When I played my role in the policy exercise, I was a member of the developing nations. At times I felt slightly frustrated when other countries expected us to “contribute more” when at the point we were at there wan not much more we could. This particularly difficult in regards to carbon emissions as everyone seemed to forget how many people we had and that some form of carbon emissions was inevitable. Generally, though I was able to understand where they were coming from, though I think part of the issue is that while the design of the agreements worked for most nations in regards to decreasing climate emissions it did not in regards to us and India. As the two groups with the lowest per capita carbon emissions, we simply could not sustain any yearly percentage decrease. We could offer a one time decrease of a certain percentage over some years but that proposal could not be incorporated into any calculations. In some ways, our group was lucky in that we had so little that our ideas and requests stayed fairly consistent throughout the process. It was, however, heartbreaking to see that even with all of our aforestation and anti-deforestation efforts, ultimately it did little. I remain optimistic though that over time as though forests would build up they could have a greater impact, it just might be an impact that the people who start such campaigns would never get to see—I still believe it would be worth it.
Several issues arose in the simulation that I am sure are problems with these negotiations today. Mistrust between countries and fear of political corruption is one that we, in particular, had to deal with. This I completely understand. The developing countries of the world (particularly the regions we were given) are rife with corruption and greed in the places of power. These powerful but corrupt individuals are also proponents of taking advantage of their natural resources when they can—regardless of the long-term consequences (The Brazillian President Jair Bolsonaro and his attitudes toward protecting the Amazon being only one of many examples). These are issues that will not be easy to solve. In the simulation, we were able to work out arrangements that included other countries being able to oversee operations they were funding (so long as the jobs went to out people) but we are not blinded by greed or a lust for power the way many world leaders, unfortunately, are.
All in all, I am more optimistic now then I have been in the past about reducing emissions. There seems to be a growing base of support for the idea in the US as well as in China. Here I think we can continue to present the facts, and perhaps stop presenting climate-change deniers as if they have the same scientific backing that climate change itself does. I am not sure if we will realistically be able to get the average degree increased to 2 degrees celsius, but I have hope that more people will see the severity of the situation, and that if some countries who are committed to this are able to sustain themselves on more green energy that the more stubborn of the countries (in particular the US) may come around to the idea.
