What's with the Climate?

Voices of a Subcontinent grappling with Climate Change


Leave a comment

Which way will we walk?

Source: DTMMS

 A Story from Mother’s Tales and Imaginary Hot Air Balloons

by Nimesh Ved, Tobias Dorr, Daniela Boos

 
During school days, of which I have endearing memories, my mother used to teach me mathematics during evenings. This primarily dealt with basics of addition, subtraction, multiplication and division. This ‘rough-work’ as it was then referred to, used to take place, on most occasions, on envelopes. Reverse of envelopes that had brought in letters, news-papers and magazines; after scraping them open with foot-rulers. White and colourful, large and small, it used to be fun to tear and get them ready for use.

Mother’s point was (and still is), to use a thing – big or small, expensive or otherwise – optimally and explore alternate use after the article was rendered unfit for its primary usage. Added to this was the dictum of only buying items that one needed.

These values I somehow imbibed. Years later when I was part of teams in Saiha (Mizoram) and Baghmara (Meghalaya), we used to regularly get Sanctuary Asia, Down to Earth, Seminar India and other engrossing reading companions to these endearing places. Envelopes that brought in these were put to use as ‘sorters’ in the office files.

Mother’s reasoning, then, was guided more from the point of saving money (a scarce resource itself!) than others. This could be, without much difficulty, today shrugged off as a miserly approach to life. But is not this facet the same as espousing a lifestyle that is low on ecological foot-print and climate friendly?

Evidence of climate change and its impact can be already observed today in daily life, at a time when we are still able to make a change. Most farmers in multiple states across the country observe changes in rainfall patterns, a decrease in duration of the winter season, uncertainty of arrival of seasons and other issues that impact farming. They may have never heard of terms like climate change or global warming, but they understand the associated phenomena well.

For instance, a researcher working on the impacts of climate change on agriculture shared that farmers lamented that their festivals have lost their bearings during recent years due to changes in climate. These changes lead to alteration in cultivation cycles and most of their festivals revolved around these cultivation cycles. It is heartening, she said, that farmers, in different regions, have designed and implemented strategies to adapt to climate change. Many farmers in Odisha, in areas affected by soil salinity owing to the Super Cyclone in 1999, had switched from paddy to crab cultivation and betel leaf plantation. Apple cultivators of Himachal Pradesh had shifted to higher altitudes owing to the rise in temperatures; apple requires a cooler climate for a certain period.

After dwelling in my childhood memories and recognizing the challenges of climate change the earth faces these days, I moved to imagining the world 50 years down the line. How would India look like some time in 2065? Where and how would people live? I closed my eyes and I flew over the country in an imaginary hot air balloon – and I was surprised: Continue reading

Advertisements


1 Comment

Conspiracy Theories, Linguistic Politics & Tech Inefficiency Hijacked Day 3 @Climate Talks

Dispatches from COP 20, Lima.

Another day passed at COP 20 Lima, is the best expression to inform the readers about what happened on the last day (3rd December). Science is recommending urgent action, but there seems to be no urgency in the talks. The negotiations are taking place in English, better say “English with overflowing jargons” which is not the first language of most of the delegates present. As a result clarity is sought on almost every phrase mentioned in the text. All this is justified and helps in democratizing the process, but it is a painfully slow process and progress is being made at snail’s pace. I’m following the discussion on the draft decision text of “Advancing the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action (ADP)”. Last day in the session dedicated to ADP, countries had cat fights in very diplomatic still unkind language.

To fasten the conversation on ADP, Co-chair of the session, Kishan Kumar Singh, proposed to start with general reflection of countries that are called parties on draft text. Their thoughts in the form of interventions can be gathered at the same time through email and placed on website for everyone to access. The chair with the support of secretariat can later incorporate those inputs, synthesize and place it on wider screen for longer detailed discussions. This was considered undemocratic by many countries. Nigerian delegate with “newest version of Apple Laptop” on his table registered his protest against the proposition in high pitch, by saying that he and others are not very tech-friendly, and will prefer the text on the bigger screen to begin with. To me, that act seem to be nothing more than a delaying tactic as they can see the draft text on their laptop screen and avail the interventions  from the UNFCCC website, and reserve and share their thoughts by notifying the chair. Too much to ask for from those who own Mac devises?!

