 Welcome to this plenary discussion on climate change, the challenges of the issue and the road to Durban, where the next conference of parties will be held. My name is Dominic Waray. I'm a senior director in charge of environmental initiatives here at the World Economic Forum and we run various activities on climate change. I shall hand this over to our moderator, David Nabaru, who is the UN Secretary-General's special representative on food security and nutrition. David. Thank you very much indeed. Good morning, Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to this really important panel on the Durban agenda. And you have all got the details of the program in front of you and we have a lot of business to cover, so I'm not going to spend a lot of time providing background, I'd just like to tell you that we are going to try to have short presentations from the panelists initially on the issues around the Durban agenda and we may have some exchange between the panelists as we drive into the issues in greater detail. There will I hope be an opportunity if we have time for one or two questions and then we will have a summing up. So without more ado, I'd like to welcome Excellency President Jacob Zuma of South Africa and invite him to set out his vision for the Durban agenda. Thank you very much, brother, for the opportunity and indeed this very important item, we don't have enough time to talk about. I've seen in conferences where a lot of time is taken and it's always difficult to arrive at conclusions, but I think it is important to say the world is faced by this very big challenge that is challenging everyone. And of course the challenges, it is always, its depth is not the same. There are other parts of the world where the challenge is very severe, very serious. In some, it is a question of life and death. I'm sure many of us who have listened to the small states and the islands or the islands will appreciate that to them is not just a debate about what impact the climate change is having. It is a question of their life and death. In some countries, the effects of it might not be as obvious. I think the recent experience of Japan indicates the reality of the challenge that you're faced with today. The question that faces all of us is how do we respond to this challenge? The objective of everyone has always been to reach the legally binding agreement that will try to accommodate all of us and therefore act with that understanding that as the globe we need to protect ourselves collectively. We were in Copenhagen and I think all of us know that experience where we imagine with an accord that helped us to reach Cancun. But also in Cancun, we had some understanding which again would help us to reach Durban. I think the question that we're faced with, the obvious question of course, are we ready to have a legally binding agreement as the world? Clearly, there are different views related to different regions of the world and what is it that people could do and not do? We say we need common but differentiated responsibilities that we all have. How do we harmonize that? What is our understanding of that? What is expected of each one of us? There are specific proposals that have been put but I think it has been difficult for all of us to meet the final agreement and therefore implement them. We are therefore looking forward as all the cobs that have met in Durban to have a kind of an agreement that will take us forward. We are also hoping that we'll be able to reach concrete programs to implement the Cancun agreements, for an example, but also move forward. It will be an ideal thing to reach a legally binding agreement, particularly because this UN conference is taking place in the continent of Africa, hosted by South Africa, a continent that is facing very serious challenges. We believe that the world would take all of that into account and indeed try to reach a kind of a common understanding which will indicate the sensitivity that the world has with regard to the continent of Africa. Thank you. Thank you very much indeed, sir, very, very clear. And, ladies and gentlemen, one of the themes of our discussion this morning is going to be the very specific challenges faced by the people and continent of Africa. And I'd like to invite President Ali Mungo on Dimba of Gabon to give us his perspective on why Africa is going to depend so much on the outcomes of the Durban conference present. Thank you very much. I will always remember those hours passed, you know, in a small room in Copenhagen. President Zuma was there in that room. And we also had the Prime Minister, Senes Benawi, from Ethiopia. I had just been sworn in as, you know, president two months prior to that conference in Copenhagen. So it's fair to say that I was aware of the problems of the environment. But I came out and I went back home after Copenhagen. I won't say a changed man, but convinced that, you know, there was more to be done. And President Zuma reminded us of the question of survival of those small islands. That fight we were trying and at one o'clock in the morning trying to get to put the maximum raise, you know, the temperature at 1.5 Celsius. And we couldn't reach that agreement, but finally we put two degrees. We in Africa are in a very difficult situation regarding climate change. And we are about those, you know, that are going to be suffering most if nothing is done. We chose to speak with one voice and we will be united again in Durban. It's critical for us because we have to face two major problems, you know. First, how to fight climate change. And obviously today one of the tools will be the technology. So technology is key, is vital. Secondly, how to finance those programs of, you know, adaptation and mitigation. So the financial aspect is also very important. That was addressed in Copenhagen. And the special fund, $10 billion for three years, leading up to 2020 where we would have $100 billion. But the question is that for us as leaders committed our way to really take upon us to be a little less selfish and to think of, you know, the community as a whole. For me it is a matter of determination, how committed we really are. And it is important for us to realize that this is serious matter. That is, there's no way around it whether we work together or we will not succeed. One cannot succeed over the other. And that's very important for us. So we will be determined to speak one voice because it's also important for us, as you know, Africans to get together. But