    • Transcript
  • Podcasts
  • iDeas Lab
  • Transcripts
  • Web Projects

Main menu

  • About Us
  • Support CSIS
    • Securing Our Future
Critical Questions
Share
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email
  • Printfriendly.com

The Final Day in Copenhagen

December 18, 2009

Q1: What is likely to be achieved at the climate change talks in Copenhagen?

A1: As the international climate change talks in Copenhagen draw to a close, it is clear that any progress made will be incremental with future success highly dependent on further negotiation. It appears that any declaration emerging from today’s meeting will reflect the broadest level of consensus and leave many key issues unresolved. Some progress was made in bringing major parties closer to agreement on issues of financing for developing country action, but major compromise is still being sought on the issue of how developing country action should be monitored, verified, and reviewed and on the overall level of emissions reduction by developed countries.

Q2: Will the outcome from the meeting meet expectations?

A2: The international community met over the last two weeks under the auspices of the UN 15th Conference of Parties with the goal to reach a new agreement on global action to combat climate change. Two years ago, the international community, working through the United Nations, established this meeting as the notional deadline for negotiating an international agreement on climate change to replace the Kyoto Protocol when it expires at the end of 2012. Toward the end of this year it became clear that the two years of negotiations did not yield enough progress for the process to conclude in Copenhagen. The Danish prime minister proposed instead the conclusion of an interim, political agreement with the goal of finishing negotiations on a final agreement by the end of 2010. The combination of these revised expectations and several notable political gestures and pledges in the weeks leading up to the negotiations (by the United States, China, India, Brazil, and others) led to a feeling of relative optimism about the potential outcome. Over the course of the negotiations, it became clear the developed and developing country blocks were still very far apart on many of the key elements of an agreement: emissions reduction pledges, monitoring and verification, finance, and the form of the agreement. The outcome of the meeting is not likely to meet any of the delegations’ expectations or aspirations for this conference. The question will be how this experience shapes what each country is willing to do in terms of future negotiations.

Q3: What comes next?

A3: The international community is keenly focused on the passage of energy and climate legislation in the United States. Many in the developing world and, indeed, several developed countries, would like to see more ambitious emissions reduction targets, as well as generous pledges for long-term financing for developing countries. If the United States fails to pass legislation that delivers significant emission reduction between now and 2050, future international climate change discussions will likely fall into disarray. The United States is the largest historical emitter of greenhouse gases and the second-largest emitter today. Without significant participation from the United States, the ability of the rest of the world to prevent dangerous levels of warming will be severely constrained. As Senator John Kerry said in his remarks at the Copenhagen conference, however, a failure to reach agreement in Copenhagen that includes commitments by the world’s largest developing countries and some transparency provisions will make it much more difficult to pass climate legislation. At the same time, international negotiators are slated to set plans to return to the negotiating table in the very near future to try and flesh out the details of the agreement. The question is whether or not the developed country block has been convinced by the experience over the past two weeks and, indeed, two years, that the UN process is too unwieldy to ever reach the scientifically robust, politically realistic deal that will actually lead to emissions reduction on a meaningful scale.

Note: Starting in January 2010 the CSIS Energy and National Security Program will host a year-long series of events focusing on the transition to a low-carbon future in a post-Copenhagen environment. For more information, contact Lisa Hyland (lhyland@csis.org). CSIS is also engaged in a center-wide project, supported by the MacArthur Foundation, focusing on energy, climate change, and regional cooperation in Asia. For more information on this project, contact Jeffrey Bean (jbean@csis.org).

Sarah Ladislaw is a senior fellow in the Energy and National Security Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C.

Critical Questions is produced by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a private, tax-exempt institution focusing on international public policy issues. Its research is nonpartisan and nonproprietary. CSIS does not take specific policy positions. Accordingly, all views, positions, and conclusions expressed in this publication should be understood to be solely those of the author(s).

© 2009 by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

Written By
Sarah Ladislaw
Senior Associate (Non-resident), Energy Security and Climate Change Program
Media Queries

Contact H. Andrew Schwartz
Chief Communications Officer
Tel: 202.775.3242

Contact Caleb Diamond
Media Relations Manager and Editorial Associate
Tel: 202.775.3173

Related
Asian Regionalism Initiative, Climate Change, Energy Security and Climate Change Program, Energy and Sustainability

Most Recent From Sarah Ladislaw

On Demand Event
Economy Disrupted: The View from Dayton
April 14, 2021
Report
U.S. Climate Leadership at the G20: A Strategy for Investment, Debt Relief, and Industrial Policy
By Lachlan Carey, Sarah Ladislaw, Nikos Tsafos
March 30, 2021
In the News
How the Defense Department Can Move From Abstraction to Action on Climate Change
War on the Rocks | Samuel Brannen, Sarah Ladislaw, Lachlan Carey
March 26, 2021
On Demand Event
The View from Arkansas
March 17, 2021
In the News
Biden’s Solar Dreams Collide With Outrage Over China’s ‘Genocide’
Bloomberg | Jenny Leonard, Jennifer A Dlouhy
March 16, 2021
In the News
AFL-CIO’s Trumka Demands Cutoff of Solar Products From Xinjiang
Bloomberg | Jenny Leonard, John Harney
March 15, 2021
On Demand Event
Road to COP26: Just Transitions and the Climate Agenda
March 9, 2021
On Demand Event
Toward a Climate-Driven Trade Agenda
March 5, 2021
View all content by this expert
Footer menu
  • Topics
  • Regions
  • Programs
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Analysis
  • Web Projects
  • Podcasts
  • iDeas Lab
  • Transcripts
  • About Us
  • Support Us
Contact CSIS
Email CSIS
Tel: 202.887.0200
Fax: 202.775.3199
Visit CSIS Headquarters
1616 Rhode Island Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20036
Media Queries

Contact H. Andrew Schwartz
Chief Communications Officer
Tel: 202.775.3242

Contact Caleb Diamond
Media Relations Manager and Editorial Associate
Tel: 202.775.3173

Daily Updates

Sign up to receive The Evening, a daily brief on the news, events, and people shaping the world of international affairs.

Subscribe to CSIS Newsletters

Follow CSIS
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • Instagram

All content © 2021. All rights reserved.

Legal menu
  • Credits
  • Privacy Policy
  • Reprint Permissions