The prospect of the United Nations' climate change negotiating framework: implications from Copenhagen and Cancun Online publication date: Thu, 16-Oct-2014
by Winston Ka-Ming Mak
International Journal of Green Economics (IJGE), Vol. 5, No. 3, 2011
Abstract: Concluded with a piece of 'Copenhagen Accord' that is not legally binding, 13 days of seesaw battles on Denmark's negotiation table did not yield any substantial results. Neither did the end of another 12 days of climate change conference in Mexico a year later in 2010, marked with a 'Cancun Agreement' that achieved nothing but money – the Green Climate Fund. For years, state leaders have gone home almost empty-handed. By late 2009, the international community had not accomplished their mission to complete the negotiations for an international climate change regime going forward from 2012 as enshrined in the Bali Roadmap. The Copenhagen and Cancun summits all proceeded within the UN's framework as agreed in 1992, but a comprehensive, all-encompassing and legally binding climate change deal, which many activists and governments want, remains out of reach for the world. Is the current climate change negotiating framework outdated? To answer this question, we have to analyse briefly the outcomes of both conferences first.
Existing subscribers:
Go to Inderscience Online Journals to access the Full Text of this article.
If you are not a subscriber and you just want to read the full contents of this article, buy online access here.Complimentary Subscribers, Editors or Members of the Editorial Board of the International Journal of Green Economics (IJGE):
Login with your Inderscience username and password:
Want to subscribe?
A subscription gives you complete access to all articles in the current issue, as well as to all articles in the previous three years (where applicable). See our Orders page to subscribe.
If you still need assistance, please email subs@inderscience.com
Our Blog 
Follow us on Twitter 
Visit us on Facebook