Jane Nees BOP Regional Councillor www.janenees.co.nz

On my way to Cardiff recently for the birth of a new grandchild, I stopped off in London to attend a conference on climate change.

Called ‘Navigating the Green Economy', the conference was attended by policy makers, lawyers and researchers from the European Union, the United Kingdom and the United States. The conference addressed the conundrum of climate change – considered to be an urgent and very complex situation which is being responded to in many parts of the world by inertia.

Key messages of the conference were:

• there is no doubt about climate change;
• the effects are already being seen;
• urgent action is imperative;
• huge behaviour change will be required to address what is the biggest challenge facing the world going forward.

The conference addressed the promise of renewable energy and clean technologies in creating a base for a green economy going forward. It was, however, very much a story of two halves – that of the developed world and that of the developing world. Enlightened developed countries can make all the changes they like, but if the developing nations don't take positive action, negative effects from climate change endangering our future are certain.

The European Union and the United Kingdom are well on to it, but the USA is so politically tangled that it is unlikely they will be taking cohesive action any time soon. New Zealand was recognised as taking brave steps forward initially, but our government's review of our Emissions Trading Scheme was noted. We aren't the only country to count agricultural emissions. Denmark for example is doing so too – and it is acknowledged it is a difficult area to mitigate.

Corporately responsible investment was lauded, as was the need for an international green bank to provide low cost finance for renewable energy projects to get them over the line.

There was a lot of debate about whether a carrot or stick approach is better to achieve behaviour change. The USA favours tax incentives, but there was recognition that a mix of tools is best and that ultimately a carbon tax will be necessary. It was thought a staged and sequential use of incentives and information (carrot) backed up by rules, regulations and taxes (stick) will be needed.

I was really impressed by some of the policies being put in place by countries such as Norway – not only setting ambitious domestic targets, but also contributing many millions to help developing nations respond to climate change. We on the other hand are being much more modest about our response and I am convinced we need to do more. Especially in informing our communities about the risks.

If you have views about this or any other issue, please email [email protected]