February 24, 2010, 6 p.m., 92Y Tribeca, 200 Hudson Street, New York, NY 10013
Nikhil Chandavarkar in conversation with David A. Andelman
An invitation-only event co-presented by RSA-US and the World Policy Journal
Nikhil Chandavarkar, FRSA, Secretary to UN-Water, offers his unique insights on the outcomes of the COP15 talks in a conversation with David A. Andelman, Editor of the World Policy Journal.
This special event brings together two thought-leaders to offer expert perspectives on the key issues coming out of the COP15 talks. What are prospects for an effective global climate change treaty? What was achieved and what is left to do? How can individuals, organizations, communities and countries play a part in what comes next?
This event is part of a series of programs on sustainability in which RSA-US connects ideas with action locally, nationally, and globally. We will try to address the struggles at each level to define scope, communicate in ways that can be relevant and easy to grasp, and empower people to see themselves as having the ability to make a difference. For more information on the RSA visit www.theRSA.org.
This event is made possible by the generous support of our speakers, partners and sponsors. RSA-US is grateful to the World Policy Journal and 92Y for their partnership.
To reserve a place, email LBroadbent@rsa-us.org. This event will fill quickly so early reservations are recommended. Priority will be given to RSA Fellows and their guests. A cash bar is available for informal discussion after the close of the program.
-
We are happy to pass along announcements from RSA Fellows which are in keeping with the RSA’s mission. RSA is not responsible for the content of Fellows’ websites or organization of Fellows’ events.
{ 6 comments… read them below or add one }
Now that the Chinese have formally questioned the validity of any connection between greenhouse gas emissions and climate change, and the evidence for global warming is seriously shaken by revelations concerning the quality of key data used in the IPCC Reports, how will the UN modify its recommended policy of transfer of more than $1 billion from developed to industrialising nations?
Let’s fill the room to overflowing!
Great location. Important subject. Exciting opportunity to meet others passionate about this challenging issue.
Robin
Copenhagen has been quickly forgotten – Toyota’s production problems, for example, are now the media’s focus. Banking reform and healthcare issues have replaced the environment on the public’s priority list. Questions for me include, how well co-ordinated is the ‘pro-environment’ camp; what’s the strategy; who should be the lead partner (in disaster response matters the Red Cross comes to mind). This issue is the most important matter of our time, yet we are not treating it with the respect and resource it derserves. As I’ve said before, the financial services collapse is a current, clear example of what happens if one waits too long, i.e. a near complete collapse of our financial system and now severe pain for millions of people. Shall we follow the same path for the eco-system?
The news cycle keeps turning but under it the heartbeat of reality continues to beat driven by human behavior. How does RSA fit into all this?
We are exploring a new active model where a Fellow is empowered to grab any one of the issues you mention and run with it….the aim being to achieve social progress. Climate change continues regardless of Copenhagen. Resolution of issues surrounding the burning of carbon need to be transformed into action such as a tax on carbon fuels. Are we able to find pathways that help to decarbonize our atmosphere and enable us to survive?
Forgive me, robin, but” … resolution of issues surrounding the burning of carbon” will not be achieved by “a tax on carbon fuels”" which presumes carbon to be guilty before trial. What we need is further, honest climate science designed to establish what, if any, influence carbon has on climate change. I personally am doubtful if carbon has any measurable influence; if it were guilty, there would be no need for Jones, Mann, Hansen and others to collude in fiddling the data.
It’s interesting and at the same time frustrating to see how easy it is to deny rather than affirm.
Amritya Sen makes the point that we can all quickly recognize an injustice while maybe getting lost in the philosophical clouds attempting to define justice.
Blogs provide a potentially great medium for exchange but seem to become rapidly corrupted by the gotcha brigade and the BANANAs…build absolutely nothing anywhere near anything. Most people then just move away to spend their time elsewhere. Meanwhile the underlying behavioral issues remain whether about justice, climate, poverty, reconstructing Haiti or rebuilding the dysfunctional US political system.
Has anyone else noticed the same problem? And if so, what to do about it? That might be an interesting discussion.