Copenhagen global editorial


in Economics, Politics, Science, The environment, Writing

Along with 56 other newspapers in 20 languages, The Guardian recently printed a front page editorial about the Copenhagen climate change conference. Apparently, the tactic of having many papers print it simultaneously has not been used previously. It seems fitting that this happen on an issue of such universal importance.

The editorial highlights the risks associated with climate change, and the inadequacy of actions taken so far. It also includes a brief response to the CRU emails issue:

The science is complex but the facts are clear. The world needs to take steps to limit temperature rises to 2C, an aim that will require global emissions to peak and begin falling within the next 5-10 years. A bigger rise of 3-4C — the smallest increase we can prudently expect to follow inaction — would parch continents, turning farmland into desert. Half of all species could become extinct, untold millions of people would be displaced, whole nations drowned by the sea. The controversy over emails by British researchers that suggest they tried to suppress inconvenient data has muddied the waters but failed to dent the mass of evidence on which these predictions are based.

They acknowledge that a comprehensive deal is unlikely in Copenhagen, but propose that one be adopted in next year’s June meeting in Bonn.

The whole piece is worth reading.

{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }

. December 11, 2009 at 4:17 pm

Group Editorial on Climate Change

Mark Tovey
December 9, 2009 11:30 PM

At least one Canadian paper followed the Guardian’s lead this morning in publishing a front-page group editorial, endorsed and printed by 56 newspapers around the world. Today, is, of course, the first day of the Copenhagen negotiations, and this unprecedented group editorial is one answer to it.

The leader writers at the Guardian, Tom Clark and Julian Glover, attempted to resolve the tensions between the various positions. Three drafts were necessary to produce a common text that all participating papers were willing to sign on to. Even people who don’t agree with the text of the editorial in its entirety may find that this is a fascinating model for aggregating views from a diverse range of perspectives, and then publicizing that consensus view for global consideration and comment.

oleh December 13, 2009 at 2:57 am

I do not recall a previous occasion in which environmental issues have held such attention as now. That is already a big reason for hope.

Milan December 13, 2009 at 11:14 am

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: