Modeled climate negotiations give students a global perspective
Photo: Sofia Garcia-George
When I walked into the classroom, there were world flags on the walls and our professor was banging his gavel. Now is the time for us to simulate the UN climate change negotiations.
While our course, Environmental Policy and Governance, focuses on domestic environmental politics in the United States, we were studying global environmentalism that day.Our Professors, Professors of the Climate Institute Lisa Dellis one of Columbia University Delegation Attended the 27th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations (COP27) in Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt. The conference convenes global leaders to advance climate action. She designed this classroom activity to help us understand the global conversation on climate change taking place at COP27 and throughout.
Activities are simple. Professor Dale assigned us roles representing the United States, the European Union, China, India and some developing countries. Additionally, some of us hold special roles as climate activists, fossil fuel industry lobbyists and representatives of the Green Climate Fund. Each of us has two main goals. One is to serve the interests of our country or special interest groups, and the other is to jointly limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. Professor Dale asked us all to introduce ourselves, gave us 20 minutes to negotiate, and then tallied our emissions reductions to see if we had reached the 1.5C target. As we’ll all find out, the campaign turned out to be more complicated than we expected. It forces us to think globally.
Photo: Sofia Garcia-George
While we’d all like to see 1.5C come easily, we can’t just wave a magic wand. We have to represent our constituencies first, so 1.5 degrees Celsius becomes a more difficult target. Students representing the US, EU and China were quick to defend their countries’ dependence on fossil fuels. Students representing India and other developing countries questioned why developed countries are responsible for most of the world’s carbon emissions, and why they should reduce them. These developing countries also argue that as they pursue higher standards of living, they should be able to increase their carbon emissions. In addition, developing countries most affected by climate change seek financial compensation from high-emitting developed countries. Contributions to the United Nations Green Climate Fund help, but don’t quite solve the problem.
As the event progresses, we refine our negotiation strategy by engaging the interests of each participant. The climate activist argues that climate action is indeed in their self-interest as more and more refugees will seek asylum in the US and EU under current warming conditions. Green climate fund advocates have used a similar argument, arguing that contributions to the green climate fund now would fund the adaptation needed to improve refugee crises like this one. The European Union, which wants to reduce emissions, has agreed to further funding the Green Climate Fund, provided the donations protect forests and count toward carbon offsets.
Photo: Sofia Garcia-George
After the event we entered the numbers into a global warming calculator and we were in the 2.0 degree Celsius range. We were all disappointed, but we now understand why 1.5 degrees Celsius is a challenging global target. By negotiating with our diverse constituencies, we have a more global view of the climate crisis. We walk away less quickly and are more willing to listen.
The Columbia Climate School aims to “grow future leaders for just and prosperous societies on a healthy planet.” In order to think globally, we need to integrate a global perspective into our education. Events such as the Model UN climate negotiations are good examples of effective educational tools, and I encourage educators to use similar strategies. If emerging climate leaders think globally and act locally, I hope we can solve the climate crisis.
Rex Koenig is an undergraduate student in Sustainability at Columbia University.
