Lesson video

Hello.

My name's Ms. Ikomi, and I'm a teacher from London.

I'm going to be taking you through today's lesson, so we're gonna get started.

Today's lesson is called Have Climate Conferences Made a Positive Impact? It's part of the wider unit, How Effective Is the UN and the Sustainable Development Goals on Promoting Sustainability? By the end of today's lesson, you will be able to evaluate whether climate conferences have made a positive impact on the UN's work on tackling climate change.

The keywords we're going to hear in today's lesson are COP, this stands for the Conference of the Parties.

This is an annual meeting of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the UNFCCC.

Paris Agreement, this is an international treaty on climate change that came into force in 2016.

The treaty addresses climate change mitigation, adaptation, and climate finance.

And last, active citizenship, this is the process of learning how to take part in democracy and use your citizenship knowledge, skills, and understanding to work together and try to make a positive difference in the world.

We are going to start by thinking about what is a climate conference.

The United Nations holds annual conferences called COP.

You know from our definition that this stands for the Conference of the Parties.

This is the conference that is concerned with thinking about climate and how to address climate change.

These conferences bring together countries who have signed the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, the UNFCCC, and gives them an opportunity to discuss progress on some of their goals.

The countries rotate between host countries, and this provides an opportunity for world leaders to meet, to discuss progress, and set new targets to tackle climate change.

The first-ever COP meeting took place in Berlin, in Germany, in 1995.

As it was the first official gathering, countries were focusing on how they would work together to address climate change, thinking about setting out the expectations and ironing out some of those difficulties.

One of the key outcomes of this COP was the creation of a permanent UN body called the Secretariat.

This supports climate action and helps to organise future COPs, so it was a really important outcome from that first one.

Let's do a check.

True or false, the first climate conference was in Paris, and they've taken place every year since.

Pause your video and choose your answer.

Can you also have a think about why you've chosen that answer? The correct answer is false.

This is because the first COP took place in Berlin in 1995, not Paris.

There have been 29 since, and there's another one scheduled in November 2025.

Climate action requires countries to think differently about how they manage the country.

There are lots of challenges that come along with this management.

For example, issues surrounding cutting emissions.

Lots of emissions come from burning fossil fuels.

Switching to cleaner energy, like wind or solar, is how we tackle this.

Even though this is a good idea and is important, it can be very expensive.

So countries come up against difficulties in terms of implementing that.

Changing industries also present a challenge.

Some industries, like mining or heavy manufacturing, produce lots of pollution.

Reducing emissions might result in people losing jobs, and that can impact the economy and employment.

Some further challenges include costs.

Tackling climate change is very expensive.

The UN estimates that it needs around $100 billion every year to support climate action.

Countries have to negotiate on how much money they can contribute, and this will be considering lots of other factors going on, including how strong their economy is at the time.

And the development gap.

Some countries are still newly emerging.

They might rely on some industries that have traditionally been heavier polluters, and that is in order to grow their economies.

If they cut emissions, their development might slow down, and that can create an unfair disadvantaged, particularly compared to high-income countries, who were able to grow and develop their economies in the past, when we didn't really mind about the use of fossil fuels.

Let's do another check.

I'd like you to summarise what type of issues the COP tries to address.

Pause your video and have a go at this now.

COP addresses lots of major challenges to climate action, for example, the high cost of tackling climate change.

The UN needs $100 billion annually to do this, and countries have to negotiate how much they can contribute, and find ways to balance development with reducing emissions.

Some COP meetings have been more influential than others.

One of the earliest significant moments was COP3, which took place in 1997.

This was held in Kyoto, in Japan.

At this meeting, an agreement was made for high-income countries to lower their emissions.

Low-income countries were not required to make the same commitments at that time.

Andeep's telling us, "The Kyoto Protocol was one of the first major international agreements to address climate change." You'll notice that the protocol is named after the place where this COP was hosted.

Another really significant COP was COP21, and that was held in Paris, in France, in 2015.

At this meeting, all the countries agreed to take action to reduce their emissions.

They agreed on a shared goal of limiting the global temperature increase to below two degrees Celsius, and there were efforts to keep it below 1.

5 degrees Celsius.

So this was really important in setting out specific targets.

