Challenge Europe was a three year project aiming to accelerate change to a low carbon future. It was active in these 18 countries
Czech Republic Denmark Finland Estonia
France Great Britain Greece Hungary
Latvia Lithuania Nth. Ireland/Ireland Norway
Poland Slovakia Slovenia Sweden
Turkey Ukraine
Climate Advocates
600 young people aged 18-35 worked on climate challenges and local projects to reduce carbon use.
Project highlights
Want to see some advocates' ideas to help fight climate change?
News Archive
Read through the archive of news about the project activities between 2008 and 2011
Project Partners
Several hundred international and national experts and partners helped the Advocates to develop their ideas. You can find the list of partner organisations below.
If one was to carry out a cost-benefit analysis of COP 16 (and all those that preceded it) the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) would have been insolvent a long time ago. The deliverables simply wouldn’t measure up.
Yet what emerged from Cancun was, for better or worse, a small step in the right direction. The agreement asserts the need for “urgent action” to combat climate change. To this end, it reaffirms the commitment to raise and disburse $100 billion a year (through a Green Climate Fund) to support developing countries and includes measures to prevent deforestation.
There are, however, two notable caveats. A post Kyoto agreement to set legally binding emission targets was postponed until 2012 and the World Bank (read USA) – to many delegates dismay – secured the mandate to run the new Fund.
Looking beyond the details and the true value of COP 16 will be determined next year. If a post-Kyoto agreement is not reached in South Africa, the US and other global powers might call time on the UNFCCC. A more optimistic scenario would see Cancun as the first pathway to a green economy, maybe even the catalyst to a low carbon future.
The failures of Copenhagen were compounded by ‘climate gate’, an event which undermined the credibility of the IPCC and the wider scientific community. COP 16 has provided an anchor to the weather this storm, restoring trust in the UNFCCC mandate and recasting the debate in the right direction. Most important, it has shown that the value of the UN process extends beyond our political conventions and beyond conventional economic thinking.
Yet the practical implications cannot be ignored for climate change will not be cheap to address. Nor will it be tackled through unilateral action. It requires a global response specifically because its geopolitical consequences extend beyond national jurisdictions.
So if we are to respond we have to shelve our conventional ideas of citizenship and embrace a universal sense of purpose. For the heart of the matter is not within the footnotes of the text nor in the size of the financial envelope. It is in our worldviews where future generations will not judge us by the extent to which we use nature for own ends, but by our ability to preserve its integrity.
Earlier this week the former prime minister of Spain, Jose Maria Aznar, founded the Global Adaptation Institute. On the same day, the Economist published a special report about adaptation’s role in building climate resilience. These two events are indicative of discussions at COP 16 where many observers and organisations have argued that adapting to the impacts of climate change is equally important as mitigation.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) defines adaptation as “adjustment in natural or human systems to a new or changing environment.... which moderates harm or exploits beneficial opportunities. Mitigation goes further and focuses on the elimination of environmental hazards associated with climate change. It is often associated with the ‘cutting edge’ of climate change technology (such as Carbon Capture and Storage), overshadowing the intangible assets essential to environmental development.
Developed countries have tried (and frequently failed) to provide the right package of ‘hard’ measures (such as clean technology) and ‘soft’ technical training. This failure is not unique to climate finance and is a recurring concern for western professionals involved in international development. Better to leave ‘development’ to those people who understand it best i.e. local organisations and communities.
Lighting a Million Lives is an initiative Led by the Energy and Resources Institute in Delhi provides electricity to poor Indian communities through the provision of cheap solar lanterns. Speaking this week, Dr. Pachauri (chair of the IPCC) underlined its role in bringing together low-cost technology (specifically light emitting diodes) with micro-finance and female entrepreneurship.
The potential co-benefits of providing low-cost clean technology to African communities are equally large. Half of the world’s poorest households use biomass and coal for fuel, the highest proportion of which are in Sub-Saharan Africa. A study published in the Lancet indicates that the introduction of low-emission cooking stoves would not only prevent millions of premature deaths (by reducing the incidence of chronic respiratory and heart disease) but generate significant fuel cost-savings.