South African delegate hinted that the inability to display on the text on screen is a conspiracy of developed countries to impose their agenda, delegation from Argentina also voiced similar concerns. Developed countries which include Switzerland, United States suggested toeing the line of the chair and moving further. Frustrated with the slow progress chair- Kishan spoke in harsh and sarcastic terms, and said tomorrow the session will begin with the text displayed on screen- “we will go line by line, word by word, comma by comma, and full stop by full stop”. On which South African delegated reacted with humor and wit, saying- “Mr. Chair, are you threatening by saying-‘line by line, word by word, comma by comma, full stop by full stop’”. Tuvalu whose existence is being threatened by climate change chose to facilitate the conversation. Tuvalu’s intervention was to constitute “Friends of chair” to define the procedures. Kishan still angry and frustrated, went on to question whether there are any friends left in the room? Continue reading


1 Comment

India’s expectation from UNFCCC COP 20

COP 20, Lima is very important and will prepare roadmap for a potential agreement in Paris, 2015. This was reiterated by Ravi Shankar Prasad lead negotiator from India, in an informal conversation with Indian Youth Delegation. Setting India’s expectation he said, India, like all other developing countries, wants to know what goes in “intended Nationally Determined Contributions” (iNDCs). Intended Nationally Determined Contributions is a mechanism put in place for voluntary commitments which parties can undertake for enhancing actions in pre-2020 period. Apart from mitigation measures like emission reduction, developing countries also want adaptation and capacity building strategies in the iNDCs. For iNDCs to be effective adequate financial resources need to be mobilized. These two are critical issues which hopefully will be looked into in the coming days and later months. India on its part is having internal evaluation for iNDCs, the report will be out this month. Between March- June, 2015 formal submission of Indian iNDC will be made to UNFCCC Secretariat.

Indian Youth Delegation with Indian NegotiatorAccording to Mr. Prasad US- China climate deal is a minor announcement. They have agreed only on two issues i.e. China peaking its green house gas emissions by 2030 and US reducing its emission by 26-28% below 2005 levels by 2025. It’s not as amazing an announcement, but is a good starting point. He denied the fact that it will have major implications on India and also rejected the suggestion that India is going to announce its Green House Gas peaking anytime soon.

Apart from iNDCs and adequate resource mobilization, he also reflected on technology mechanism. According to him, India is pushing for relaxation of global Intellectual Patent Rights Norms so as to access efficient technologies. Conducive global IPR regime will provide enabling environment for developing countries to move towards greener economy.

Rest as they say, the charm of negotiator is determined by the way he hides his thoughts and not the revelation of it. It’s just the first day, and nothing is final till the deal is sealed.

With inputs from N. S. Prasad.


Leave a comment

Strengthen CTCN, Encourage Energy Efficiency & Renewables, Involve Communities

Indian Youth Climate Network Policy Brief on Technology Transfer under UNFCCC

Background & Current Status:The world economy at large is still dependent on carbon intensive sources of energy. There are significant steps undertaken by many developed countries to move from carbon intensive sources to renewable sources. But there is lot left to do. The development trajectory followed the west after the industrial revolution can no longer be a safe pathway for developing countries to move on. Poverty, low access to financial services and political instability have kept many developing countries in the fossil fuel based carbon trap. Thisformed the backdrop for the adoption of Article 4.5 in the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) that refers to commitment on the issue of transfer technology to help poor countries leapfrog to a less carbon intensive future. The article states

“The developed country Parties and other developed Parties included in Annex II shall take all practicable steps to promote, facilitate and finance, as appropriate, the transfer of, or access to, environmentally sound technologies and knowhow to other Parties, particularly developing country Parties, to enable them to implement the provisions of the Convention. In this process, the developed country Parties shall support the development and enhancement of endogenous capacities and technologies of developing country Parties. Other Parties and organizations in a position to do so may also assist in facilitating the transfer of such technologies.”

Technology Transfer in UNFCCC has been one of the most contested issues as it involves added financial costs for developed countries to help developing countries leapfrog. There are additional concerns over “Intellectual Property Rights” that are currently under the rubric of “World Trade Organization” and not the UNFCCC that impede work under article 4.5. Some of these obstacles were addressed in COP 7 in Marrakesh, resulting in an accord, which had Technology needs assessment, technology information, enabling environments and capacity building as its four pillars.  These are described below –

Technology needs assessment: “Technology Needs Assessments (TNAs) are a set of country-driven activities that identify and determine the mitigation and adaptation technology priorities of Parties other than developed country Parties, and other developed Parties not included in Annex II, particularly developing country Parties.”

