With the Copenhagen Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) approaching this month, stakeholders all over the world are concerned about the outcome of this important meeting and its implications for business, government and civil society round the world. It was just a few weeks ago that a number of observers had started lamenting Copenhagen as a non-event. However, as a result of President Obama?s decision to travel to Copenhagen, even though it would be ahead of the participation of other leaders, and his decision to commit the US to a reduction in emissions of 17% by 2020 over 2005 levels, the US has clearly entered the multilateral process of decision making in this field, after prolonged inaction particularly during the previous administration. What has added further urgency to the Copenhagen process is the announcement by China of a reduction of 40% in the intensity of emissions per unit of GDP by 2020 over 2005 levels. There is now, therefore, some renewed vigour on the basis of which it is expected that a fairly strong political agreement will be reached in Copenhagen, and which can perhaps be carried further to lead to a strong binding agreement for mitigation by the developed countries and adequate financing for the developing world as well as some facilitation of transfer of certain technologies from the developed to the developing countries.

Business and industry would clearly have to be in the lead in taking a large number of actions that would be required for meeting the challenge of climate change worldwide. But irrespective of the outcome in Copenhagen, the world is likely to move to a low carbon future and several other changes that would not only require society to adapt to the impacts of climate change, but also reduce emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) on a global basis. As far as the impacts of climate change are concerned, these vary significantly from one part of the globe to the other. Some of these could impinge directly on the operations of business enterprise, such as the effect of sea level rise. Several business enterprises and manufacturing units are located in coastal areas and near the ports of many countries. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in its Fourth Assessment Report concludes that the mega-deltas in different parts of the world, and particularly in Asia and Africa, would be the most vulnerable. These locations in Asia include cities such as Shanghai, Dhaka and Kolkata, all three of which are extremely vulnerable, because of the large concentration of population and the presence of major physical assets and infrastructure. Mumbai, which is not even located on a delta, faced major disaster in 2005 on account of an extreme precipitation event resulting in a complete standstill of the entire city. At least a million people were affected by damage to their homes and dwellings.

The IPCC has projected an increase in the frequency, intensity and duration of floods, droughts, heat waves and extreme precipitation events. Consequently, business enterprises as well as governments will have to carry out a rigorous assessment of the impacts of climate change and then adapt to them for running their operations. For instance, climate change is expected to lead to growing scarcity of water in several parts of the world, which would make it essential for industry to recycle water and adopt technologies that are water conserving. Another major impact of climate change would be in respect of agricultural outputs, wherein the yields of several important crops could be reduced significantly as a result of climate change. Those companies that are dependent on raw materials from agriculture would be adversely affected as a result. Similarly, climate change would have major health impacts, which employers would do well to anticipate and adapt to effectively by putting in place systems and facilities that would prevent health problems rather than having to deal with them after the fact.

It is essential that Copenhagen not only arrives at an agreement that places adequate emphasis on adaptation but that the developed countries also provide adequate resources and financial transfers for the developing countries to take in hand appropriate adaptation measures. There is an ethical and moral dimension to this because some of the poorest countries of the world would be the worst affected victims of climate change, and are in no way responsible for causing the problem in the first place. Human induced climate change is the result of increase in the concentration of GHGs in the atmosphere, which have accumulated as an output of industrial activity essentially in the developed countries since the beginning of industrialisation. To minimise and avoid the worst impacts of climate change the world must, therefore, reduce emissions of GHGs as rapidly as possible so that the earth?s climate can be stabilised effectively within a reasonable time. It is expected that the developed countries would come up with a strong commitment to reduce their emissions by 2020, so that the world can move on a suitable path of reducing overall GHG emissions. Some of the worst affected countries in the world are located in Africa, and they have finally begun to voice their concerns and legitimate demands. Copenhagen would, it is expected, listen to these demands and act in response by making commitments on financial transfers that could help some of the worst affected communities and countries to carry out adaptation and mitigation measures effectively.

While some may see mitigation as a burden, the reality is that all mitigation actions carry a large number of co-benefits such as lower levels of local air pollution and, therefore, matching health benefits and higher levels of energy security worldwide. Other co-benefits include greater level of employment and higher agricultural outputs. India?s response to the challenge of climate change is its forward looking National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) under which eight separate missions have been identified. The first of these, the solar energy mission has been cleared by the Union Cabinet and would now require urgent implementation.

Indian business must not only look at this large domestic opportunity for development and use of solar technologies but also use this as a basis for reaching out to other markets in the world. Copenhagen may provide a strong global signal for the development and use of these technologies, but irrespective of the outcome in this important meeting, it is highly likely that the world will pursue a low carbon and greener path of development. If Copenhagen comes up with a strong agreement on mitigation measures, Indian industry would need to move rapidly to take advantage of this opportunity but if Copenhagen does not lead to strong binding commitments to reduce emissions of GHGs, Indian businesses should not be lulled into a sense of false confidence. It could use the country?s Solar Energy Mission as a springboard for developing capabilities and capacities to meet the needs of a low carbon future in the whole world. It is inevitable that India?s energy future, which is also threatened by problems of insecure energy supply resulting from mounting imports of coal and oil, needs to move in a different direction. Copenhagen might provide the trigger for bringing about the necessary shift.

The writer is Director-General, TERI and Chairman, IPCC