These examples highlight the importance of integrated packages of aid. Yet the sectoral approach adopted by many developed countries at COP 16 creates a false division between mitigation and adaptation. This neglects the importance of building ‘intangible capital’.
Research by the World Bank shows a strong legal and regulatory framework, legitimate property rights and good governance are all essential for prosperity. It is these key ingredients rather than the scale of finance that determines a country’s ability to build sustainable pathways of development.
One can't help but to become frustrated here at COP. The slow negotiations is an obvious source of frustration but there is also so much unfairness in the air. The host country, Mexico, is doing a good job at trying to decrease the unfairness of the stakeholoders participation, by having hearings with the stakeholders like businesses, environmental organizations, youth organizations and others that are present at the negotiations and by preparing a review paper of stakeholder participation. Hopefully that helps because right now it feels like our possibility to have an effect on the negotiations are slim to none.
Over the weekend the champions worked as volunteers at the World Climate Summit, the business summit on climate issues. A demonstration was held outside when the summit started against the business presence at COP. But I feel that they are as entitled to be here as the other stakeholders. But I don't like the fact that just because they have bigger resources for lobbying, their voice is heard louder. That is very obvious in Finland, where for example youth are not included in the delegation nor heard before the negotiations and business lobbyist seem to be in charge of Finlands position in the climate negotiations.
Another thing I don't like was how we volunteers where treated at the summit. I found out that racism still exists. We where told that we may have lunch at the summit. Everyone else did not have a problem with this, but when our darker champions from Indonesia and Bangladesh went to take food, they where told that they shouldn't eat of the same lunch as the attendants who had payed $1.000 for the summit, or they would have to pay for it too. The issue got sorted out later, but left a bitter taste in my mouth.
Another thing that is unfair is that the Least Developed Countries (LDC) and especially the small island states (AOSIS) don't have enough resources to send negotiators to the COP. Recently the host country announced that no more than 6 meetings are going to be held at the same time, but there are still delegations with less delegates than that. The UNfairplay initiative is doing what they can to help out. UNfairplay is a group of young people that help underrepresented delegations by for example attending sessions and taking notes for them. They just came out with a report of the unfairness of the negotiations and suggestions of how to improve the situation. You can read the whole report Levelling the Playing Field - A report to the UNFCCC Secretariat by UNfairplay, here: http://unfairplay.info/
On this issue I also have to give a hand to Finland, who finances womens participation from the LDCs in the negotiations.
An old post that wasn't published in the blog, for one reason or another:
Today (2. December) is the youth and future generations day at COP16
in Cancun, Mexico. This means that during the day there will be a lot
of side-events and demonstrations to highlight the youth participation
in the negotiations. The day started with a silent demonstration, to
point out the fact that youth has very limited possibilities to affect
the negotiations. But since some excellent, unexpected good news on
Tuesday, this might change very soon. The so called Article 6 of the
climate convention, which deals with education, public awareness and
public participation, will be discussed in a contact group, and a
COPdecision of it might be done here in Cancun. This means that the
question will get much more attention than it has so far, and for
example more financing will be possible. A great thing is that the
draft that is proposed include a lot of the things the youth
constituency, YOUNGO, has proposed to the text. Fingers crossed that
it will go through! Follow the blog (and Twitter!) for updates on the
issue!
Not so long ago I did not think that I would be here now in Mexico.
Last year, after participating in the negotiations in Copenhagen, I
was really depressed about the result of the negotiations, like so
many others. I had lost my belief in UNFCCCs power to act and the
private sectors readiness and willingness to provide innovative
solutions to the climate change. But one could say that I lost my
religion, but found my faith. I found new faith in the youth! In
Copenhagen you could see them everywhere (I say them, because in
Copenhagen I didn’t participate as a youth delegate, but solely
represented my job at the Nordic Council of Ministers). The youth was
very engaged and knowledgeable and a positive force in the middle of
the nightmare that Copenhagen became. The global youth’s willingness
to take responsibility and act is something totally different than you
would think that the general atmosphere of the public is when you
follow the negotiators, who are not ready to compromise when it comes
to so called national interests. But the negotiators fail to see the
bigger picture and realize that the global interest is in everyone’s
national interest! Luckily the youth is in Cancun to remind them of
this fact, again!
ps. The Article 6 went through, with all the amendements that YUONGO,
the youth constituency, whished for!
