RSS del sitio de los Acreedores de la deuda Ecológica http://www.ecologicaldebt.org Wed, 10 Mar 2010 16:37:06 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.2 http://www.ecologicaldebt.org/images/M_images/rss.png http://www.ecologicaldebt.org RSS del sitio de los Acreedores de la deuda Ecológica http://www.ecologicaldebt.org/News/SPAIN-Support-for-the-Who-owes-whom-campaign-Soutien-pour-la-campagne-Qui-doit-a-qui.html Dear all, As some of you might know Spanish parliament is discussing this days two new bills that will regulate two new public funds for development finance (FONPRODE) and export support (FIEM), respectively, that will become debt creating mechanisms. At the campaign's webpage (http://www.quiendebeaquien.org/spip.php?article1671) you’ll find information and the “Who owes whom?” demands in relation to this two new bills, in Spanish (http://www.quiendebeaquien.org/IMG/pdf_es_argumentario_QDQ.pdf), French (http://www.quiendebeaquien.org/IMG/pdf_fr_argumentario_QDQ.pdf)and English (http://www.quiendebeaquien.org/IMG/pdf_eng_argumentario_QDQ.pdf). Some international networks and organizations have already sent us their support by endorsing our demands. If you wish to do so, please write to page internet de la campagne (http://www.quiendebeaquien.org/spip.php?article1671)ci-joints des informations ainsi que les demandes de la campagne “Qui doit à qui? (¿Quien debe a quien?) concernant ces propositions de loi, en français (http://www.quiendebeaquien.org/IMG/pdf_fr_argumentario_QDQ.pdf), espagnol (http://www.quiendebeaquien.org/IMG/pdf_es_argumentario_QDQ.pdf)et anglais (http://www.quiendebeaquien.org/IMG/pdf_eng_argumentario_QDQ.pdf). Plusieurs réseaux et organisations internationales ont déjà manifesté leur soutien à travers leur adhésion à nos demandes. Si vous souhaitez nous soutenir, il vous suffit de nous écrire à l'adresse suivante: quiendebeaquien.estatal@gmail.com La période pendant laquelle il sera possible de réaliser des amendements à ces propositions de loi, prendra fin dans quelques semaines. Dès lors, un processus de discussion débutera entre les partis politiques. C'est donc maintenant qu'il faut faire parvenir nos demandes aux parlementaires. À cet effet, nous avons préparé une lettre afin qu'elle soit envoyée aux députés/ées (dans les commissions de coopération et commerce). Vous pouvez participez à cette action en envoyant cette lettre à nos parlementaires, depuis la page internet de la campagne: http://www.quiendebeaquien.org/spip.php?article1718. Pour plus d'informations sur les lois, veuillez vous diriger vers notre site internet: http://www.quiendebeaquien.org/spip.php?article1653 ou nous contacter à l'adresse suivante: quiendebeaquien.estatal@gmail.com. Merci de diffuser cette information à tous ceux et toutes celles que vous penser pouvoir être intéressés, et merci encore pour votre soutien. Salutations, “¿Quién debe a quién?” www.quiendebeaquien.org Thu, 18 Feb 2010 16:35:58 +0100 http://www.ecologicaldebt.org/News/Copenhagen-Seattle-Grows-Up-Naomi-Klein.html Copenhagen: Seattle Grows Up By Naomi Klein, The Nation, November 12, 2009 The other day I received a pre-publication copy of The Battle of the Story of the Battle of Seattle, by David Solnit and Rebecca Solnit. It’s set to come out ten years after a historic coalition of activists shut down the World Trade Organization summit in Seattle, the spark that ignited a global anticorporate movement. The book is a fascinating account of what really happened in Seattle, but when I spoke to David Solnit, the direct-action guru who helped engineer the shutdown, I found him less interested in reminiscing about 1999 than in talking about the upcoming United Nations climate change summit in Copenhagen and the climate justice actions he is helping to organize across the United States on November 30. This is definitely a Seattle-type moment,” Solnit told me. “People are ready to throw down. There is certainly a Seattle quality to the Copenhagen mobilization: the huge range of groups that will be there; the diverse tactics that will be on display; and the developing-country governments ready to bring activist demands into the summit. But Copenhagen is not merely a Seattle do-over. It feels, instead, as though the progressive tectonic plates are shifting, creating a movement that builds on the strengths of an earlier era but also learns from its