Final Paper for a class project

0This paper is a summation of a roleplay excercise that I had performed with other members of my class on the topic of "Environmental Reductions of Emissions" I played a reporter for an American Newspaper titled "The New York Times"02br
02br
00Alexandre Laurent02br
02br
01b00Revisiting the Climate Conference02b02br
02br
01b00 02b00My role in the climate conference is twofold: my first and foremost priority is to report the news to my readers, the majority of whom are United States citizens; Second, to report news that is important to my base of readers. The former represents my role in the climate conference, which is to give news updates on what happened during the climate change discussion The latter, however, implies that I actively seek facts of significance to the US perspective. This affects the type of questions that I ask, and the priority that I have to the information that I include in my news articles. As a member of the media, I make a unique contribution to the climate conference by gauging the effectiveness of the debate and allowing the involved parties to develop an understanding of how successful they are in the debate. The failure of the climate conference can be based primarily on three parameters: First, the failure of the countries to reach consensus through bargaining and negotiation; Second, the ineffectiveness of the proposed solutions in the climate conference debate; Third, the lack of organization in the manner which the conference talks were conducted.02br
02br
00 A majority of the responses to the climate conference mentioned the apparent lack of cooperation that existed amongst the nations. J. Michel of Japan astutely observed that each country’s unwillingness to depart from their own position led to the failure of the conference. Naomi Girard of the IPCC mentioned that if any chance for success would exist, it would be after the nations begin cooperating. Henri Durand of the Pew Center attributes his lack of cooperation to the unwillingness of the nations to sacrifice their economic growth. Katherine Thomas of the Nature Conservancy specifically outlines in her proposed solution that in order for climate change to be addressed, every country would need to take a hit to their economic growth. I agree with all of these points, and I would say that the failure to bargain on terms with other nations represents one of the ultimate failures of the climate conference. Marcel Lambert of the Cato Institute seems to agree with my point. He mentions that the developed nations should have shouldered a greater burden for the reduction of emissions in order to compromise with developing nations like India and China. Essentially speaking, there were a multitude of possibilities for success had the nations simply been more willing to compromise. It is worthy to note, however, that much of the disagreement stemmed not only from the inability of the nations to compromise, but also of the flaws in the proposed solutions themselves.02br
02br
00Mr. Michel of Japan makes the observation that the lack of knowledge possessed by the college undergraduate participants of the climate contributed to the ineffectiveness of their proposed solutions. I personally agree with this point, and attribute it to the lack of insight that all of the participants had in gauging the efficacy of the proposed solutions. Jason Pope of Western Europe specifically states that he renounced all solutions that were related to his market-based carbon trading scheme. I would assert that Mr. Pope’s lack of expertise as a college undergraduate contributed to his inability to understand or agree with other valid solutions. Mr. Lambert of the Cato Institute even admits to his lack of economic knowledge when he was defining his own position. The most insightful contributor to the climate change debate was Ms. Girard of the IPCC, it was apparent that she performed the most research on the viability of climate change solutions and she specifically stated that the best solution for one country would not be the best solution for another; ironically, universal solutions dominated the debate. Vishnu Thyagarajan of India mentions the irrelevant attacks against the political and social histories India and China. This type of ineffective behavior reflects the lack of relevant knowledge possessed by the participants of the climate conference.02br
02br
00Green technologies were mentioned during the climate conference debate, but little attention was given to their actual application and their ultimate goal as a solution to climate change. Wynn Heh of the United States proposed a technology-based solution for climate change, but the specifics of the solution were very vague, and it was unclear as whether or not such a solution would actually work. Although this partly can be attributed to her lack of knowledge as an undergraduate student, it underscores the point of how the conference would use green technology to affect climate change. Mr. Durand of the Pew Center states that technologies are only a means to an end, and that in order to work, an end must exist. I agree with Mr. Durand on this point. The role of green technologies was too vague in the conference, while it was assumed that the effects of green technologies was positive, the manner in which green technology would help solve climate change was not even mentioned. If the goal of the climate conference had been to replace carbon-emitting fossil fuels as the source of the worlds energy, it would have been much easier for the nations to propose and agree upon a solution. The lack of variety amongst proposed solution is not only to be blamed on lack of foresight; many solutions were not mentioned simply because they did not have a chance to be discussed, which brings up the issue of the problems with the manner that the conference itself was conducted.02br
02br
00There was near unanimous consensus that lack of outside moderation of the conference contributed to its failure. Kelli Peterman of Eastern Europe attributes inconsistent attendance as the conference’s greatest failure. I would agree, but assert that was only one flaw with the conference. Although certain representatives were not even present during all days of the conference, what is equally vexing is that the speaking floor was dominated by only a small number of representatives, mostly Japan and Western Europe. Digressions rampantly controlled the direction of the debate; KD Simon of China welcomed the idea of an unbiased moderator being present, her contention was primarily based on the irrelevant attacks directed at her country. I would agree, but also assert that a more procedural distribution of speaking privileges would be necessary to both promote a civil atmosphere but also ensure that all solutions have a chance to be discussed. Limiting the time that one was allowed to speak and banning all interruptions and digressions would have contributed much towards a civil atmosphere, and an efficient use of time. Ms. Heh of the United States goes as far as to institute participation grade penalties and mandatory survey style worksheet assignments to regulate the conference, but I would say that such measures borderline excessive regulation. Although individually none of these changes exist as solutions in themselves, they would contribute greatly to the formulation of a viable solution and to overall consensus.02br
02br
00The ideal solution to the climate conference would first involve revamping the structure of the debate so that speaking privileges are more moderated. This could be accomplished by imposing time limits on speakers and deferring interruptions and questions until a speaker is finished. The presence of a moderator will also help minimize inappropriate comments. In the next conference, the role of technology should be specifically defined. It should be determined that either the goal of technology would be to replace carbon-emitting fossil fuels or merely to aid in emissions reductions, and thus would have given tech based solutions more focus and understandability. Finally, the industrialized nations should make more of an effort to compromise on the solution to climate change with the developing nations. Once the nations get to the point that they are making compromises for the other nations, it will be possible to reach a consensus.0-