Should countries move quickly to phase out their fossil fuel production or opt for a more gradual “phase-down”? Will wealthy governments like the U.S. cough up tens of billions of dollars for poorer nations’ climate damage — and should China pay too?
When more than 70,000 people from nearly 200 countries descend on Dubai starting next week to negotiate over the fate of the planet, the talks will become the scene for a host of competing national agendas.
The annual U.N. climate summits have drawn criticism for having grown unwieldy since they started in 1995, thronging with corporate lobbyists and marked more by non-binding pledges and squabbles over grammar than their ability to deliver change. But they have a real-world impact, sending signals to markets about governments’ coming policies and reflecting real-world trends. And supporters are quick to point out that they remain the one forum where everyone — from the world’s richest countries to its smallest and most marginal — has a say.