Copenhagen Summit (2009)

Copenhagen Summit (2009)
Name	Copenhagen Summit (2009)
Date	December 7–18, 2009
Venue	Bella Center
Location	Copenhagen, Denmark
Participants	Heads of state and government, negotiators, observers

Copenhagen Summit (2009) was a major international climate meeting held at the Bella Center in Copenhagen, Denmark from December 7 to 18, 2009, convening delegates from more than 190 parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change process. The summit brought together representatives from the United States of America, the People's Republic of China, the Republic of India, the European Union, the Russian Federation, and other nations to attempt to forge a successor to the Kyoto Protocol. High-profile attendees included leaders from the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Brazil, South Africa, Japan, and international figures from the United Nations and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Background

Negotiations were conducted under the auspices of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change following preparatory meetings such as the Bali Conference and the Poznań Conference. Parties arrived amid increasing scientific urgency signaled by assessments from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and policy momentum from fora including the G8 and the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate. The summit aimed to define post-2012 commitments after the Kyoto Protocol first commitment period, address mitigation pledges from the United States of America and the European Union, and reconcile positions of major emitters such as the People's Republic of China and the Federative Republic of Brazil.

Negotiations and Key Proposals

Negotiations featured blocs and leaders advancing divergent proposals: the European Union promoted legally binding economy-wide targets; the United States of America presented legislative-style domestic pledges; the People's Republic of China and the Republic of India emphasized differentiated responsibilities; the Federative Republic of Brazil and the Republic of South Africa advocated for finance and adaptation support to developing parties; and small island states and the Alliance of Small Island States pressed for ambitious emissions reductions and loss-and-damage mechanisms. Key proposals included emissions targets, binding versus voluntary commitments, market mechanisms inspired by the Clean Development Mechanism, and finance packages resembling those proposed by the World Bank and the Global Environment Facility. Negotiators from Denmark and the United Nations attempted to bridge gaps through high-level consultations involving delegations from the Russian Federation, Japan, Canada, the Kingdom of Norway, and the Kingdom of Sweden.

Outcomes and Copenhagen Accord

The summit concluded with political negotiations among heads of state that yielded the non-binding Copenhagen Accord, a document recognized but not formally adopted by consensus under the rules of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change plenary. The Copenhagen Accord included voluntary emissions pledges submitted by major emitters such as the United States of America, the People's Republic of China, the European Union, and the Republic of India, a collective goal to limit temperature increase to below 2 °C endorsed by parties and supported by scientific assessments from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and commitments to establish a fast-start finance package pledging tens of billions of dollars in support from developed parties including the United States of America and members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development to developing parties such as the People's Republic of China, the Republic of India, and countries represented by the G77 and China.

Reactions and International Responses

Reactions varied widely across capitals and international institutions: the European Union and leaders of the United Kingdom and France expressed disappointment at the non-binding nature; the United States of America administration framed the outcome as a step forward alongside domestic legislative efforts; the People's Republic of China and the Federative Republic of Brazil highlighted the accord's finance and technology transfer language; and small island states criticized perceived inadequacy relative to pleas from the Alliance of Small Island States and the Least Developed Countries Group. International organizations including the United Nations, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund engaged in follow-up discussions on mobilizing climate finance and implementing mechanisms referenced in the accord.

Implementation and Follow-up Actions

Following the summit, parties submitted mitigation pledges to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change secretariat, and developed-country parties pledged fast-start finance delivered through channels involving the World Bank, bilateral arrangements, and multilateral funds such as the Global Environment Facility. The Copenhagen Accord's language influenced subsequent negotiations culminating in the Durban Conference and the eventual Paris Agreement, as parties continued work on measurement, reporting, and verification frameworks, carbon markets, and adaptation finance. Institutional follow-up included enhanced technical work by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and further engagement by the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate to operationalize technology transfer and capacity-building initiatives.

Criticism and Controversies

Critics pointed to procedural controversies surrounding recognition of the Copenhagen Accord without consensus in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change plenary and to leaked communications implicating the host Danish Government and other delegations in backchannel negotiations. Environmental advocacy groups and delegations from the Alliance of Small Island States and the Least Developed Countries Group criticized the accord’s voluntary pledges as insufficient compared with scientific guidance from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the mitigation pathways discussed in the Bali Action Plan. Analysts from think tanks and academic institutions compared the summit’s outcomes unfavorably to legally binding frameworks such as the Kyoto Protocol and debated the implications for subsequent diplomacy at fora including the Cancún Conference and the Durban Conference.

Category:International climate change conferences