it is also important for us to really also get on board the business community. Because as I said, you know, the financial part is critical. And governments alone will not be able to bear the whole burden. So we have to bring the business community on board. You know, make it, you know, environmentally profitable business. And the business community leaders all together will, will be able to find, you know, a solution to these problems. Thank you very much indeed, Your Excellency. Sheila Susulu works as the Deputy Executive Director of the World Food Programme. And Sheila, you and your work see how people are affected by shocks of different kinds. How important is climate change for the people of Africa with whom you are working day-to-day? Thanks, David. I think I'd just like to start by saying that South Africa has an organizing principle for its development and that government applies, which is called Batrubili, People First. And I think South Africa should lead in Durban with that principle of putting people first in all the discussions about climate change. And just to give you a flavor of what I'm talking about, just last year, 2010, 200 million people were affected by climate-related disasters, 200 million. At the cost of 400 billion. And 80% of those people did not have any social safety net, did not have any protection, any fallback either by government or themselves. So this is not what will happen. It has happened, it is happening now. And therefore the social dimensions of climate change on people affecting hunger, they get hungry in that process because they cannot grow food, their agriculture is not responding the way they've known for centuries how it works, and it affects their health, it affects their livelihoods. The other of course dimension being the only woman on the panel I have to say is the gender, the impact of climate change on women and children. I'm sure my leaders here and my brothers would probably mention women in passing but I want to stick to that point that we have to look at that issue as we look at these social dimensions of climate change and the point is to act now. It's not to act after Durban, to act after an agreement has been reached because as President Zuma has said in many instances it's already a matter of life and death and when it's a choice between life and death people do choose life by the way and they will use any means possible to survive. And already we can see conflicts happening when pastoralists move with their livestock to look literally for greener pastures. When we see young people living in rural areas and we have a resulting rapid urbanization and huge numbers of young people in Africa in particular who are unemployed they've left the land because the land is not yielding much. So we should act now and I think again South Africa should give the opportunity for African governments to showcase what some of them are already doing successfully. They're not waiting for when the money comes, when the agreements come because people on the ground are reacting and governments are already responding so it should be a good thing to showcase what governments are doing in partnership with communities, with the international community and we have a lot of tools and experiences that we can also share in that forum. Thank you. Thank you very much indeed, Sheila. Ladies and gentlemen, James Cameron our next panelist told me that he has been involved in every one of the climate negotiations so far. James you've heard very clear statements from our three panelists about what's going to be happening and how we've got to really move forward with urgency. What are your expectations of COP17 in Durban and your advice to those who are going to be involved in the negotiations? Well thank you David. It's very easy to follow these introductory remarks from the other panelists because in essence what we face in this process is the survival and prosperity of the whole human race. That's as big an issue as any leader will face in their tenure and office. Now when we have such a severe threat in mind, one has to move very quickly to how to respond in a way that encourages others to follow and where we don't overwhelm ourselves with the fear of the consequences. So there are two propositions I'd like to put to the audience and to the panel. The first is that we have no alternative other than to make a multilateral process work. We need very high levels of cooperation in order to solve a very complex and dispersed collective action problem, which means we need institutional power, the authority to act cooperatively and the only option we have at the moment is the UN process with which we are all connected and which will have its next round here in South Africa at the end of the year. So we have to commit to that process. For those who are the weakest and most dispossessed, they only have the law to seek justice. They don't have economic or political power. That certainly was the case with the small island states that I represented for years. So we have to commit to that. But as an investor, I have very much the view of Sheila's constituency too, which is that we cannot wait for a particular type of legally binding agreement in order to act now to both manage risk and find opportunity. So I would like all those involved in negotiations, both those who are formally negotiating and those who attend, who attend in the kind of trade fair that surrounds the event that brings their technology and business ideas, to simply ask the question, where are the resources to solve this collective action problem? And if they ask that question honestly and openly, they will find that it's not in the treasuries of the Western world. It's not exclusively in the technologies that are currently possessed by those in Western companies. It's actually amongst us all. It's in the sovereign wealth funds of the petroleum producing nations. It's in the pension funds and insurance industries that are located here in South Africa. It's in the innovation that's already taking place in businesses in this part of the world. I learned this week of a brilliant demand side management technology that's been developed in cooperation with two businesses here in South Africa. That didn't need any technology transfer from anybody. It didn't need any donor money. It was created here in South Africa. Can be applied to SCOM here, but it also could be sold around the world. And really my final point is that once you ask that question, where are