Ecoystems are non-linear and respond to feedbacks. This means they are simultaneously resilient and vulnerable; changes in their composition (as a result of human activity) are variable and cumulative. It seems logical, therefore, that policy responses to climate change should err on the side of caution and adopt what is often referred to as the "precautionary principle".
Yet discussions at Cancun continue to overlook two fundamental things: first, humans have an in-built need to define, categorise and order the world, the most visible manifestation of which is the (problematic) dissociation of the sciences from the humanities. The second omission from the climate talks is perhaps the most defining characteristic of our era: "the risk society". Despite the evidence base, many individuals still have a tendency to perceive environmental risks as a result of natural forces rather than as a direct cause of human activity.
The immediate consequence of this is that many policy makers (and papers) conceptualise and define climate change according to single sectors: energy, finance, transport, forests etc. or single policy measures i.e. adaptation or mitigation. Less visible - yet increasingly critical - to COP 16 is how these themes reflect the way we conceptualise climate change.
The wider outcome of this narrow perspective means that ‘cross-cutting’ themes (such as health and education) which should underpin all environmental policies, often fall between the cracks. They are mere footnotes to the headline targets, both scientific and financial.
If the international community to respond to climate change effectively, we need to move beyond a sectoral approach. Overcoming these artificial barriers requires more than just money and policy measures. It requires a unified understanding of our knowledge i.e. the integration of the natural and social sciences in principle and in practice. Most important, it requires an understanding that our knowledge of the natural world is limited and hence flawed.
Any diagnostic process relies upon trial and error and general rules of thumb. The UNFCCC framework is no exception. If it is to deliver this week we have to restore trust in its process and confidence in its mandate. Moving beyond a sectoral approach and framing the problem from nature's perspective would help.
Teleconferencing, telepresence, webinars, live streaming: all these terms are increasingly relevant for UK organisations, not least because of budget constraints. For the environmental movement the benefits of such technology are not only financial. Skype and other applications that offer a means for remote participation are reducing the need for travel and hence the emission of green house gases.
Leading this shift to virtual engagement are the British Council and the Department for Energy and Climate change (DECC). Both operate on a global scale. Earlier this week, both were involved in bringing together their staff with government advisors, politicians and young people engaged in the environmental movement (most notably the UK Youth Climate Coalition).
Streaming live from London, the event offered DECC’s Youth Advisory Panel the opportunity to present the key findings of their report on “energy pathways” to a decarbonised economy. Exploring scenarios that could further the UK’s drive towards a low-carbon future, the report highlights the importance of determining the right “energy mix”. As such, it provides a broad trajectory for a sustainable energy sector, emphasising that the direction of environmental change is equally important as its magnitude.
Few governments have taken concrete steps to consult the youth constituency. Fewer still have engaged the ‘climate generation’ to participate in and contribute to the COP negotiations. By financing the efforts of young professionals - both for projects on the ground and to inform policy formation – DECC and the British Council are, in principle, extending the terms of the debate.
Yet outreach is not sufficient. If the vote of the climate generation is to be counted, Article 6 of the Kyoto Protocol (focusing on the provision of primary education and training) has to mobilise money, not just words. Let’s hope the negotiators understand that intergenerational equity means more than looking beyond the present. For in the coming week it is their decisions that will determine the possibilities of our grandchildren and subsequent generations. As one journalist said this week, “nature doesn’t do bail outs”.
Walk around the Messe (the main venue) at COP 16 and it’s clear that REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation) is gaining political traction. REDD essentially enables developed countries to pay developing nations to practise sustainable forestry management. Not only is this financial mechanism being lauded as the answer to illegal logging but it is widely seen as an effective (albeit imperfect) instrument to ensure the future integrity of the Amazon rainforest.
The country with most to gain (and lose) from REDD is Brazil. Yet financial engineering can only do so much to protect the ‘lungs of the world’. In the last decade, the real driver of forest clearing is an institutional vacuum in Brazil’s legal history: the absence of legitimate, enforceable and clearly defined property rights.