Technology information: “The technology information component of the framework defines the means, including hardware, software and networking, to facilitate the flow of information between the different stakeholders to enhance the development and transfer of environmentally sound technologies.”

Enabling environments: “This component of the framework focuses on government actions, such as fair trade policies, removal of technical, legal and administrative barriers to technology transfer, sound economic policy, regulatory frameworks and transparency, all of which create an environment conducive to private and public sector technology transfer.”

Capacity Building: The capacity building component is a process which seeks to build, develop, strengthen, enhance and improve existing scientific and technical skills, capabilities and institutions in Parties other than developed country Parties, and other developed Parties not included in Annex II, particularly developing country Parties, to enable them to assess, adapt, manage and develop environmentally sound technologies.”

These components were expanded in the Cancun Agreement in COP 16 and termed Technology Mechanism, “fostering public-private partnerships; promoting innovation; catalyzing the use of technology road maps or action plans; responding to developing country party requests on matters related to technology transfer; and facilitating joint R&D activities.”

The Technology mechanism consists of Technology Executive Committee (TEC) and Climate Technology Center and Network (CTCN).  The Technology executive committee that worked on the technology mechanism, formulated a report based on the needs of 31 parties who submitted their application including Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Bhutan from South Asia. In order to compile the report, the existing frameworks of the parties were studied, sectors were prioritized for adaptation and mitigation and barriers were identified. Following this recommendations for technology action plans were prepared and submitted for consideration to the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice in 2013. This has been a good starting point with more parties sending their requests to become the beneficiaries of the technology mechanism in subsequent months.

Last year in Warsaw, COP 19, parties finalized the modalities of Climate Technology Center & Network and its advisory board resulting in streamlining of submissions from National Designated Entities on the issue.

The Road Ahead

Mandate to TEC to provide guidance on CTCN priorities:  The work of CTCN is seen as a developing country driven process, but fact remains that there is no adequate mechanism by which developing countries can voice their collective requests.  The TM needs to adopt and request prioritization procedures that are based on the ADP’s understanding of equity, and how it is measured, to create an “equitable distribution” of the resources of the CTCN.

Long term funding for TEC and CTCN: Long term financing of technologies is must for making Technology Mechanism work. There have been contributions from Indonesia, Netherlands, United States and others under Global Climate Finance that are most welcome. However,developed countries need to mobilize more resources to reach the specified targets. Voluntary commitments from developing countries for climate financing should be encouraged. Private funding can and should be mobilized as private enterprises have a large role to play in the TM. However, there is a note of caution with private funding. It will come with its own set of strings which may hamper the agenda of TEC & CTCN orienting it towards certain interests.Therefore, the core funding for the decision making part of the TM, the TEC and the Climate Technology Centre and its Advisory Board should be supported in the long term through public funding.

The framework of CTCN is sound but there has to be enhanced emphasis on including transfer of knowledge, technology and skills for energy efficiency and renewable energy. This will help developing countries to diversify their energy portfolio, thereby reducing their dependence on coal.  Many countries like India & China are already moving in that direction. Setting up CTCN at regional levels could then be the next step.

Application of Precautionary Principle: CTCN should also have a mandate to ensure that the socio-environment impact of all environmentally sound technologies is studied thoroughly. There are many technologies that may seem less carbon intensive but can have high ecological, economic and health costs. Funding to such technologies should be refrained.

Stakeholder identification and community participation in decision making on technology assessment and action plan should be made compulsory. The methodology for stakeholder identification and participants should be evolved and adapted to varying local conditions of countries. It is important to ensure the participation of youth, women, indigenous peoples and local communities and other marginalized groups as stakeholders in the process.  Inputs collected should be presented by the national designated entities while filing the request. Any opposition from the communities should also be recorded for consideration. Technology Transfer should be done in an inclusive way and the goals of poverty alleviation intertwined with it. More Green jobs for youth, skill building of the poor and marginalized groups on priority basis should be encouraged.

Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) norms should be revisited for ensuring that past mistakes of funding “efficient but still carbon intensive technologies” are not repeated. For technology transfer non-market based approaches should also be identified, which currently is considered as anti-thesis of innovation in technology.