Izzy's telling us, "The Paris Agreement was the first time the world set a climate goal based on an average global temperature," which really illustrated the fact that this is a shared responsibility.

We can see again that the agreement is named after the city that hosted it in this COP.

Another important COP was COP26, this was held in Glasgow, in the UK, in 2021.

At this meeting, there was a stronger focus on helping low-income and newly emerging countries than in those previous conferences.

New targets were also set for reducing methane gas emissions, which is a particularly harmful greenhouse gas.

Jun's telling us, "The methane reduction target built upon the original goals that were set in the Paris Agreement in 2015." Let's do another check.

Which COP conference agreed that all nations needed to reduce emissions? Is it A, COP3 in Kyoto, B, COP21 in Paris, or C, COP26 in Glasgow? Pause your video and choose your answer.

The correct answer is B, COP21 in Paris.

Let's put this into practise.

I'd like you to explain the function of a climate conference.

I'd like you to include the following terms in your answer, COP, negotiate, and climate action.

You should also include one example of an influential climate conference and one challenge that is faced at climate conferences.

Pause your video and have a go at this now.

I asked you to explain the function of a climate conference using some keywords and examples.

You might have said, "The UN hosts annual meetings called COP, Conference of the Parties.

These conferences bring together world leaders to negotiate climate action and set targets to reduce emissions.

For example, COP21 in Paris set the goal of limiting global temperature rise to below two degrees Celsius.

Climate action is complex.

For example, low-income and newly emerging countries may face challenges in reducing emissions due to their need for continued development.

COP provides a platform for all countries to discuss these challenges and work towards solutions, such as financial support and the sharing of technology." Well done if you included some of that in your answer.

Next, we're going to think about how have climate conferences been positive.

COP3 in Kyoto, Japan, was the first conference to result in a binding treaty on climate change.

Binding means that countries who signed the agreement were legally required to follow it, as it would be written into their laws.

Andeep's telling us, "The Kyoto Protocol was a significant success.

It was first introduced by the UN in 1992.

This was agreed upon at COP3 in 1997, and entered into force in 2005." The Kyoto Protocol aimed to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions, but it recognised that countries also have different capacities to do this, depending on other things that are happening within the economy and within the countries.

The treaty required high-income countries, like the UK, the USA, Russia, and Canada, to reduce their emissions more quickly than newly emerging and low-income countries.

This approach was designed to be fair, with the hope that it would lead to greater success than requiring all nations to reduce emissions at the same rate, 'cause this wouldn't necessarily be feasible for newly emerging nations.

The Kyoto Protocol included several key concepts, one of those is the fact that it is legally binding.

The treaty legally required countries to reduce their emissions and report how they were progressing on this goal to the United Nations.

There were also penalties for non-compliance.

If a country failed to meet its emissions target, it had to make up the difference the following year and pay a penalty.

So this included a chance to keep countries accountable to what they had set out they were going to do.

In terms of implementation, countries had to adopt climate-friendly policies to cut their emissions.

The UN helped in this goal by setting up an emissions trading system.

So if the UK, for example, needed to admit more one year, they might buy unused emission allowances from other countries, who omitted less.

This encourages countries to reduce their emissions.

The treaty also established a fund to assist low-income and emerging countries in transitioning to climate-friendly economies.

The Kyoto Protocol was a success in many ways.

It helped to reduce emissions.

High-income nations experienced a 17% reduction in emissions compared to 1990.

So this demonstrates that it was able to meet some of those goals.

It helped us think about future ambition.

It demonstrated that countries could collaborate on climate and set the stage for more ambition agreements, such as the Paris Agreement, which came later.

It was the first of its kind.

As the first international treaty on climate change, it was a symbolic success, as it was able for countries to come together and agree to these goals.

Let's do another check.

Which of these was not part of the Kyoto Protocol? Is it A, to promote unrestricted industrial growth in low-income nations, B, create a fund, which supported nations to switch to climate friendly economies, or C, create legally binding commitments on nations to reduce their emissions and report progress to the UN? Pause your video and choose your answer.

The correct answer is A.

COP21 resulted in the Paris Agreement, which built upon and updated the Kyoto Protocol that we've been speaking about.