Under constitutional law, landless individuals are entitled to claim land not in ‘beneficial use’ (e.g. farming or ranching). Exploiting this ambiguity, the Movimento dos Trabalhadores Rurais Sem Terra (MST – Brazil Landless Workers Movement) assert that pasture, providing neither jobs nor food, does not meet constitutional requirements. This legal inconsistency means that landholders have an incentive to clear land to avoid the risk of expropriation.
The result is deforestation: where constitutional provisions can be invoked to clear forested land and ownership cannot be unequivocally assigned through civil law, insecure property rights function as a catalyst of land speculation and ultimately land clearing.
The wider outcome of this legal uncertainty was the ascendancy of two opposing models of land reform: a centralised, state-led redistribution of land to poor individuals and "Market Assisted Land Reform” (MALR), a decentralised market-driven alternative financed by the World Bank.
With the inception of MALR during the 1990s, the World Bank not only restructured the way land was allocated - from redistribution to privatisation - but enabled multinational banks to gain control over rural credit. This led to violent clashes between the MST and landholders, fuelling deforestation.
If REDD is to bridge the divide between these two models of land reform, the World Bank (read the USA and other developed nations) should not prescribe financial packages without first investing in Brazil's legal institutions. Finances can only be used effectively if they are underpinned by a strong regulatory and legal framework. Countries built on these ingredients - rather a scaffold of 'structural adjustment reforms' - will reap the long-term benefits of climate finance.
Stripping away the technical jargon and political machinations of COP 16 (Conference of Parties) – is the first task of any rookie. So the first few days is essentially about getting stuck in, reading between the lines and asking the simple but essential questions:WHY, WHO, HOW AND WHAT.
Why are we here?Because 2010 is the hottest year on record and green house gas emissions – resulting from human activity – have reached their highest level ever.
Who is involved? Over 190 delegations from 4 continents.
How did we arrive at this cross-road?The history of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) dates back to 1992 when 54 countries agreed – in principle - that climate change was a global ‘issue’. Since then, the evidence base underpinning climate change has strengthened and the community of scientists, NGOs and politicians – often referred to as the environmental movement – has grown.
Following the establishment of the Kyoto Protocol in 1997, over 150 countries have subsequently agreed (again in principle) to reduce the concentration of green house gases (GHGs) in the atmosphere. Under the Protocol, 39 countries have committed to legally binding targets; the USA is the only developed country that has not signed up. Developing countries are not subject to such targets as they have no ‘historical obligation’ under the terms of the Protocol. Most important, according to most observers the targets do not go far enough and are unlikely to prevent a two degree temperature rise by 2050.
What is at stake?Well it depends on who you ask. For the Chinese – representing one billion votes in the climate generation - it represents a possible impediment to their place in the sun i.e. the modern economy. For the world’s hyperpower, it’s a challenge to the American business model and a country built for the automobile. For Bangladeshi’s and other low-lying countries, the threat is immediate, the risk much greater, the stakes much much higher. If we are to act, the predicament of Bangladesh and its people has to take precedence. Only then will we understand what 'climate generation' really means.
I arrived in Mexico late Saturday evening to participate in the climate negotiations. Not so long ago I did not think that this would happen. Last year, after participating in the negotiations in Copenhagen, I was really depressed about the result of the negotiations, like so many others. I had lost my belief in UNFCCCs power to act and the private sectors readiness and willingness to provide innovative solutions to the climate change. But one could say that I lost my religion, but found my faith. I found new faith in the youth! In Copenhagen you could see them everywhere (I say them, because in Copenhagen I didn’t participate as a youth delegate, but solely represented my job at the Nordic Council of Ministers). The youth was very engaged and knowledgeable and a positive force in the middle of the nightmare that Copenhagen became. The global youth’s willingness to take responsibility and act is something totally different than you would think that the general atmosphere of the public is when you follow the negotiators, who are not ready to compromise when it comes to so called national interests. But the negotiators fail to see the big picture and realize that the global interest is in everyone’s national interest! Luckily the youth will be in Cancun to remind them of this fact, again!
26. November 2010
Thousands of negotiators, NGOs, business representatives and heads of states from all around the world will meet in Cancun, Mexico, for the climate negotiations, COP16, starting next week. British Council will provide for 15 climate champions to participate in Cancun. I will be the only one from Europe. Now I need to know what message do you, as the youth of Europe, want me to take to Mexico?!
