What a surprise! …/s
But the Loss and Damage fund is a very delicate issue, was progress even to get some countries to agree the concept exists. Seems to me, that the “developing” countries are right about the ‘World Bank’ issue, but fundamentally wrong to insist on retaining 1990 definitions of country groups, the situation changed enormously over 33 years. For example the per capita emissions of China are higher than the european average for many years now, and those of the Arabian gulf are the highest in the world. The impact on the atmosphere depends on historical emissions, but not on their simple sum - there is a decay over time as most of the CO~2 ~ goes into the ocean and other sinks. Unfortunately the subtleties of such science don’t penetrate to those ‘high’ level discussions (been there, tried that).
What a surprise! …/s But the Loss and Damage fund is a very delicate issue, was progress even to get some countries to agree the concept exists. Seems to me, that the “developing” countries are right about the ‘World Bank’ issue, but fundamentally wrong to insist on retaining 1990 definitions of country groups, the situation changed enormously over 33 years. For example the per capita emissions of China are higher than the european average for many years now, and those of the Arabian gulf are the highest in the world. The impact on the atmosphere depends on historical emissions, but not on their simple sum - there is a decay over time as most of the CO~2 ~ goes into the ocean and other sinks. Unfortunately the subtleties of such science don’t penetrate to those ‘high’ level discussions (been there, tried that).