Izzy's telling us, "By 2015, some progress had been made in reducing emissions, but the scale of climate change made it clear that much more needed to be done." Therefore, the Paris Agreement took some of those ideas and those goals, and aimed to create a legally binding framework for climate action.

It became legally binding in November 2016, after enough countries had ratified it.

When a country ratifies an agreement, they fully embedded and consent to taking part.

Unlike the Kyoto Protocol, the Paris Agreement did not set a central emissions target.

Instead, it required nations to set their own targets that they were working towards.

The main goal was to limit global temperature rise to below two degrees Celsius, with an ambition to keep it below 1.

5 degrees Celsius.

The Paris Agreement had some important principles.

It had, ultimately, that temperature goal, to limit global warming to well below two degrees Celsius, and ideally, to below 1.

5.

This was compared pre-industrial levels.

This goal requires action from all the nations, not just high-income countries.

So we see a little bit of a difference there between the Kyoto Protocol.

It also allowed for nationally determined contributions.

Each country set its own emissions reduction targets through these NDCs, which were to be reviewed every five years to ensure progress and ambition.

It also had long-term goals.

It set a long-term aim for all countries to reach net-zero emissions by the second half of the 21st century.

That involves reducing emissions to zero or capturing and storing carbon.

And also the principle of resilience.

The agreement focused on adaptation, encouraging nations to build climate resilience in the future through green energy and climate-smart infrastructure, which would hopefully make this less of an issue.

It established mechanisms to fund projects that improve that resilience later down the line, such as flood defences and also renewable energy initiatives.

The Paris Agreement has been a success in lots of ways.

It has had wide participation.

195 parties sign the agreement, expanding the global commitment compared to the Kyoto Protocol.

It had early progress.

Lots of countries committed to transitioning away from fossil fuels.

This demonstrates stronger collective action than in previous agreements.

It has the element of collaboration for climate action.

All the nations agree to share technology, ideas, and research to address climate change, and foster mutual support between countries.

Let's do another check.

Which of these is a success of the Paris Agreement? Is it A, it created a legally binding commitment on high-income nations to reduce their emissions, B, it's allowed nations to share research and technology to lessen the impacts of climate change, or C, it successfully reduced total global greenhouse gas emissions by a total of 25%? Pause the video and choose your answer now.

The correct answer is B.

Well done if you got that right.

Let's put this into practise.

I'd like you to evaluate which climate conference has had the most significant impact on tackling climate change.

You should consider the outcomes of each conference, the challenges they faced, and the level of global participation.

Just justify your answer based on the key features of each conference discussed.

Pause your video and have a go at this now.

I asked you to evaluate which climate conference has had the most significant impact on tackling climate change.

You might have included some of the following in your answer, "COP3 has had the most significant impact because it was the first time countries agreed to a legally binding deal to reduce emissions.

This was the Kyoto Protocol.

This protocol led to a 17% reduction in emissions from high-income nations compared to 1990 levels and proved that countries could work together to tackle climate change.

It was also fair because it asked high-income countries to do more, recognising they were the biggest polluters.

Whilst it was a strong start and set a good precedent, the Kyoto Protocol also showed how challenging it is to get every country to do their part equally." An alternative answer might have spoken about COP21.

"COP21 has had the biggest impact because it resulted in the Paris Agreement, which allowed countries to set their own emissions reductions targets through nationally determined contributions.

This flexibility made it easier for more countries to commit to taking action.

The main goal of the agreement is to limit the global temperature rise to well below two degrees Celsius, with efforts to limit it to 1.

5.

This shifts the focus from just cutting emissions to addressing the larger issue of global warming.

The agreement also encourages global cooperation, helping countries share technology and resources, which is especially important for those with fewer resources to tackle climate change.

Also, 195 parties signed the agreement, showing much wider participation than previous climate treaties." Last, we're going to think about how are citizens involved in climate conferences An important part of these conferences is the opportunity for people and citizens to get involved.

They can participate in formal events, like discussions and panels, or informal action, like protests or social media campaigns.

Jun's reminding us that, "Active citizenship is where a person takes an active responsibility, becomes involved in areas of public concern, and tries to make a positive difference in their community.

