“Belgium must now organize itself to be climate neutral by 2050” – Belgium

The Belgian bastion of climate policy, which is largely ineffective, has the merit of being there.

You can’t escape it, it’s all over the media: COP26 is in full swing today. The COPs (or COPs) have been held annually since 1995. Three years ago, in 1992, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was ratified by 166 countries, including Belgium. In 1988, the first United Nations resolution on “Conserving Climate as the Common Heritage of Humanity” was published and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was established in the same year.

One prominent activist said in September, “Of course we need a constructive dialogue. But they’ve been whining for 30 years now, and where did that take us?” The question is legitimate, because 33 years after the creation of the IPCC, 24 years after the Kyoto Accords, and 6 years after the Paris Accords, we are still emitting more greenhouse gases around the world. A trend that, according to the United Nations, will rise by 16% by 2030.

Thus, the Earth’s temperature rises and the climate changes. In Belgium, winter has been rare in recent years, and autumn has already declared itself in the summer of this year, with the peak of monsoon-like showers. On a global scale, it is hot in one hemisphere while water in the other half falls from the sky in buckets. And so your drought becomes deluge. Fiery, my heatwave. Your culture will soon be my new tradition. And in between all this, sea level rises quietly.

How hot the weather gets and how quickly the climate changes depends only on one factor: humans and their ability to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the short term. We know that. Those 33 years of discussions, agreements and promises reflect the profound human, and therefore social, challenge of climate change. They are attempts to organize ourselves and take action.

Belgium must now organize itself to be climate neutral by 2050.

But these 33 years have not been entirely in vain: They have yielded a bastion of international climate policy that, while largely ineffective, has the advantage of being. It is a stronghold that made it possible, among other things, to hold the Belgian state accountable through the climate case in June 2021, when a Belgian court ruled that various Belgian governments were guilty of “misconduct” by embracing neglect of climate policy.

To illustrate this very slow evolution, Friday’s group drew a “climate line”, Interactive timeline with overview of scientific reports (IPCC) to debate agreements (UNFCCC), from debates to international agreements (Kyoto, Paris), from international agreements to European legislation (such as the European Green Deal) and national legislation. Conclusion: Belgium must now organize itself to be climate neutral by 2050.

How will we deal with this? Perhaps not by hiding behind the Belgian institutional architecture. For example, the Belgian Energy and Climate Plan (2021 – 2030), even before any discussion of our climate goals, begins to explain the structure of our state. It shows the institutional exception of Belgium, as if climate change, which is a huge challenge for everyone, is more complex and difficult for our very complex small country. This is not only far from reality (other federal countries such as Germany face similar challenges), but it also leads to unconstructive fatalism.

It is up to us to create governance that can meet the challenges of the future. To this end, it is useful to return to the heart of climate change and rethink our policy on greenhouse gases. In Belgium, as well as internationally, there is a policy framework to address the existential challenge of climate change. It is defective, incomplete and inappropriate. But it has the advantage of being.

This is exactly why the Climate Line has also formulated 9 recommendations that reinforce the current Belgian climate policy. Because it’s time to speed up this policy and manage it well with full wind in our sails.

Stephanie Danes is an architect and urban designer.

Allen Buysschaert is an economist.

Marie Roman, Strategic Analyst at Solvay SA

Magali van Kopenol is an economist.

They are all members of the Friday group.

The Belgian bastion of climate policy, hugely ineffective, has the merit of its existence. You cannot escape from it, it is pervasive in all media: today COP26 is in full swing. The COPs (or COPs) have been held annually since 1995. Three years ago, in 1992, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was ratified by 166 countries, including Belgium. In 1988, the first United Nations resolution on “Conserving Climate as the Common Heritage of Humanity” was published and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was established in the same year. One prominent activist said in September, “Of course we need a constructive dialogue. But they’ve been whining for 30 years now, and where did that take us?” The question is legitimate, because 33 years after the creation of the IPCC, 24 years after the Kyoto Accords, and 6 years after the Paris Accords, we are still emitting more greenhouse gases around the world. A trend that, according to the United Nations, will rise by 16% by 2030. Thus the Earth’s temperature is rising and the climate is changing. In Belgium, winter has been rare in recent years, and autumn has already declared itself in the summer of this year, with the peak of monsoon-like showers. On a global scale, it is hot in one hemisphere while water in the other half falls from the sky in buckets. And so your drought becomes deluge. Fiery, my heatwave. Your culture will soon be my new tradition. And in between all of this, the sea level is quietly rising, and how quickly the temperature is rising and how fast climate is changing depends on only one factor: humans and their ability to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the short term. We know that. Those 33 years of discussions, agreements and promises reflect the profound human, and therefore social, challenge of climate change. They are attempts to organize ourselves and take action. But these 33 years have not been entirely in vain: They have yielded a bastion of international climate policy that, while largely ineffective, has the advantage of being. It is a stronghold that made it possible, among other things, to hold the Belgian state accountable through the climate case in June 2021, when a Belgian court ruled that various Belgian governments were guilty of “misconduct” by embracing neglect of climate policy. To illustrate this very slow development, Friday’s group developed the “Climate Line”, an interactive timeline with overview from scientific reports (IPCC) to debate agreements (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change), from debates to international agreements (Kyoto, Paris) , from international agreements on European legislation (such as the European Green Agreement) and national legislation. Conclusion: Belgium must now organize itself to be climate neutral by 2050. How will we deal with this? Perhaps not by hiding behind the Belgian institutional architecture. For example, the Belgian Energy and Climate Plan (2021 – 2030), even before any discussion of our climate goals, begins to explain the structure of our state. It shows the institutional exception of Belgium, as if climate change, which is a huge challenge for everyone, is more complex and difficult for our very complex small country. This is not only far from reality (other federal countries such as Germany face similar challenges), but it also leads to unconstructive fatalism. It is up to us to create governance that can meet the challenges of the future. To this end, it is useful to return to the heart of climate change and rethink our policy on greenhouse gases. In Belgium, as well as internationally, there is a policy framework to address the existential challenge of climate change. It is defective, incomplete and inappropriate. But the merit of its existence is the reason why the Climate Line makes 9 recommendations that reinforce the current Belgian climate policy. Because it’s time to speed up this policy and manage it well with the wind full in our sails, Stephanie Deans is an architect and urban designer. Allen Buysschaert is an economist, Marie Roman is a strategic strategist at Solvay NV, and Magali van Copenol is an economist, all members of Vrijdaggroep.