Calling All Climate Activists!
As COP 14 in Poznan draws ever closer, the Communications Working Group has been discussing how the global youth climate movement can most effectively communicate our ideas and priorities at the negotiations. We must speak with a strong, unified voice, with a consistent message coming directly from our movement. Uniting youth under a message and talking points that represent our global diversity across borders, creeds, and race; we are vastly effective.
For participants traveling to Poznan as part of national youth delegations or as representatives of NGOs, don’t worry! This isn’t an attempt to dictate what your delegation says or does at the conference. The international message is what we plan to talk about when we’ve stepped out of national delegation or NGO mode, and are speaking as international youth.
Together let us create a list of talking points and key issues that we can emphasize at this international conference.
Given the international nature of the climate crisis, what is it that makes the international youth message unique?
It is absolutely imperative to focus on the issues that affect young people all over the world, and particularly those that will disproportionately impact disenfranchised people like the global south, indigenous peoples, and low income people.
But the actual content of this message isn’t just for the Comms group to decide - that’s up to you!
Post your ideas as comments in the thread below, Today! Spread the word to make sure that as many young people as possible can participate in this process.
Please post your comments no later than November 21st, 2008
Looking forward to your ideas,
Malachai Chadwick and Shadia Fayne Wood
International Communications Working Group
Subscribe by Email!
Subscribe by RSS!
Share on Facebook
I hope this is a sufficient way to post comments.
For me, the biggest priority is reforestation. I don’t mean tree farms. I mean actual reforestation of places that have been cut for timber, agriculture, and “development.” No more burning coal and no more nuclear power. I don’t want a “clean energy revolution.” I don’t want solar panels, I want photosynthesis. I don’t want windmills, I want wind brushing through the overstory. I don’t want geothermal, I want foxes to warm themselves in their holes come winter. I definitely don’t want dams unless beavers make it. I don’t want a smart grid and the internet, I want mycelium to span continents.
In general, reforestation and a return of humans to land-based lifeways are my priorities. Take care of that, and the rest will follow. If this meeting can encourage that, I would appreciate it.
from the shrinking forest,
kodama
Kodama,
I think you have a point - reforestation is key to restoring the Carbon balance to the earth. Deforestation alone accounts for up to 20% of all anthropogenic CO2 emissions, and we need to remedy that situation. But it’s foolhardy to think that we can solve the climate crisis without dealing with the industrial revolution and the carbon emissions it has wrought. We need reforestation and biodiversity, but we also need clean energy and real sustainable development. We need all these things.
I would be in favor of using an umbrella vision under which we can specify points we’d like to see addressed, such as deforestation, clean energy and a just transition to a carbon-free world.
Phil
My wish for this years UNFCCC:
1. I wish for the USA to ratify
2. China to follow
3. Canada US and China all of a sudden pop out these super amazing enviro plans detailing how they will each one of them cut their CO2 emissions by 40%! below 1990 levels by 2020 and say jovially : “Ha!Ha! Had you all fooled!”
We all laugh and join hands a circle of United Nations
…sigh Utopia
I suggest we focus on the overarching issues first before working on specific policies.
How many youth delegates from how many countries would agree that we need a treaty that helps keep us below 350 ppm?
How many would agree to making sure an agreement limits global warming to less than 2 degrees C?
Moving a little lower:
How many would agree that an agreement cannot do these things without the United States showing leadership by signing on?
Below that would come specific policies like the very important deforestation/reforestation, land use, etc.
Start at the top, see which of those we can agree to, work our way further down the list as far as we can go with the time we have.
Start earlier for Copenhagen and repeat.
Hi there:
I think a primary issue to focus on is that industrialized countries must take a leadership role in committing to meaningful targets for mitigation, for post-2012. This seems to me the first, and one of the most crucial, steps in the negotiations. If industrialized nations demonstrate they are serious in taking climate action, developing nations will be more likely to consider taking on commitments. Hesitation from the industrialized world only delays global, more comprehensive action.
Industrialized countries should commit to taking real action to solve the problem that we have largely produced.
Caroline
Hi all,
On an even broader level than where Kyle started, I’d also like to see a youth vision somewhere in this. The most powerful messaging we have, in my opinion, is when we can paint a vivid picture of the world we want to live in, which can only exist if we address climate change now.
So I’d like to see things like green jobs, resilient communities, a safe future, stable global economy, etc. To have these things, we need to create a strong global climate agreement now. Then comes all the other messaging.
“Our Climate, Our Future”
or even
“Our Climate, Our Future: not negotiable”
It is inclusive, it is youth-focused, and it takes ownership of the future, while the personal pronoun acutally puts a human face on the message, not just talking about an abstract ‘the’ or ‘one’ climate.
Also, in case it is interpreted that ‘our’ is exclusively referring to youth, and thus excluding older people, we can simply tell them that no, it is THEIR future too. ‘Our’ refers to everbody!
350ppm I think is prudent for youth to support, and is necessary. (And it makes 550ppm totally out of the question! Aiming for ‘450′ or for ‘2 degrees’ makes 550ppm seem closer to a ‘reasonable compromise’, which is of course, bulls**t.)
Hi everyone,
This is Ryan from Singapore, a tiny country in South East Asia. =)
I noticed some issues and I would just like to divert some attention to them.
1. Lack of representation from other parts of the world, a.k.a. Asia, Africa, Latin America
I know that it’s difficult, but perhaps, it’s easier to work within regional groups, as solutions, policies and messages may differ from region to region.
2. Technology transfer
There’s a lot of energy in this debate from youths, and that’s really awesome.
Personally, I’m studying engineering, and I feel that for environmental issues, the campaigns and policies should also be supplemented by technical solutions.
3. Financing
I hope that there is more input from people from a financial background, as I strongly believe that solutions need to be sustainable also financially.
Thank you,
Ryan
http://www.e3alive.org
I think Kyle has outlined a good approach in terms of the overarching issues. And Ryan also has some good points regarding the specifics of how the overarching goals might be reached.
Would just like to point out in relatin to the visioning mentioned by Liz that the Alliance of Small Islands States AOSIS has recently agreed that 350pmm and 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels as an objective that would be more likely to allow for the rights to survival of small islands developing states.
Any higher than that and the vital coral reefs that provide food security and buffers from storm surge will likely suffer from ocean acidification as well as the temperature and sea level rise issues we already are well aware of. Perhaps as much or more than terrestrial forests, healthy oceans are key to the long term viability of our planet.
Regards
Yes, lack of representation is a key problem. That’s why we’re trying to have this discussion in public areas, so other youth can see it and contribute.
It seems like a lot of youth groups already agreed to a slogan like Our Climate Our Future.
I think it would be more productive to focus our limited time on policy messages. Then we will know what to lobby for. I can’t tell the American government Our Climate Our Future. They won’t know how that would translate into an actual policy they could support (or oppose…)
Let’s see how many youth delegations would agree to 350 ppm as an overall policy goal.
Ryan, good call on technology transfer. That seems like another area where youth are largely in agreement.
What kind of short phrase about technology transfer could we develop and see how many youth delegations support it?
It could be as simple as “Support Tech Transfer” or something more clever.
Financing mechanisms, especially fund vs. market mechanism for combating deforestation will be hug, although I’m not sure we’ll have time to develop policy messages for them.