mistakes. The big criticism of the movement the media insisted on calling anti-globalization was always that it had a laundry list of grievances and few concrete alternatives. The movement converging on Copenhagen, in contrast, is about a single issue—climate change—but it weaves a coherent narrative about its cause, and its cures, that incorporates virtually every issue on the planet. In this narrative, our climate is changing not simply because of particular polluting practices but because of the underlying logic of capitalism, which values short-term profit and perpetual growth above all else. Our governments would have us believe that the same logic can now be harnessed to solve the climate crisis—by creating a tradable commodity called carbon and by transforming forests and farmland into sinks that will supposedly offset our runaway emissions. Climate-justice activists in Copenhagen will argue that, far from solving the climate crisis, carbon-trading represents an unprecedented privatization of the atmosphere, and that offsets and sinks threaten to become a resource grab of colonial proportions. Not only will these market-based solutions fail to solve the climate crisis, but this failure will dramatically deepen poverty and inequality, because the poorest and most vulnerable people are the primary victims of climate change—as well as the primary guinea pigs for these emissions-trading schemes. But activists in Copenhagen won’t simply say no to all this. They will aggressively advance solutions that simultaneously reduce emissions and narrow inequality. Unlike at previous summits, where alternatives seemed like an afterthought, in Copenhagen the alternatives will take center stage. For instance, the direct-action coalition Climate Justice Action has called on activists to storm the conference center on December 16. Many will do this as part of the bike bloc, riding together on an as yet unrevealed “irresistible new machine of resistance” made up of hundreds of old bicycles. The goal of the action is not to shut down the summit, Seattle-style, but to open it up, transforming it into a space to talk about our agenda, an agenda from below, an agenda of climate justice, of real solutions against their false ones…. This day will be ours. Some of the solutions on offer from the activist camp are the same ones the global justice movement has been championing for years: local, sustainable agriculture; smaller, decentralized power projects; respect for indigenous land rights; leaving fossil fuels in the ground; loosening protections on green technology; and paying for these transformations by taxing financial transactions and canceling foreign debts. Some solutions are new, like the mounting demand that rich countries pay “climate debt” reparations to the poor. These are tall orders, but we have all just seen the kind of resources our governments can marshal when it comes to saving the elites. As one pre-Copenhagen slogan puts it: If the climate were a bank, it would have been saved —not abandoned to the brutality of the market. In addition to the coherent narrative and the focus on alternatives, there are plenty of other changes too: a more thoughtful approach to direct action, one that recognizes the urgency to do more than just talk but is determined not to play into the tired scripts of cops-versus-protesters. Our action is one of civil disobedience, say the organizers of the December 16 action. We will overcome any physical barriers that stand in our way—but we will not respond with violence if the police to escalate the situation. (That said, there is no way the two week summit will not include a few running battles between cops and kids in black; this is Europe, after all.) A decade ago, in an op-ed in the New York Times published after Seattle was shut down, I wrote that a new movement advocating a radically different form of globalization just had its coming-out party. What will be the significance of Copenhagen? I put that question to John Jordan, whose prediction of what eventually happened in Seattle I quoted in my book No Logo. He replied: If Seattle was the movement of movements’ coming-out party, then maybe Copenhagen will be a celebration of our coming of age. He cautions, however, that growing up doesn’t mean playing it safe, eschewing civil disobedience in favor of staid meetings. I hope we have grown up to