Stronger engagement with other conventions and agreements: International and other national Patent Rights norms of developed countries can be a hurdle and obstacle in technology transfer. Parties should be encouraged to remove those barriers for accessing the resources. If possible, creating a common pool of technologies and best practices should be evolved for the benefit of the commons.

Youth has an important role to play. With their energies and risk taking abilities they can take charge of innovating and adapting shared technologies, marketing them at affordable prices thereby creating more green jobs and better growth model.

Prepared by Kabir Arora after consultation with Indian Youth Climate Network members.


Leave a comment

Review of implementation biodiversity action plans went missing, definitions hijacked the agenda of CBD COP

CoP 12 Working Group II

CoP 12 Working Group II

Dispatches from Pyeong Chang, S. Korea

The weather in Pyeong Chang (S. Korea) is very cold. The participants of Conference of Parties (COP) – 12 with their multiple agendas and contestations, counter statements are keeping the negotiation rooms very warm. The parties to convention are extremely thankful to Korean government for warm hospitality irrespective of the fact that everyone is freezing in plenary and working group tents. They are showing their deep gratitude by opening each and every statement they make (intervention as it is called in COP terminology), with ‘we show our gratitude to Korean Government for being a warm host’…blah, blah, blah. I’m sure the Korean government must be tired of listening to the same thing over again and again.  Ah! And then they thank the elected chair and keep reminding her that they will be very supportive.

Last day I was following the Working Group –II (Convention on Biological Diversity) where the first reading of decision draft text was undertaken with discussion on item number: 19 on the agenda of draft text i.e. Article 8 (J).

Article 8 (J) which deals with the traditional knowledge, innovation and practices of convention (on biological diversity) is one of the most contested pieces where agreement was reached over a period of time. Restating it in the archaic language of COP terminology- it has no Square Brackets.  “Article- (8) Each Contracting Party shall, as far as possible and as appropriate: (J) Subject to its national legislation, respect, preserve and maintain knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities embodying traditional lifestyles relevant for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity and promote their wider application with the approval and involvement of the holders of such knowledge, innovations and practices and encourage the equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the utilization of such knowledge, innovations and practices;

In addition to the first reading of draft text, the parties were also supposed to undertake the mid-term review of implementation of Article 8 (J) in their countries. While most countries from developing global south very nicely avoided the review and came up with recommendation of replacing the term ‘Indigenous and local communities’ to  a more ‘appropriate’ term coined by UN Permanent forum of Indigenous Issues  ‘Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities’.

For many of us it may not mean anything but for international environmental governance framework every word and term matters. There was visible divide on the issue. While most developing countries preferred the term given by UN forum, Canada raised the red flag. According to Canadian negotiator the change in terminology will open a new Pandora box which initiate more issues and make the discussion longer.

India while supporting the draft text on Article 8(J) actually asked for voluntary commitments according to the needs and local conditions of the country. Sujata Arora who is representing India (negotiator in Working Group II) shared the reason behind the statement and said that the voluntary commitments will give countries space to maneuver depending on the local conditions during implementation. The Article 8 (J) is about indigenous communities sadly, the agenda of representatives of indigenous groups who also give recommendations is dictated by the ones from Americas who are always present in big numbers. That was one of the others reasons of why India took this particular stand. Still Indian stand is questionable irrespective of the fact that one size will or may not fit all. Certain homogeneity in the guidelines for implementation of article will help in evolving monitoring programmes and better comparative studies.

Besides that according to her, India already has very strong provisions like Forest Rights Act which empowers indigenous communities to sustainably harvest the biodiversity produce. The National Biodiversity Authority through which access to the resources and traditional knowledge can be availed is another instrument which India has in place, to implement the given article. The domestic laws like those reiterate that commitments and road map of implementation should be voluntary as per her words.

When asked about the High Powered Committee constituted by Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change and their proposed amendments for most environmental laws in India, she declined to make any comment and said that she has no right to comment on domestic policies. I find it utterly strange as the domestic policies are going to be linked to international laws and conventions. India- for sure, will use the mentioned domestic instruments during the midterm review of implementation of Aichi Targets- especially in the conversation over Strategy Goal E: ‘Enhance implementation through participatory planning, knowledge management and capacity building’- Target 18 which includes Article 8 (J).

