Throughout the COP15 climate change summit in Copenhagen, members of the 1000-strong Debatewise Global Youth Panel of 15-25 year-olds from more than 100 countries have been debating issues raised by the conference.
Members of the group held 33 online debates during the 12 days of the UN summit. Covering a wide range of topics – including whether they thought the conference was going to be a success (59% thought it would be). This is being followed up with a debate about whether they think it was a success – currently in progress (so far 75% think it wasn’t).
The GYP and the debates were a great success however, and the Debatewise GYP has decided to carry on now that COP15 has ended, in order to follow the development of climate change issues.
Many of the Global Youth Panel live in some of the world’s poorest countries, and are most likely to be affected by climate change and the decisions made in Copenhagen. Everyone on the GYP has been using Google Wave as the platform on which to debate. This has made the debates accessible to anyone with a computer connected to the Internet – something many of us take for granted. Not so for some of our panel, who have had to overcome some real obstacles in order to take part, but have done so because they feel so strongly about the outcome of the UN summit.
These obstacles included government crackdowns (Iran), bandwidth limitations (Bhutan), and restricted services (Nigeria). The most ironic has to be that of Equador, where panellists often could not get online because of power cuts – caused by a delayed winter and the much needed rain it brings to power the hydroelectric plant.
“I am full of admiration for everyone who has taken the time, battled with the technology and overcome the language barrier to read or participate in the GYP climate change debates. Everyone involved made excellent contributions:
Many of the debaters also took time to explain how they felt climate change was affecting their own environments:
“It’s very exciting that the Global Youth Panel has decided to stay together as a community to track climate change and the progress of organisations such as the UN. Just about everyone has expressed their gratitude at having a platform that has allowed their voices to be heard. But thanks are due to them – to the commitment and effort of everyone who has taken part in these debates,” David Crane adds.
end
List of debates and outcomes:
Monday 7 December:
Is the Copenhagen conference going to be a success? (Yes: 59%; No: 38%; Neutral: 3%)
Does ‘Climategate’
AOSIS will only sign if they get an ambitious deal: (Yes: 70%; No: 23%; Neutral: 7%)
Tuesday 8 December:
The EPA’s ruling allows the US to be more ambitious at Copenhagen (Yes: 75%; No: 17%; Neutral: 8%)
Agreeing mutually acceptable emissions targets will be more effective than tough, legally-binding targets. (Yes: 61%; No: 30%; Neutral: 9%)
Bangladesh should get 15% from any climate fund? (Yes: 24%; No: 61%; Neutral: 14%)
Wednesday 9 December:
The ‘Danish text’ shows that the Danish Government is failing in its duty to be an unbiased host. (Yes: 54%; No: 31%; Neutral: 15%)
A split in the G77 can be papered over. (Yes: 58%; No: 20%; Neutral: 22%
Might makes right. (Yes: 24%; No: 67%; Neutral: 10%)
Thursday 10 December
Blaming others does not help negotiations (Yes: 87%; No: 2%; Neutral: 11%)
It would be better if the Copenhagen conference failed and we start again from scratch (Yes: 9%; No: 74%; Neutral: 17%)
Friday 11 December
Climate change is a security issue (Yes: 75%; No: 16%; Neutral: 9%)
Is the EU contributing its ‘fair share’ to combating climate change? (Yes: 54%; No: 28%; Neutral: 18%)
Consumer culture needs to be stopped if we are to have any chance of preventing climate change. (Yes: 80%; No: 16%; Neutral: 4%)
Saturday 12 December
Should the conference come out with a target to limit temperature rise to 2 degrees? (Yes: 35%; No: 41%; Neutral: 24%)
Sunday 13 December
Spend billions to allow investors to protect rainforests?
Do protesters have an effect? (Yes: 51%; No: 21%; Neutral: 28%)
Monday 14 December
Delegates and leaders show their disregard for the issue of limiting emissions by arriving by plane. (Yes: 28%; No: 68%; Neutral: 4%)
Africa was right to walk out over fears the rich world won’t renew Kyoto. (Yes: 22%; No: 47%; Neutral: 31%)
The core of a deal needs to be done before the leaders arrive. (Yes: 64%; No: 29%; Neutral: 7%)
Tuesday 15 December
Developed and developing countries came to the climate conference with a donor mentality. (Yes: 62%; No: 31%; Neutral: 7%)
A worldwide carbon tax should be imposed. (Yes: 72%; No: 22%; Neutral: 6%)
There needs to be more democracy in the negotiations (Yes: 53%; No: 20%; Neutral: 27%)
Wednesday 16 December
More industrialising countries should follow South Korea’s lead. (Yes: 96%; No: 0%; Neutral: 4%)
Population needs to be limited in all countries, and should be part of the negotiations. (Yes: 54%; No: 33%; Neutral: 13%)
Can leaders manage a deal in the last two days? (Yes: 48%; No: 38%; Neutral: 14%)
Thursday 17 December
Are environmental initiatives undermined by corporate sponsorships?
£100bn per year, enough to save the deal? (Yes: 7%; No: 86%; Neutral: 7%)
Is bringing forward COP16 to Mexico a better option than a poor deal? (Yes: 33%; No: 47%; Neutral: 20%)
Friday 18 December
Does a deal matter? (Yes: 71%; No: 29%; Neutral: 0%)
Google Wave – do you love it or hate it? (Yes: 43%; No: 17%; Neutral: 40%)
Saturday 19 December
Should a small cabal of countries be able to decide a deal? (Ongoing
Copenhagen conference: success or failure? (Ongoing)
*
For more information about Debatewise and the Global Youth Panel Climate Change Debates, please contact:
http://debatewise.org
blog: http://debatewise.info
David Crane
020 3393 7223
dc@debatewise.org
65-71 Scrutton Street
London
EC2A 4PJ
What is Debatewise?
Debatewise is a not-for-profit organisation. It was started by David Crane with the help of funding from Open Society Institute – whose chairman and founder is George Soros (http://www.soros.org/
Debatewise was created to provide a place where the best possible arguments for one side are listed next to the best possible arguments against. These arguments aren't created by one person, but by like-minded individuals collaborating to form the strongest case. This allows people both to easily compare the pros and cons, and come to a decision safe in the knowledge that it’s based upon the best information to hand.
The aim of Debatewise is to be the first place people think of when they want to make up their minds; also to provide an environment where people can visit to explore both sides of an argument or issue, and leave better informed. It’s also hoped that they’ll share their knowledge to better inform others.
