New Articles
4) The Rule book agreed to in COP 24, is not ambitious enough to prevent the dangerous effects of global warming. Critically analyze.(250 words)
Topic: Conservation, environmental pollution and degradation, environmental impact assessment
4) The Rule book agreed to in COP 24, is not ambitious enough to prevent the dangerous effects of global warming. Critically analyze.(250 words)
Why this question
Nearly 200 countries have agreed to the rule book to the Paris agreement in the recently held COP 24 held at Kavotice recently. However the rule book has been criticised for being not enough to tackle the Climate change issue. It is therefore necessary to discuss its shortcomings as well as its positive implications.
Directive word
Critically analyze- here we have to examine methodically the structure or nature of the topic by separating it into component parts, and present them as a whole in a summary. based on our discussion we have to form a concluding opinion on the issue.
Key demand of the question.
The question wants us to delve deeper into the provisions and main points of the rule-book agreed to in COP 24. It wants to bring out the shortfalls and deficiencies of the rule-book and also bring out the positive implications/ points, if any. Based on our discussion we have to form an opinion on the issue in the form of a way-forward.
Structure of the answer
Introduction– write a few introductory lines about the COP 24 and the rulebook recently agreed to by the group of nearly 200 countries. E.g mention what is rulebook and its relation to the Paris agreement.
Body-
Discuss the shortcomings of the rulebook. E.g Fine-tuning of some of the technical aspects under sub-article 6.2 (concerned with cooperative approaches and internationally transferred mitigation outcomes or ITMOs), and sub-article 6.4 (Sustainable Development Mechanism or SDM) has been left for COP25 in 2019, and will be based on the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice’s (SBSTA’s) recommendations and guidance. Similarly, sub-article 6.8 (non-market approaches) has also been relegated to the SBSTA for guidance, which unlike the other sub-articles, largely lacks content; The ambitious options of levying an automatic or discounted cancellation on the transfer of emission reductions, as proposed by the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), have been removed etc.
Discuss the positive points. E.g While some rulebook elements still need to be fleshed out, it is a foundation for strengthening the Paris Agreement and could help facilitate U.S. re-entry into the Paris Agreement etc.
Conclusion- based on your discussion, form a fair and a balanced conclusion on the given issue.