The agreement includes a “Green Climate Fund” that is expected to reach $100 billion a year by 2020 to help poor countries finance emissions reductions and adjustments. [12] There has been no agreement on how to extend the Kyoto Protocol or find the $100 billion a year for the Green Climate Fund, or whether developing countries should have binding emission reductions or whether rich countries should first reduce their emissions. [13] Alister Doyle, Reuters Environment Correspondent, said that most delegates, although they agreed, had “terribly too little action” in the agreement. [14] The New York Times called the agreement a “big step forward” as international negotiations have stumbled in recent years, and “modest” because it did not require changes that scientists deem necessary to avoid dangerous climate change. [15] John Vidal, who wrote in the Guardian, criticized the Cancun agreements for not playing a leadership role, for not specifying how the proposed climate fund would be funded, and that countries had to “get by” within ten years and reduce them quickly so that there was a chance of avoiding warming. The postponement of decisions on the legal form and the level of emissions reductions was also criticised. [16] Professor Kevin Anderson called the Cancun agreement “astrology” and explained that science suggested an increase in the global average temperature of 4 degrees Celsius, possibly in the 2060s. [17] The agreement also recognizes that deep reductions in global greenhouse gas emissions are needed to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions in order to keep global average temperature growth below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. , and that the parties should take urgent steps to achieve this long-term goal, in accordance with science and on the basis of justice; and acknowledges that the first review must take into account a strengthening from an average global temperature increase of 1.5oC. The agreement also notes that the fight against climate change requires a paradigm shift in building a low-carbon society. The summit resulted in an agreement adopted by the state parties, which called for the creation of a large “Green Climate Fund” and a “climate technology centre” and a network.

He expects a second commitment period for the Kyoto Protocol. Other commentators spoke of a positive negotiating spirit and paving the way for an agreement in Cancun. [10] The agreement calls on rich countries to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, as promised in the Copenhagen agreement, and developing countries to reduce their emissions. The agreement recognizes that climate change poses an urgent and potentially irreversible threat to human societies and the planet, which must be urgently addressed by all parties. It reaffirms that climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our time and that all parties must share a vision of long-term cooperative action in order to achieve the goal of the agreement, including achieving a comprehensive goal. It acknowledges that the warming of the climate system is scientifically confirmed and that most of the increase in global average temperatures observed since the mid-20th century is most likely due to increased anthropogenic concentrations of greenhouse gases, as assessed by the IPCC in its fourth assessment report. The 2010 United Nations Climate Change Conference was held in Cancun, Mexico, from November 29 to December 10, 2010. [1] The conference is officially referred to as the 16th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP 16) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the 6th meeting of the Conference of the Parties, which is called the Meeting of the Parties (CMP 6) of the Kyoto Protocol.

In addition, the two permanent subsidiary bodies of the UNFCCC – the Scientific and Technological Advisory Subsidiary (SBSTA) and the Subsidiary Implementation Body (SBI) – held their 33rd session.