the resources? You immediately turn to the human resources, the ingenuity, the creativity that exists. Because this problem requires thinking differently. It requires a certain change of mentality. Why shouldn't that innovation in how we do business and how we behave amongst ourselves emerge from here? Why should we look to the so-called developed world to produce the answer to reconceptualizing, rethinking how we organize our economies? I'm equally confident that those views will come through from this part of the world. And I like to see the process that we have to commit to be a place where you come and bring those ideas. Durban will be a success if a number of businesses get together around the edge of the negotiations and decide to deploy capital at scale into low-carbon technologies. Durban will be a success if a smaller group of countries got together and said, even if we can't get a binding global agreement on all matters, this we can agree on. This particular intervention will have this material effect to how we organize the flow of capital in our economies. We'll do that. Durban will be a success if at the event, the institutional investors of the world, committed to allocate more capital to green technologies. And they made that binding agreement amongst themselves without the intervention of governments, but inspired by the gathering that would take place here. And that's really where I'd like to rest at this stage, the notion that there are many related interests in resource efficiency, in the nexus between food security, water security, and energy security, that can be moved ahead on now because they have a much more immediate concern for ordinary people today and for politicians who represent them, than dealing with the climate change issue as a risk approaching slowly from afar. But we need to do both at the same time and commit wholeheartedly to the both. James, thank you very much indeed. The issue is here and now. There is a vital political process underway, but there are also actions that can and should be taken now using indigenous resources. Pat Davis is Chief Executive of a major South African company working in the energy sphere and also doing a number of other very important industrial related products. Pat, would you like to give your, in a way, your position on what might be happening in relation to the Durban process, but also to address some of the points raised by James Cameron? Thank you, David. I must say I'm feeling a little lonely as the sole current businessman, and I must hasten to add that I speak as a businessman. I would hardly claim to represent all of business on the African continent. But I do have a couple of comments to make on what is, I agree, as other speakers have said, a very serious challenge, and I think business generally takes this as a very serious challenge. The first point is to pick up on other speakers is this has to be a team approach. We have to have government, business, civil society, and communities all working together. Much in the way we did last year in this country or in this continent with a very successful hosting of the Football World Cup. We need this Team Africa approach to make all of this a success, I believe. Our government in this country, we're delighted to see, has been very open and very engaging of business, and I think business through its various fora is responding appropriately. Governments, and we have many of them represented here, need to provide us with the clear rules, the direction, the certainty, and we would argue, of course we would argue, the incentives, not only the disincentive, such as taxes, but the incentives, so that business with clear rules, with some certainty can get on with doing what it does best. And that is making the plans to change, to adapt, to mitigate, and to invest in new technologies and new ways of providing the world with its energy and its resources and its commodities. That's generally how it happens, I think. Governments must define the policy, the implementation thereof is generally left to business to get on with. And business must not only get on with influencing and assisting with the policy development process, but we must get on with our own mitigation and adaptation to James's point. There's a lot we can do without waiting for global agreements. Companies such as mine have for many years now been doing quite a lot on investing in renewable energies, working on energy efficiencies. We've done some, we're doing more, and we plan to do a lot more, given the certainty that we hope is going to be forthcoming. A very important point is that whatever agreement is reached by governments, and this is something I think that Sheila has emphasized, must not compromise competitiveness of any particular region or country, mustn't compromise growth, employment, or the poverty alleviation that is so necessary in our continent today. I believe the latest jargon is climate resilience, which balances sustainable solutions on mitigation and adaptation with economic development and growth. There's a lot of talk about green jobs and how many can be created as we move to a more, to a lower carbon world. Not all of us are as convinced that so many green jobs are going to be forthcoming as quickly as some people seem to anticipate. So it's important, traditional industries, many of those that are based in South Africa also do their bit. In this regard as well, in our particular country, is something of an outlier. We are a very carbon-intensive economy. We have very limited alternatives to make quick changes. This needs to be taken into account carefully as we make commitments. Our president spoke about legally binding agreements and with great respect, I'd like to suggest that those commitments should be to mitigating actions. They should be, I think the terminology, is nationally appropriate mitigating actions rather than us committing to hard targets now. I think a lot more work has to be done, developed economies versus developing economies, et cetera. A lot of the impacts have to be clearly understood before we make such hard targets. I think furthermore, the African bloc is, should, and this has been mentioned, resist any pressure to forego the conditions agreed upon in Copenhagen. African needs, despite what we can do ourselves, we still need technology transfer, we need funding, and we need capacity building. So we should hold on to that conditionality, in my opinion. So, David, in summary, a team approach, be careful about