Climate Talks Stall as UN Ponders: Who’s Rich, Who’s Poor?

By Christopher Forestieri

The last decade has seen the notion of man-made climate change evolve from a liberal “myth” to a widely accepted scientific fact. Well, OK, there are still some who disagree, but regardless of its cause, there seems to be a consensus that global warming is a condition which must be addressed. But how?

While there has been a lot of talk (and action) in Europe and the US about lowering emissions, creating alternative fuels and reducing our carbon footprint, the fact remains that there is still a significant portion of the world which is either financially unable or unwilling to address climate change.

Recently in Poland, the current site of UN’s annual climate negations, talks have stalled due to a disagreement between rich and poor countries. Essentially, wealthy countries like the U.S. are putting pressure on less developed nations to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions which is vital for any kind of realistic solution to our current climate crisis.

The problem is not a new one -- the countries in question do not have the resources to lower emissions and want richer countries to foot the bill. But there may be an even bigger obstacle?

According to Michael Levi’s recent article on Slate.com, “the list of who's rich and who's poor that would be used for any final agreement is hopelessly out of date.”

The list, created in 1992, is just another example of how the products of bureaucracy can impede any prospect of real change. The list puts Ukraine (which at the time of the list’s creation was part of the Soviet Union) as a rich country. At the same time it has Singapore listed as a poor country. The problem is, Ukraine now is ranked 97th among the world’s wealthiest countries while Singapore now ranks 6th.

Levi says, “Unless the climate regime overhauls its wealth labels, a country like Singapore could reap the benefits of financial aid, while Ukraine would be burdened with emissions caps. Needless to say, that kind of nonsensical setup won't get you very far in international talks.”

If there is ever to be a viable method of curbing global warming, a significant portion of the world must get on board. While counties such as the U.S. do emit a large amount of greenhouse gases, many poor countries which cannot afford to take even small steps, such as getting old, poorly functioning vehicles off the road, make a very significant impact.

While my hope is that the UN is ultimately able to solve this problem, the situation they are currently facing reinforces my belief that we should be looking to entities in the private sector with no government ties for a viable solution . . . at least while the leaders of the world figure out what they’re doing.