Climate change and politics: a real shift or status quo?

Résumé du document

We will try to analyze the responses from the political field against climate change and the overall sustainable development. Climate change means significant change in the average weather, which causes a lot of perturbations on the natural system.

The French president, Jacques Chirac, in a World Summit, asserted that the intention of sustainable development was a fundamental advancement and people should work towards its progress, respecting the precautionary principle and by incorporating it in daily life.

However, climate change remains low on the list of a lot of countries' policies. One of greatest challenge facing politicians is curbing greenhouse gas emissions (GGE), and for that they have to set up concrete measures which are incompatible with their growth perspectives. But is there a scenario, according to which the government explain their wishes to develop sustainability, but do not actually want to change the truth? Is there a real dynamic among these politicians who adapt their policies to the needs of the planet?


The climate change, a concern shared by the politicians around the world:

The national actions
The example of France:
The French ministry of the environment gives a lot of importance to sustainable development.

For instance, instigated by the President of France, Nicolas Sarkozy, the Grenelle Environment is an open multi-party debate in France that brings together representatives of national and local government organizations on an equal footing, with the goal of unifying a position on a specific theme with a decisive step towards a sustainable development model.

What is sustainable development? By the definition of the Norwegian Prime minister, Gro Harlem Brintland, the sustainable development is a development which fits with today's needs without jeopardizing the capacity of future generations to satisfy their own needs.

As the former French President, Chirac said, sustainable development requires a shift in the behaviors of each of us (citizens, firms, local and national governments), concerning the effects of the climate change (social inequalities, industrial risks, loss of biodiversity, and so on). The aim of the politics is to conciliate the necessity of economic and social advancement, without destabilizing the natural equilibrium of the planet.

The French ministry tries to combine the economic growth with the protection of the environment and social changes.

One of the decisive action which concerns the administration is the eco responsibility of the administration. This implies several responsibilities. First, they have an environmental responsibility, in order to preserve the environment. Second, they have a social and economic one, so that, the state realizes some budgetary economies.

Extraits

[...] The north has so a climatic debt to the south (alternatives sud). And if we not implement concrete measures, there would be more harshness, lack of water, ecosystem. Moreover, the consciousness about environment issue was really late. The scientist began to warn from 1950. But the first conference, which recognizes the importance of the issue, took place in 1979. But it is just in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro that a conference about the development and the environment has been realized. [...]

[...] For instance, the Kyoto protocol, a great step for humanity, has a long way to prove its efficiency. Its implementation remains uncompleted. Many countries refuse to ratify it, or committed themselves to ridiculous restrictions, which won't have any effects. On the opposite, Climate change determines a lot the tendency of our politics. Until this paradox would be solve, there are no concrete solution to this challenge of climate change. Bibliographie Rubens Born, Régimes internationaux et politiques de changements climatiques, in Alternatives Sud Dahan Amy, Changement climatique global. [...]

[...] That is to say, it is not possible to realize that aim without implementing serious restriction to GGE. And one of the question raised by these restrictions is how can we share the responsibility. Who will endure the more? In, the convention some tried to pretend that developing countries are emitting more Greenhouse gas. In fact, we should bear in mind that the western and developed countries are responsible of the greenhouse gas emissions between 1950-1990, which cause the current and the coming natural disasters. [...]

[...] The case of other nations, California. One may point the example of the Californie, where a certain environmental conscience is awaking. State of California has officially gone on trial against the federal state of the US on January 2007. Indeed the federal state has prevented California of implementing a bill which commended the reduction of the greenhouse gas emissions of the automobiles. It is the illustration of the lack of wish from the states. B The international step toward the ecology and global action The Kyoto protocol We cannot mention the international policies about climate change, without the Kyoto protocol. [...]

[...] As Nordhaus says “Those who would put little concern for the problem of the future (regardless as how living standards develop) would similarly show little concern for the problem of climate change”. One may not neglect the impact of the GIEC'work , for the UN, which make aware the international community. But the Stern review has revolutionized the environmental policies in the sense that in the second part it develops the policies. B What kind of environmental policies should be implemented? Case of France France should drastically reduce its gas emissions. France can act without waiting for the international coordination, as Henri Prévot asserted in an article[3]. [...]