the agreements, but I believe business will come to the party, not only in terms of content, but also in terms of the logistics, the process of making Durban a great success for this continent. Thank you very much indeed. I appreciate you're not speaking as a representative of business, but I think that your points that you've made will surely resonate with many business people here who are taking part in this, and I hope that when we have space for exchange, that business people in the audience will come and give their perspectives, either taking sides with you or perhaps questioning any of the points that you've made. And I'd really like to say how pleased I am that we have here in our panel a minister from the Government of India, Anand Sharma. And while Pat was talking, Mr. Sharma, I saw your head nodding a bit. Some points of agreement, particularly when he mentioned nationally appropriate and not hard targets. I wonder if you could give us your perspective and perhaps also the Government of India's perspective on what ought to be happening during COP 17 in Durban, South Africa, later this year. Thank you, David. I was listening carefully to President Zuma, the President of Gabon, our sister Sisulu, and the representatives of the industry, Pat and the others. It's very clear that the magnitude of the challenge confronting humankind in the form of climate change is enormous. It is affecting every region, every continent, all countries, developing poor. And I fully agree with what you said about the social dimension. It is manifesting in Africa, in Asia, in South Americas. I was reading yesterday in Africa, which could be the brainbasket of the world, given the land, given the resources, human material. There's already a reduction of 50% to 60% in rainfall, particularly in those regions where there was abundant water, whether Niger, Lake Chard, and beyond. No, it's home to 1 billion people. Now, when we are talking about addressing the challenge, we have to bear in mind that these are developing countries with Africa, India, South Americas, and our neighbors in Asia. There was this cute balance of power in the world, which did condemn a large part of humankind to poverty, backwardness, illiteracy. That was the Industrial Revolution, the technologies which came, and the great divide. Those who had the benefit to advance, to colonize, and those who didn't. Now, in the 21st century, second decade, COP17 being hosted by South Africa assumes a special significance. And we wish the Durban Conference well, and India will fully support to ensure that there is a successful conclusion, which is acceptable, balanced, and equitable. Equity is vitally important in whatever outcome is there. Equitable distribution and sharing of resources, technologies. Let's also not forget, when it comes to responsibility, it's true that it cannot be compartmentalized, that it should be developed countries, or it is only developing countries. I fully agree with what was said. It has to be a team effort within the countries, between government, business, civil society, but a global partnership. No country or group of countries are in a position to address a challenge of this magnitude. Having said that, we also have to look at the developmental dimension. It has many interlinkages, the climate change challenge. Of energy access, energy security, food security, health security, poverty alleviation. They all are interlinked. To address one, overlooking the others would be a fundamental mistake, which in my view and India's view should not be made. Africa has only 25% of electricity intensity. And developed countries, on average, have electricity intensity, which is 13 times more. In India, we're known as a fast-developing economy. We're a country of 1.2 billion people. 600 million live in villages. And at least half of them have no access to electricity. That's why the UNFCC and the earlier protocols, which have been agreed, if I refer to Kyoto, and which led to the Bali Road map, the principle of common but differentiated responsibility as per the respective capabilities of the countries have to be respected and honoured. Because if we do not do that, we'll be condemning a large part of the world to live in perpetual backwardness. As development takes place, energy consumption will increase. Therefore, just to remind that 2.2 billion people in Africa and India contribute 4% in Africa and 4% in India to the per capita greenhouse gas emissions. So the technologies, the financing, the intellectual property rights related matters come to the fore. Cancun did make progress when it comes to a broader understanding and agreement between the developing and the developed countries. But the issues of financing and IPRs have not been addressed. Mitigation and adaptation, these are just not two words. The damage which has been done for a long period in the industrialization and the kind of consumption and pollution that has taken place. I'm afraid those who have the technologies must share it for the benefit of the humankind. The small island countries, the LDCs. For that matter, a large number of developing countries do not have the resources, even to generate electricity, let alone invest in innovation and new technologies. We are committed in India to clean development mechanisms. We have a national election plan. I hope some have credit. We are giving emphasis on renewable energy. 20 gigawatts we are producing from renewables. And we have kick-started many more missions where we are going to take it to at least 100 gigawatts in this decade itself. We have made voluntary offers at Copenhagen. And our basic countries coming together addressing this issue saved Copenhagen to some extent and have led us here. I hope those issues will get addressed. And most important thing for COP 17 would be to ensure that there are second commitments made on Kyoto Protocol of deep emission cuts. Those who have not done it, because 2012 the Kyoto Protocol runs out, this will be the last opportunity for the world to ensure that there is a renewed commitment made at Dublin. Minister, thank you very much indeed. And in particular, I would like to reflect on your clarity on the important challenge of equitable development within the context of the essential agreements that need to be reached. And I wonder if Prime Minister Reiler Odinga, I could ask you to give your perspective on what Team Africa should be anticipating from COP 17, perhaps also reflecting on some of the points that Minister