become much more disobedient, Jordan said, because life on this world of ours may well be terminated because of too many acts of obedience. Sat, 09 Jan 2010 19:24:02 +0100 http://www.ecologicaldebt.org/News/Canada-We-Accept-Concept-of-Climate-Debt.html Canada: We Accept Concept of Climate Debt Canada gives details of new Climate Debt Mechanism, announces details of pilot program in Africa. Ugandan delegation lauds proposal. Peter Jensen 14/12/2009 13:20 The Ugandan delegation to the COP-15 climate talks has been the first to react to Canada's announcement of ambitious new emissions-reduction targets and vigorous climate-debt reparations to African nations. The Ugandan delegation convened a press event shortly after the surprise Canadian announcement, in a breakthrough moment for a summit marked until now largely by gridlock. Delegates, NGO representatives and members of the press crowded the room to listen to the impromptu address, although delegates from the United States, the UK and China were largely absent. This is the day that will define our century, said Margaret Matembe, MP and member of the Climate Committee of Uganda. Today, we no longer have to wait for a COP20 or COP100 before the voices of our children are heard. In a press release distributed this afternoon, Canadian environment minister Jim Prentice repeated calls to other developed nations to follow Canada’s lead. The threat to world stability from climate change is too important for short-sighted negotiating postures, said Prentice. The key question as negotiations enter their final week in Copenhagen is to what extent other countries of the developing world will take Canada’s lead. The outcome and efficacy of any final agreement largely depends on the answer to this question. Fri, 01 Jan 2010 12:32:51 +0100 http://www.ecologicaldebt.org/News/CLIMATE-DEBT-FAQ-Sent-by-Elizabeth-Peredo-BOLIVIA.html Sent by Elizabeth Peredo, BOLIVIA “CLIMATE-DEBT” FAQ 1. Is climate-debt just an NGO/activist idea? No. The concept of climate-debt has been submitted to the Climate Negotiations by over fifty countries including Bolivia, Bhutan, Malaysia, Micronesia, Sri Lanka, Paraguay, Venezuela and the Group of Least Developed countries, representing 49 of the world's poorest and most vulnerable countries. You can read Bolivia’s submission on the concept here: http://climate-debt.org/wpcontent/ uploads/2009/11/Bolivia-Climate-Debt-Proposal.pdf You can read Bolivia’s proposed amendment to the Kyoto Protocol that incorporates the ‘emissions debt’ concept here: http://climate-debt.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Bolivia-Kyoto-Protocol- Amendment1.pdf Civil society is supporting these countries in calling for a just solution to climate change. 2. Is climate-debt more than compensation for damages from climate change? Yes. The climate-debt concept incorporates two distinct elements: Adaptation debt – which represents the compensation owed to the poor for the damages of climate change they have not caused. Emissions debt – which is compensation owed for their fair share of the atmospheric space they cannot use if we are stop catastrophic climate change. 3. What is meant by fair share of the 'atmospheric space’? Most discussion of emission reductions focuses on percentage cuts (eg. 85% by 2050 etc.) However what matters is the total amount of tonnes of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (measured as: GtCO2). To prevent catastrophic climate change, and stabilize the atmosphere at 350 ppm total emissions must be limited to around 1660 GtCO2 between the industrial revolution and 2050. We've already used most of this up. Only 750 GtCO2 remains between the years 2000 and 2050. These limits on emissions are referred to as the ‘global carbon budget' or the 'atmospheric space.' 4. How should this carbon budget be divided? The most equitable and logical way to divide it would be to allow each person on earth the same amount of atmospheric space, that is the same amount of GtCO2 emissions per year. In practice, this is not physically possible due to excessive historical emissions of the wealthy. As this is not possible the difference between what is fair and what is possible represents the rich world’s ‘emissions debt.’ 5. What about past emissions or ‘historical responsibility’? The world’s carbon budget – the total amount of CO2 we can emit ever - did not start in the year 2000 (as discussed above) so we also need to consider historical emissions. It is these emissions which have caused current climate change impacts and it is for these emissions/impacts that the rich owe an ‘adaptation debt.’ FOR MORE INFORMATION SEE: WWW.CLIMATE-DEBT.ORG People in the developed world, one fifth of the world’s population, have used three fifths of all the carbon budget/atmospheric space. Over-consuming the share of atmospheric space by a factor of three contributes to our ‘emissions debt.’ 6. How do we then quantify this ‘emissions debt’? Emission reductions from developed countries must reflect their historical responsibility for the causes of climate change and the needs of developing countries for adequate atmospheric space in future. Developed countries must repay developing countries in the atmospheric space required for their development by making emission reductions as deep as technically possible. These reductions would be called its ‘domestic commitment’. The more they repay now; the less they repay later. To the extent it is not technically possible to repay the full measure of debt in terms of atmospheric space, some part of may need to be repaid by developed countries in the form of financing and technology - this extra part would add up to the country’s ‘total commitment’. 7. What about adaptation debt? Those who are harmed by climate change, but who did little if anything to cause it, should be compensated for the damage they suffer. The total cost of this damage is difficult to estimate but in principle, financing and compensation should cover: 1) avoidance costs; 2) actual costs; and 3) opportunity costs. Recent estimates put future climate-related costs and damages into the trillions. We pay trillions to save our banks and build weapons. Surely we can find it to stabilize the Earth's life support system? 8. How does this help solve climate change? This helps solves climate change by using science to determine the perimeters – i.e. the carbon budget/atmospheric space of a global agreement. Once the perimeters are set it uses equity to determine the best path forward making sure everyone can agree. Those countries that have over-consumed their atmospheric space (and got rich doing so) use that wealth to convert to a low-carbon economy. They will not be able to make all the cuts that science requires at home – we are still too dependent on fossil fuels – so they enable developing countries to avoid following the same polluting development pathway they did, through a green ‘Marshall Plan’ to ensure that no new countries adopt the wealthy’s over-consuming and unsustainable lifestyle. 9. What needs to happen at Copenhagen? To honour its climate debts to the poor the developed world needs to: a) Commit to meet its adaptation debt by meeting the real costs of climate change impacts; b) Commit to an amendment to the Kyoto Protocol that recognizes a domestic target and a total target for each developed country that will put the world on a path to live within our carbonbudget. 10. What can you do? Visit www.climate-debt.org for more information. Get in touch with your Government to support climate-debt proposals at Copenhagen. Support an NGO that has signed on to the campaign for the re-payment of climate-debts. Fri, 01 Jan 2010 12:18:31 +0100 http://www.ecologicaldebt.org/Carbon-and-Climate-Change-Debt/RECOGNITION-AND-INTEGRAL-REPARATION-OF-THE-ECOLOGICAL-DEBT-DUE-TO-CLIMATE-CHANGE.html OPEN LETTER INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT FOR THE RECOGNITION AND INTEGRAL REPARATION OF THE ECOLOGICAL DEBT DUE TO CLIMATE CHANGE WITHIN THE AGREEMENTS REACHED IN COPENHAGEN The Southern People´s Ecological Debt Creditors Alliance supports the demand of Bolivia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Venezuela, Honduras, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Dominican Republic, Panama, Guatemala, Cuba, Belize, Dominica, St. Vincent The Grenadines, Antigua and Barbados, Sri Lanka and Malaysia, for the RECOGNITION AND INTEGRAL REPARATION OF THE ECOLOGICAL DEBT DUE TO CLIMATE CHANGE THAT IS OWED TO COUNTRIES IN THE GLOBAL SOUTH BY COUNTRIES IN THE GLOBAL NORTH, within international agreements of the 15th United Nations Framework Conference on Climate Change in Copenhagen, Denmark (COP15). Download document 79.31 Kb Wed, 09 Dec 2009 06:29:46 +0100