The results are mixed. The glass is not completely empty: the majority of countries have updated their contributions, some of them, like China, a few days before the conference, or even, like India, during the conference.
With tears in his eyes on Saturday evening, Alok Sharma said he understood the “deep disappointment”, but felt it was “equally vital that we protect this agreement”. It’s a sequence that sums up all the ambivalence of the agreement reached at COP26, a “compromise full of contradictions” against global warming.
The agreement adopted at the end of COP26 in Glasgow is largely insufficient to limit the global temperature rise to 1.5°C. Requests for funding from the poor countries that will suffer most from the effects have been rejected, while promises to move away from fossil fuels have been weakened.
As the dust settles on COP26 in Glasgow, people are still getting to grips with the new Glasgow Climate Pact and what it means for the global climate movement. Here, Edie presents seven key points (not all of them bad) from this historic new announcement.
The Conversation asked experts from around the world for their reactions to the outcome of this year’s UN climate summit, COP26, and in particular to the Glasgow Climate Pact adopted by the 197 countries taking part in the negotiations. Here’s what they had to say about the agreements reached. (This page will be updated as feedback is received).
If developing countries fail to reach the amount they need to adapt to climate change, the world will be condemned to a lifetime of escalating climate impacts. These impacts, which we cannot prevent or adapt to, are called “loss and damage” in the jargon of international climate policy, and they are already beginning to be felt in the most vulnerable countries.