Sharma and other panellists made while they were speaking. Thank you very much. Well, we are very pleased that COP 17 is taking place here in Africa. And we congratulate South Africa for being the convener. When we went through Copenhagen, all of us were very optimistic that we would come out with positive results. We were disappointed. Cancun was an improvement on Copenhagen. And we all want to believe that, Durban, we have further improvement on Cancun. On the continent of Africa, right now there are two developments which are affecting the lives of our people. One is the sharp increase in the prices of food on the international market. And secondly is the price of oil. These two developments are impacting very negatively on our people. And they have something also to do with climate change. It is not a secret that food prices in the international market are high because of climate change. That large areas that were used for food production have now been affected. In Kenya, we live between two twin disasters, of El Nino and his twin sister, La Nina. So once El Nino has come with devastating floods, in his wake, it invites his sister to move in and comes with severe drought. That affects the food production. The increase in demand for oil, particularly by the emerging developing economies, itself is responsible for the rise in the price of oil. But this demand also means more emissions of greenhouse gases in the environment. So we therefore need to act now. And our view here is that we don't need to wait in Africa that time to act now even with the limited resources at our disposal. And we, for example, in Kenya have already begun this. For example, at Independence, we had a forest cover of 12% that is now less than 2%. So we began a very massive program of a forestation aiming to increase the forest cover to 10% by the year 2030. We are also, for example, trying to rehabilitate a lake that used to be very lively and teeming with life, which has also been severely affected, like Nevasha. And we are regenerating that. But then the Africa cannot do this alone. In Copenhagen, there was the $30 billion that was pledged. This, again, was confirmed in Cancun and it was supposed to be $30 billion to be disbursed by the end of 2012. And from then on, it was supposed to be increased to $100 billion going upward to 2020. Up to now, not much of this money has been seen. Suffering from what you call a vicious cycle. African countries are saying we are not seeing this money. The developed economies are saying that there are no bankable projects that are available to be funded. That really was the reason why we started what is called Paris-Norobi Initiative. This is an initiative between the French government and the Kenya government. But which has now brought in all the other African countries is a cooperation on green energy, clean energy. We had a conference last month in Paris attended by over 30 African ministers. And this is aimed at tapping the resources that are available on the continent. Geothermal, wind, solar, and biofuels. So that African countries can come up with bankable projects for funding in order to disabuse the notion that there are no projects that can be funded. Already a secretary that has been established in Nairobi for this purpose and to coordinate the effort on Africa. Now, we hope that in Durban, we will be able to come up with a legally binding agreement on the limits of emissions, which has eluded the past two conferences, that is Copenhagen and Cancun, that these limits will be much more severe. We are also hoping that we can include the national appropriate mitigation actions, particularly for developing countries here. And we hope that it may be possible to extend the Kyoto Protocol by at least three years as a bridge as we continue to negotiate for this binding agreement. We are saying that we have no option in this matter. Failure is not an option in this matter because the resources on this planet are finite. You cannot borrow them from many other planets. Therefore, you have to use them prudently and frugally. Thank you. Prime Minister, thank you very much indeed. I'd like now to invite President Zuma to react to what he's heard from the panelists and to tell us a bit whether this has in any way either confirmed or even changed any of his thoughts about the priorities for the Durban meeting before then inviting comments from you here in the audience if you have any points to make yourselves. President. Well, thank you very much once again. I think the colleagues here have made very important points, which I believe in a way they are a contribution to the preparations as we go for COP 17. I think they've made very important points, which are part of what is being discussed in preparations. A number of meetings that are being held globally in preparations. And I'm hoping that those who are participating in those meetings are taking notes of what are the critical points. I think it is true that as a global community, we have no alternative. We have to respond to the challenges of the climate change. They are here. They're a life and death. And therefore, we have to. And I think it is equally true that we cannot hesitate. We cannot wait. We need to act now. And that, again, we need to put the resources on the table. There are understandings that have been reached in this regard. And there are people who have been put in place to raise the resources. And I think we should be able to do so. And I think we should be able to get something, particularly on the question of the resources, as a very firm report in Deborah. Do we have the resources? If not, why? I also believe that the point that has been raised by Sharma in particular, the question of renewing our commitments, is absolutely crucial. Because we cannot allow a situation where we go back on very important commitments that were made. I think what we need to perhaps become frank about is where are the problems? Who is responsible in delaying us moving forward if this is a question of life and death, so that we could focus to those who are finding it very difficult, so that we talk to them, rather than talking in generalities, and find out what are the problems. Of course, the problem is always the different interests that at times come into play when we are to take very serious decisions. I would imagine that by the time we get to Devon, we should have narrowed the gap. We should have clarified the issues. We should be able to know where are the problems, so