South Africa like India also has domestic legislation and wants the implementation to be voluntary as otherwise if a new language and changes in terminologies is undertaken then they have to change the norms at home, this makes the implementation more tedious.

The proceedings went on. And parties which include India, Brazil, Canada, Indonesia, Norway, New Zealand, Australia, Uganda and others were invited by the chair of the meeting to have a separate discussion to finalize whether the Convention on Biological Diversity will use ‘Indigenous and local communities’ or ‘Indigenous peoples and local communities’.

Further adding to the update, South African negotiator emphasized a lot on ‘resource mobilization’ for ‘capacity building’ which if I may take liberty to declare that- it is very cliché term- is in use in environmental governance framework from a long time. It is the most over-abused term under the ambit of which the failure to achieve agreed targets can be clubbed in.

Sadly we shall never have enough resources to implement the given goals, still the clock is clicking and something needs to be done. International environmental governance is driven by the spirit of volunteerism. The environmental governance mechanisms under UN & UNEP are toothless unlike the World Trade Organization agreements where countries can earn legal economic sanctions or boycott if they don’t implement the agreed framework in word and spirit. And that makes the feeble proceedings far more frustrating for those who want to bring change.

If not anything else after following the working groups, by the end of COP 12 I’ll be using a lot of jargons which will be un-understandable for the most around me. I’ll also accomplish the art of complicating the matters further with the spirit of volunteerism.


1 Comment

De-Mystification of Bio-D COP 12

Dispatches from Pyeong Chang, South Korea

Global Youth Delegation for COP12- Convention of Biological Diversity

Global Youth Delegation for COP12- Convention of Biological Diversity

From Earth Summit in Rio in 1992 three legally binding agreements emerged i.e. United Nations Framework on Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), Convention on Biological diversity (CBD), and United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD). UNFCCC is a well known and talked about agreement and framework. Annual event called Conference of Parties (COP) for the same is much awaited for. For the others we know very little, I here will delve on the processes of lesser known Convention on Biological diversity (CBD). Different countries, other constituencies like inter-governmental organizations, civil society groups, representatives of indigenous communities, youth have gathered in highly controversial for massive infrastructure construction in ecologically fragile zone still known very well venue for 2018 Winter Olympics- Pyeong Chang in South Korea. I’m there too and will be here till 18th October, 2014. With the help of Global Youth Biodiversity Network (GYBN) – a lot of us got financial support to attend the prestigious COP 12.

While the weather is very cold, everyone from official negotiators to civil society groups- young activists all seem to be very excited and warm. And it is quite impressive to see a balance of Global North and South especially in constituency of Youth which is very different from UNFCCC COPs. In Climate Change negotiations, there are more from Global North than South. The over-representation of North is absurd. At times many of the global north civil society groups have a tendency to hijack the agenda, while here in CBD the numbers are at par with each other.

At a very basic level the negotiations will include midterm review of Aichi Targets which countries have committed for the decade 2011-2020. We are in the October of 2014 and the performance against almost all vague targets is dismissal. Still there is hope. The optimism of achieving some desirable results by the end of 2020 was also reflected in the words of Malta Qwathekana, the CBD primary focal point from South Africa, during the interaction with the Global Youth Delegation. All the negotiations will be circling around provision of ‘adequate predictable resources’ for achieving the stated targets. That’s definitely not good news, as in past too- countries set ambitious targets for the decade 2001-2010 but failed to reach the desired outcomes because of ‘lack of adequate predictable resources’, hope is that we don’t miss another decade in the whirlpool of conflicts over resource mobilization.

During the present two weeks the Meeting of Parties (MOP-1) will begin for Nagoya Protocol focused on access and benefit sharing which was adopted in the year 2010. The Protocol will come in force this year and there will be wider discussion on it. Almost all countries have signed it, excluding three which includes United States of America.  Many suggest that the process for Nagoya Protocol was more efficient and smoother as United States was not a party to it.  There will be other aspects related to biological diversity which will also be looked into during the COP 12.

