Get Low Targets, Goals Dropped: Copenhagen Ends In Failure

Concerns over the exist; some of the key criticisms include: The itself is not legally binding. No decision was taken on whether to agree a legally binding successor or complement to the Kyoto Protocol.

The Copenhagen meeting was a disappointment, primarily because it failed to set the basic targets for reducing global annual emissions of greenhouse gases from now up to 2050, and did not secure commitments from countries to meet these targets collectively.

In late 2009, the Copenhagen Summit concluded with only a simple political statement affirming the need to limit the global average temperature increase to no more than 2°C above pre-industrial levels (1750). There was, however, no agreement on how to do this in practical terms.

One reason critics say the represents failure is its textual incoherence: It was written to be a legal instrument of the UNFCCC, but that's not how it's turned out. It is very important, in fact, to remember that the Copenhagen is not a legal instrument.

In particular, it failed to agree on limiting greenhouse gas emissions and the question of forming a global environmental agency was side-lined.

However, the agreement they reached stripped out specific reduction targets from the final text and ensured it was not legally binding. The limited final text and lack of wider consultation would produce sharp criticism from the Europeans, small island states, and climate activists.

Concerns over the exist; some of the key criticisms include: The itself is not legally binding. No decision was taken on whether to agree a legally binding successor or complement to the Kyoto Protocol. The sets no real targets to achieve in emissions reductions.

However, the agreement they reached stripped out specific reduction targets from the final text and ensured it was not legally binding. The limited final text and lack of wider consultation would produce sharp criticism from the Europeans, small island states, and climate activists.