that we get there, not to talk all the time. But to say these are the issues, these are the decisions that we need to take. And pass away to those who are finding it very difficult. For the sake of humanity, I think we need to take very concrete decisions in Devon. Thank you. Thank you very much indeed, sir. We must take the decisions for the sake of humanity. And as we come to Devon, you said, we need to be able to focus on the specifics, perhaps helping some of those who are having difficulty with taking the difficult decisions to find a way through them. Ladies and gentlemen, we have in the audience our colleague, Vice Minister Lendro from Mexico, who perhaps could give us his reaction to what the panelists have said based on his understanding of the Cancun process. Minister, are you here? Yes. Have you got a microphone? You have. You're prepared. You have the floor, sir. Thank you. Thank you very much for the invitation on behalf of the Mexican government. First of all, we're very glad that this climate change agenda is gaining so much importance in the World Economic Forum and also in the African Development Agenda, because that is precisely the way we Mexicans think about climate change. We don't think about climate change as an environmental issue, but more and more is an issue related to the economic agenda and also to very key development issues that were addressed by some of the panelists here. This was said, and of course, at Cancun, in which we reach very, what we believe, very significant agreements for the climate change agenda. I guess the first one is the renovation of confidence in the multilateral decision-making process. I think we think that is key. That was addressed by James Cameron, and I pretty much agree with him. But there were also some other key issues to be taken into consideration by economic decision-makers, because they will place an enormous impact in the economic, either business or government agendas. The first one is the definition of a global goal on temperature increase to keep the temperature increase below to Celsius. There was also formalization of mitigation, commitments of developed countries, and were rightly set mitigation actions by developing countries. There was a request for countries to develop low-emission development strategies in the Cancun agreement, a topic very related to the issue of green growth. There were sectoral issues like the forest sector decision on red reductions of emissions for the forestation and forest degradation, a comprehensive package and institutional arrangement to boost technology, cooperation, financing, and adaptation. And there was also the ratification of the finance package, the $30 billion between 2010 and 2012, and the $100 billion by 2020. Well, I agree that these numbers and packages of mitigations need a lot more transparency in the way resources are being invested. We believe there's a progress. In terms of the implications for the economic agenda, I guess the main point is that in order to reach this goal, to reduce emissions and to keep temperature below the to Celsius degrees, we are definitely going to need massive amounts of mitigations, reductions. We're thinking about the range of 12 to 16 billion tons of CO2 per year by 2020. And this will not be possible if we do not transfer the way economies actually operate. There will be a lot of opportunities for different business areas. Mainly renewables, energy efficiency, carbon sequestration, and clean technologies. Some of the numbers that have been put on the table in terms of investment, $500 billion by 2020 by the World Economic Forum in investment in clean technology, $10 trillion between 2010 and 2020 to build a low carbon energy market, also by the World Economic Forum, the International Energy Agency is talking about $550 billion between now and 2020 in clean energy. And already the amount being invested in low carbon projects is already significant. We have about $100 billion to $300 billion a year in low carbon initiatives. So I guess the main point, this issue has no way back, is going to be in the economic agenda from now on. We believe that we as the international community, we should take this into consideration. And we wish South Africa a very successful COP17. We will ratify our support to South Africa. Thank you. Thank you very much, indeed, Minister. Ladies and gentlemen, we would like to invite two or three more questions from those of you who are here or comments. I was quite lenient with our Mexican colleague because this was a sort of handover opportunity for you. But I think if others are asking questions, if you could make your comments brief and perhaps address one of the panelists or two of the panelists, that would be helpful. Ladies and gentlemen, just in the third row back on my right, here comes the microphone too. If you could just say who you are. And I've noted also a gentleman from the African Development Bank. And further back, yes, I've noted you, sir, but African Development Bank next. If you could just say who you are when you speak and perhaps also indicate who you would like to react to your point. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Michael Spicer, CEO of Business Leadership South Africa. I just wanted to make a comment to say that the views put forward by Pat Davies do in fact reflect the views of business, particularly in South Africa. We appreciate his perspective, particularly the cautionary notes which were put forward. The phrase naturally, nationally appropriate, mitigating actions, I think is the right one. And that was echoed in turn by Minister Sharma, who talked about the need for common, but differentiated actions according to the capabilities of individual countries, which did not get in the way of food security or energy security compromise those. I think these cautionary notes are really important. Finally, I think that James Cameron's point about not just relying on detonations to provide funding that is implausible in the current circumstances. We must cast the net wider and look to sovereign wealth funds, institutional funds, and so on. Thank you very much indeed. I think we will invite the panelists to react to all your comments as they come in. Very clear that those remarks from yourself representing South Africa business resonate with several of the points the panelists made. Ali Abu-Sahab from the African Development Bank. Thank you, David. Good morning. My name is Abu-Sahab. You'll have to talk louder because your