I will be blogging from Cancun, so follow this page!
My name is Maria and I’m one of the 17 climate advocates of 2010-2011 from Finland. I’m 27 years old and work part time for the Nordic Council of Ministers. I’ve studied environmental economics at the University of Helsinki, with social psychology as my minor subject.
I’ve done my internship for the Ministry of the Environment of Finland. I am writing my master’s thesis on CDM, one of the flexible mechanisms about emissions trading under the Kyoto Protocol, for a private consulting company, specialized in emissions trading. Last summer I was involved in a start up that will bring clean technology to East-Africa, in order to empower the local community and fight climate change and deforestation.
My first presentation in primary school was about rainforests. I didn't realize until upper secondary school that not everyone cares about the environment as much as I do! I love skiing and will do everything in my power to keep the winters of Finland snow covered!
On the afternoon of our first day we were dealing with project planning, which is a crucial part of managing a successful project. All advocate groups from the different countries have project ideas, even at this early stage. In small groups we created a list of actions for implementing our visions. Our greatest challenge was identifying and focusing on the most appropriate actions, starting from a very wide range of ideas and narrowing them down to the key four or five tangible ones. The afternoon was filled with brainstorming of the enthusiastic climate advocates.
The team work went on easily in the sunshine with sheep and chickens in the background. We tried to create realistic actions in which we could use our own skills and knowledge. We were seeking ambitious goals, but at the same time have to keep in mind our own limits and abilities. With careful planning we are able to prepare ourselves for a long journey fighting climate change.
Everything has a beginning but what is it that needs to happen first before you start working on your project?
It is essential to have a clear vision of what you are trying to achieve through your project, and to be able to define in a simple way what the end picture is. Perhaps the easiest way is to take a box of crayons and a piece of paper, return to your childhood and draw your vision out. If you cannot do that it, it is not simple enough and you should re-think it over.
Another thing that is important to realise is what would happen should your vision not come true. That will help you take the right steps in order to avoid this `hell`of nothing being done. Can we live without these changes? Is your project going to take us away from disaster?
What does it mean to `have a clear vision`?
As mentioned above, you should be able to express it visually, you should find what will attract people to want to be part of your dream and do not forget that to get people on board, ' you need to give them something, even if it is just a hangover'. (Alan Caldwell)
Once you have defined, in a simple way, what your are trying to achieve and what your vision is, then you can take another step and start planning.
One of the fun facts we have learned at this BC event, is how to establish a steering group that will carry out a project in your community. By creating it, all actions are carried out more easily because the tasks are divided amongst the steering group members - so it's more efficient!
There are basically five stages in the process. You start with agreeing on what the steering group should do - for example, promote consuming locally produced food. Next, define who is involved (e.g. local farmers, residents, local authorities etc.) and how to attract those right people (e.g. distribute leaflets, organise events, fundraising, food fairs etc.). Then, define roles and responsibilities: who is going to take care for the advertisement, who for lobbying, who for fundraising? Define the rules clearly and establish an appropriate structure: who is who, who is the manager, who the on-site worker etc. Do you need extra training? Finally, build your skills and knowledge - depending on what your group's abilities are (e.g. if there are lawyers, economists, planners, designers ... amongst you). Otherwise, reach for outsourcing and, of course, volunteers. :)
From there on, go out and realise your dreams! Find a way to engage your community. Oh, and by the way, Comrie is in the middle of nowhere and they did it. :)
Podnebni zagovorniki pod okriljem British Councila Slovenia
organizirajo
NATEČAJ za najboljši prispevek na temo PODNEBNIH SPREMEMB
Kaj lahko mlade generacije pričakujemo v prihodnosti? Imamo vpliv na oblikovanje in sprejemanje okoljsko relevantnih politik? Kako doživljamo problem podnebnih sprememb na osebni ravni?
Kako se bo spremenilo gospodarstvo v prihodnosti? Bomo v kratkem res doživeli preboj zelenih tehnologij? Bo v prihodnosti Jug še naprej nosil breme potratnega Severa? Kje se v rešitvah globalnih problemov nahajamo Slovenci?