COPs are the perfect opportunity to do this." During COP26, around 100,000 people march through Glasgow to demand stronger action from world leaders on climate change.

Activists highlighted how climate change affects their communities through lots of powerful speeches.

For example, Ugandan activists, Vanessa Nakate, stressed that the climate crisis is already here, and that ordinary people have to demand change when leaders fail to act.

March and speeches are an example of active citizenship.

When people feel strongly about issues, they might organise a protest.

In this situation, citizens gathered to demand a change in climate policies.

COP is a gathering of world leaders.

And by organising a protest at COP26, citizens had the opportunity to grab their attention.

In Glasgow, the peaceful protests highlighted just how strongly citizens feel about government action on climate change.

Let's do a check.

What type of active citizenship did citizens take part in at COP26 in Glasgow? Was it A, a judicial review, B, violent disorder, or C, a peaceful protest? Pause your video and choose your answer.

The correct answer is C.

Another important way citizens can take part in COP conferences is through citizens' assemblies.

Climate Assembly UK is an organisation that hosts citizens' assemblies on climate change.

In these assemblies, groups of people come together to learn about climate change, discuss the impacts, and propose solutions for actions.

These are based on their views and understandings.

Climate Assembly UK invited over 30,000 citizens to take part in their assembly.

They selected 108 individuals to represent the citizens of the UK.

Those participants ranged from age 16 to 79 years old, showing the full range and wide interest and involvement in climate issues.

Sam's telling us, "Citizens' assemblies give people a platform to have their voices heard and play an active role in addressing serious challenges like climate change." At a citizens' assembly, citizens are given information by expert panels.

They provide balanced, factual information.

Once the citizens have heard this information, they're then given time to debate the issues.

At this assembly in the UK, citizens discussed how electricity is produced, how we make food and transport people and goods, how we might reach net-zero sooner.

These recommendations are then sent to the UK government to consider.

Citizens' assemblies might take place on a smaller scale and at different locations, these are called citizens' juries.

These are further examples of active citizenship, which might be informally organised by local groups.

Let's do a check.

What type of issues did the Climate Assembly UK discuss? Was it A, how to reach net-zero, B, how many emissions the UK could release, or C, if the UN's goals were good or not? Pause your video and choose your answer.

The correct answer is A.

Let's do another task.

I'd like you to think about whether you agree or disagree with the following statement, there is no role for citizens in climate conferences.

Write two paragraphs explaining your answer, include both sides of the argument, and consider the role of active citizenship.

Pause a video and have a go at this now.

Let's check our answers.

Your answer might have included some of the following, "Some may agree with the argument that there's no role for citizens in climate conferences.

For instance, COP events are designed for political leaders to negotiate and set international targets, such as reducing emissions and addressing the impacts of climate change.

The formal negotiations at COPs are indeed restricted to official delegates, and citizens are not directly involved in the decision-making process.

This formal exclusion might suggest that citizens have little influence on the outcomes of these high-level meetings, especially when considering that many important discussions occur behind closed door between government representatives." However, others may disagree with this argument.

Whilst COP conferences are mainly attended by political leaders, citizens have still played an important role in influencing the outcomes.

At COP26, for example, around 100,000 citizens march through Glasgow to demand urgent government action on climate change.

This shows that citizens can make their voices heard.

Citizens' assemblies, such as Climate Assembly UK, give ordinary people the opportunity to discuss climate change.

They propose solutions and ensure their views are heard by government leaders.

Citizens' assemblies allow citizens to directly contribute their ideas, which can influence future climate policies.

These forms of active citizenship create pressure for ambitious climate policies and hold leaders accountable for their commitments.

Therefore, showing citizens can play a role.

Today, we have been thinking about have climate conferences made a positive impact.

We've learned that climate conferences, such as COP, allow countries to negotiate and agree on climate action.

For example, setting targets for emission reductions, providing support, and addressing the transition to green energy.

The Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement were key milestones, with the Kyoto Protocol being the first legally binding treaty, and the Paris Agreement allowing nations to set their own targets.

Active citizenship plays a key role in shaping climate action.

People engaged through protests and citizens' assemblies to ensure their voices are heard at climate conferences.

These actions help hold leaders accountable and push for stronger climate policies.

That's the end of today's lesson.