The high level meeting will start next week. Most important secretaries or environment ministers will be arriving at that time. While all this is going on, as one of the few Indians it makes me feel extremely sad and frustrated over the fact that India will and may play a spoil sport. The apathy of the new government on the issues of environment is very visible especially when the Indian leadership suggests ancient sciences as a mitigation strategy for climate change in United Nations General Assembly and picks up the same old lollypop of historical responsibility without realizing we have more to lose with the inaction. Most of the support mechanisms like Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights Act, 2006), National Forest laws, Environment Impact Assessment under Environment Protection Act and others which India has stated for national implementation to achieve targets have now an endangered future. The new government is pushing for amendments to resolve the concerns of industry and that will make environment, nature pay a heavy price.  While the world will be moving for greener future, we in India shall continue to follow the dirty model of so-called ‘development.’

Hoping for sanity to prevail! With the mixed feelings looking forward to the COP-12 on Convention of Biological Diversity which formally begins tomorrow.


Leave a comment

Agents of Change (IYCN) Helping Educate Students About Climate Change

by Manish Gautam*

Climate Change is a buzzword these days, although one can notice its absence in the English and other vernacular newspapers, education syllabuses and other general discourses, except in the scientific community in India (however due to its jargon language and closed room discussions it does not often grab the attention of the laymen). The question that might occur to anyone is what exactly is ‘this’ climate change and what we mean by climate change knowledge. It consists of definition of (human induced) climate change, the scientific findings supporting that the climate change occurring today is chiefly due to human activities, and it is important to take action timely otherwise the sustenance in this world would be difficult in near future. The main accused of this climate change are greenhouse gases that have been emitted mostly due to human activities (industries, agriculture, etc.), and the primary stress that every scientific study assessing the impact of climate change is to mitigate emission of these gases[1].

The UN summits and other global venues where climate change is being discussed, the developed and developing nations are often at the tug of war on who should be blamed for this 21st century scare. Montreal protocol, Kyoto protocol and other agreements, however, gave an optimistic picture that the future might be better; the agenda of economic growth being at the helm, lately, in developing countries such as India and China are rendering Climate Change issue as less important [2]. Despite the hesitation and seemingly inaction at the world stage, India, however, has keenly started its own set of programs to deal the Climate Change. It has already deployed a national action plan on Climate Change, and the (in)famous words also made their entry to the latest five year plan (12th FYP-Planning Commission). Some states also have followed suit and laid out state level action plans. The scientific communities, NGOs, and other citizen groups are also coming forward to set the action in the right course [3].

‘Agents of Change’, a flagship program of IYCN and into existence since 2008, is determined to disseminate knowledge and information on Climate Change and create awareness among the Indian youth about the issue. The Agents of Change have continuously made their presence at the past CoPs representing the Indian youth and appealing to the leaders of nation-states to adopt measures to curb the carbon emissions, and to combat the Climate Change problem [4].

On the onset of the next CoP in Lima, December 2014, the youth organizations worldwide once again are preparing themselves to mark their presence and let their voices heard. Indian youth are also not behind and they are, in the form of AoCs (IYCN) are doing their homework. The Climate Catalysts workshop, that took off in August 2014, and had its first workshop in Hyderabad city, has been empowering youth through these workshops. The two-day workshops have climate change science, global negotiations summary and policy reviews, interactive sessions with green entrepreneurs and sustainability practitioners, and group discussions among participants to understand the issue along with India’s role into climate change on its menu. The outcome so far – Hyderabad, Bangalore, Pune, Ahmedabad, Chandigarh – has been encouraging and the responses from the participating youth are making AoCs to achieve its goal of spreading knowledge on Climate Change.

While the ecological and environmental issues pertaining to India have been at the center of the discussions at the workshops, the youth have started to perceive the issue of Climate Change and to understand it as an imminent threat at national and regional level. The workshops are the groundwork for the Agents to present the youth’s opinion in the dialog of climate change at CoP. Amid the news of increasing levels of CO2 emissions, population growth, and action-inaction of the nation states to make the vulnerable future resilient, the information and knowledge can prove to be a powerful tool to fight for a livable, sustainable world.

*Manish Gautam is a researcher @Indian Institute for Human Settlements and member of Indian Youth Climate Network

1.https://unfccc.int/essential_background/the_science/items/6064.php

2.http://www.vox.com/2014/9/25/6843673/india-climate-change-stance-emissions-rise-30-years

3.http://www.c2es.org/international/key-country-policies/india/climate-plan-summary, http://envfor.nic.in/ccd-sapcc

  1. http://iycn.in/