Bo papež delil odpustke za onesnaževanje okolja? Je vegetarijanstvo rešitev?
Problem podnebnih sprememb je izjemno širok in vpliva tako rekoč na vse vidike našega življenja, na naše delovanje in razmišljanje, zato nas zanima tvoj pogled.
S tem natečajem te želimo izzvati, da pogledaš na podnebne spremembe iz drugačne perspektive! Povej nam kaj doživljaš, o čem razmišljaš, kaj raziskuješ, kaj že veš in česa še ne veš, ker ti nihče ne pove.
Prispevke zbiramo do 15. marca na
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
.
Več informacij o natečaju na: podnebnizagovorniki.blogspot.com
Izbrani prispevki bodo objavljeni v zborniku. Avtorje najboljših treh po izboru podnebnih zagovornikov čaka presenečenje!
Projekt podpirata Eko Šou in Služba vlade RS za podnebne spremembe.
POGOJI SODELOVANJA
Besedilo je lahko družbeno-kritičen, poljudnoznanstven ali strokovni članek, pri čemer je potrebno upoštevati pravila o citiranju in navajanju virov ter literature. Obsega naj 3 - 5 tipkanih strani pisave Times New Roman velikosti 12, napisano je lahko v slovenščini ali angleščini.
I think COP15 was one of the most important experiences in my life. I saw what a huge international, intergovernmental negotiation looks like, I saw the people who attended the event. I have seen so many different NGOs and research institutions I would've never seen otherwise, and collected a lot of useful material (still reading them).
I also met some new people, mostly climate champions, I met friends from previoustheme based events, exchanged ideas, opinions, it was really useful for networking. The Scottish Day was great, it was good to see all these people together, and it was useful to meet the experts they invited. Maybe if we had a little more workshops, or special Challenge Europe-related events, we could expand our networks more.
Staying outside Copenhagen without internet (youth hostel reserved by the BC) didn't really help getting the useful information sent by email on time (like Bella Center is closed for Sunday, no point going there). On the other hand there was this small problem with the second passes with the Bella Center (only 33 for 110 people), I think the BC handled the rotation quite well; I could get in every day, when the British Council was on the entrance list.
Overall, the COP15 was really useful experience; it formed my opinion a lot regarding negotiations and protocols. The result of the conference is what I expected, if they really wanted to come up with some kind of agreement between the developed countries, they should have been worked on it all year at home and not only in the last weeks before the conference.
we have just opened a public blog - to give a chance to the Challenge Europe world and especially to the Climate Advocates to share our opinions and views. The upcoming COP 15 might be a good opportunity to start it up.
The Climate Camp is in accordance with the “Seal the Deal!” campaign led by the United Nations. Seal the Deal! aims to encourage governments to reach a fair, balanced and effective climate agreement in Copenhagen, by mobilizing political leaders, the business sector and civil society on a global scale to apply pressure for urgent action on climate change.
You can sign the petition for a fair climate agreement at the Copenhagen conference here.
Climate Camp is organised by the British Council in association with the British Embassy and in cooperation with the Representation of the European Commission in the Republic of Slovenia.
The International Climate Camp is being supported by:
The Office of the President of the Republic of Slovenia,
The Office of the Speaker of the Parliament of the Republic of Slovenia,
The Slovenian Ministry for Environment and Spatial Planning,
The aim of the Pathways to Green Towns project is to inform people about the positive effects that green areas have on life in cities, towns and villages. One of the project’s elements was supporting people who want to protect green areas in their communities.
Czech Republic
Denmark
Finland
Estonia
France
Great Britain
Greece
Hungary
Latvia
Lithuania
Nth. Ireland/Ireland
Norway
Poland
Slovakia
Slovenia
Sweden
Turkey
Ukraine
The aim of the Pathways to Green Towns project is to inform people about the positive effects that green areas have on life in cities, towns and villages. One of the project’s elements was supporting people who want to protect green areas in their communities. 
The Climate Camp is in accordance with the “Seal the Deal!” campaign led by the United Nations. Seal the Deal! aims to encourage governments to reach a fair, balanced and effective climate agreement in Copenhagen, by mobilizing political leaders, the business sector and civil society on a global scale to apply pressure for urgent action on climate change.