voice is so soft. Okay, good morning, David. Good morning, everyone. My name is Abu-Sahab, Ali Abu-Sahab. I coordinate the climate change work in the African Development Bank. My question is, we've heard this morning a number of times the question of financing the needs and the pledges, the roles of the business community and the public funding. So the question that I have, how can institutions such as the African Development Bank be of help in actually implementing some of these agreements in working with the African countries given the very long experience in development that we've had on the continent? Thank you. Thank you very much indeed. Now, the third question, further back and on my left. Thank you. And then coming to the middle, also further back. So you have the floor. Thank you, David. I'm Jeff Litman from the UN World Tourism Organization. And I'm also the vice chair of the Aviation and Travel and Tourism Council of the World Economic Forum. And I have a comment and a question to James Cameron. I think the key issue that we feel as a private sector driven organization is that it's a time to change the narrative on climate change, which has long been an issue of what targets can be met at a timeframe long into the future, 40 years. If we'd have been trying to do this 40 years ago we wouldn't have had the internet even as a tool to help. The timeframe makes this difficult. We believe that the industries can come together to produce the kind of solutions that haven't actually yet been formulated, particularly around technology. And we think that travel and tourism is one of those sectors which the African continent every country has as an export in the services sector. So we want to commit to come to Durban and to help in that process. And I would like James to say a little bit about the work that we've been doing in our councils to try to make this happen. Thank you. Thank you very much indeed. Jeffrey Lippman from the World Tourism Organization. Now, AS, hand up now more to the middle. No microphone coming towards you yet. You have one. Thank you. My name is Peter Draper from the South African Institute of International Affairs. The WTO talks, the Doha Development Agenda are effectively dead. And the issues on the agenda there are ambitious, but I would suggest not nearly as ambitious as what is on the agenda in the UN process. Given that trade issues and competitiveness issues are now moving to center stage in the climate change talks, what gives anybody on the panel confidence that we can actually reach a global deal? Thank you very much indeed. Okay, I'd now like to come back to the panelists. And I'd like this time to start with James Cameron and come up this way, of course giving the last word to President Zuma. James Cameron first, please. Thank you, David. And thank you for those questions. So my first point, maybe it's just to affirm a connection to Pat to my right. I do run a business, Pat. And what's more, I run a business that invests in businesses that one day I hope will take on yours. So I'm fully paid up member of the Competitive Economy Club and not looking for any favors, although I realize in order to do that, in order for the clean technology business, the alternative fuels businesses, or the energy efficiency businesses that we invest in to really thrive, a little bit of muscle is required to make space for me to compete against the incumbents, against the fossil fuel businesses of today. And indeed a lot of partnerships will have to happen along the way so we can do good deals together. So I'm quite confident and I'm very pleased that Jeff has asked this question from inside one of the groups here at the World Economic Forum. I'm quite confident that, and partly through the assistance of the forum, that we can start to make connections across from these different global agenda councils that have been formed. So that, and we have done this inside the Climate Change Agenda Council. We have asked ourselves, how do we really get to grips with solving this problem without depending exclusively on government to government negotiations? And without, I want to put this as politely as possible, without continuing to fight battles that ultimately might produce Pyrrhic victories. So let me give you an example. If through these negotiations with the increased power that exists in the basic countries, with the shift of power that has taken place in this world, very much addressed in the opening session yesterday of the forum. If as a result of all of that, a victory is achieved and a lot more money is secured from those that actually caused the problem over the last 200 years. And it's celebrated as a triumph, as a just negotiating outcome. I want to tell you right now that it won't be enough that the money is not enough. An outstanding success from the point of view of the basic countries in pure government to government negotiations and the money that is committed, the 100 billion that is never going to come from public money anyway, it's not enough or even close to deal with the transformation that we are talking about. So let's not pretend it is. Let's agree that it's an important process to commit to, but let's not assume that those are the resources that will help us, all of us, resolve this problem together. It's not there. So let's not waste our efforts trying to pretend it is. It might be, to a large extent, inside a global sector like travel and tourism where we are already connected through business, where technology is transferred routinely every day because that's how flights take place. Regulatory structure, Chicago Convention, IRTA, Industry Association, organizations that make it possible for you to book online today your holiday in South Africa from your hotel room in New York, right? That happens routinely every day. So if we can get into that grouping with some ideas about how the revenue could be raised, collected, deployed, for example, to incentivize a hotel group in Southern Africa to become completely energy efficient so that there are virtually no costs associated with running that infrastructure for people to come and stay in. These are all perfectly possible strategies to deliver outcomes that matter to people's lives, none of which are dependent upon the outcome at the end of the year in Durban, but all of which would be assisted by a good outcome, by a good positive atmosphere, by good leadership from political figures. So my parting shot on the finance is whatever happens in the multilateral process, the numbers don't add up and the money will not flow in the right amounts, the right place is fast enough, but we should still try. Whatever happens in these processes that we can organize within a business grouping will make significant advances, but will not be enough on its own. So the great challenge for this audience in particular is to constantly connect the two, not lose hope and provide enough of a narrative that is positive and constructive that others can follow. Thank you very much indeed. Other panelists will probably have to be slightly briefer than James was, thanks for the apology. Pat. Thank you to respond to James, I'm very happy to take you on in the competition. You'll find that more and more fossil-based companies like ours producing alternative fuels are investing more and more, as I said, in renewable energy, so we'll meet in that space as well. At the risk of being pedantic on the issue, David, the legally abiding agreements that have been emphasized so much, I must repeat the caution, if those agreements are in tons of CO2 reduced for South Africa by a certain date, then I don't think we understand the full impacts of that and the particularly impacts on growth, poverty alleviation and so on. I don't think I'll well enough researched. I absolutely believe in legally abiding agreements, but at a mitigation action level, nationally appropriate, which of course will lead to absolute reduction in tons of CO2 in time, but they will take time. And as far as the global agreement is concerned, a view as a businessman, I don't think to the question that I'm confident at all there will be one global agreement. I think we're moving more and more away from a one-size-fits-all, given the differences that there are in the world and the different blocks in different countries, and that we're going to end up with agreements per sector, per region, per block, perhaps, which are more appropriate and will be more effective in the long run. Thank you very much indeed. We've got some very important suggestions coming through, and as the panelists give their final comments, please do pick up on what others have said. Minister Sharma, one or two points were also directed at you. Would you like to react? Yes. We are very clear that this is a global challenge. It's not a question of basic countries coming together, articulating a collective position or seeking a victory. That is not the endeavor. That is not the objective. We are working to ensure that there is a victory of humankind. It will be either for all a solution or a disaster for all, because the planet Earth is interconnected, even oceans don't divide. So where economic or climate disaster takes place, which leads to multiple effects, it will eventually impact every region. That's why a collective effort, finances would be required, so will be technologies. And the issue of intellectual property, which I said earlier, is very important, which needs to be addressed. Either a multilateral regime on technologies, clean development mechanisms, particularly for the poor countries, LDCs, it should be made available for free. What good is the intellect of humankind if it is not used for the survival of humankind itself? That's a question. And also, when we are looking at the figures, there are no ballpoint figures, which anybody can give. 30 billion is actually a very, very small amount by 2012, and another 100 billion. If we look at fossil fuel subsidies alone, annually, those are 500 billion. That's what the governments are giving. And with the rising oil prices, I do not know where the fossil fuel subsidies would be. So the other course is for renewables, which many of our countries are doing. It's true. Businesses and governments have to do it together. The governments have to invest in innovation in ensuring that the technologies come fast, and they are shared. And I can say on behalf of my country that we are developing technologies, and we will share our technologies with the developing world. We will not stand on this issue that whether the others should also develop their own, that would be a mistake. Lastly, I'll also say that electricity consumption will increase as development reaches all parts of the world. It is projected that there will be 55% more demand in the next 15 years. And if clean mechanisms or technologies are not made available, it will cost $26 trillion and lead to 50% more greenhouse gas emissions. So that is where the challenge is. Whether to spend $26 trillion or to give $100-$200 million now and transfer the technologies. And for the renewables, whether it's wind, solar, despite the tragedy, which is heart-rending what has happened in Japan, nuclear energy will remain also a source of energy. But for biofuels, care has to be taken. Mistakes have been made in the past. We have the same crisis challenging us on food and fuel like they were in 2008 before the onset of the financial and economic crisis. Therefore, there should not be any diversion of grain or edibles for biofuels. It should be non-edibles. That's what I have to say. Thank you very much, indeed, Minister. Sheila, quite a number of people picked up on your point that you made in the opening. Are you comfortable with what you've heard? I wish I was. I'm sorry that I don't think it was picked up strongly enough, particularly the issue of gender, the impact of climate change on women and children. That was not even picked up with due respect. And therefore, I have to emphasize that success for me from a people-centered or people-first perspective, success of Durban should be measured by the extent to which the issues of the social and gender dimensions of climate change are integrated, are integral to the agreements, whatever their agreements. At the moment, they are a footnote. Food and nutrition security, the capacity of people to feed themselves through agricultural development, these are footnotes. And that would not be a good outcome, especially in COP17, led by South Africa, and being hosted by South Africa, and Team Africa. If Team Africa fails to fight for the inclusion of people in the text of this agenda, then it would be more than unfortunate. So I hope that we would have that people first. Sheila, thank you very much indeed. President Ndimba, you've listened. I saw you times nodding, times perhaps not so sure. What are your last minute of thoughts before we close the panel? What are we primarily trying to achieve? The well-being of our people. And now, well-being of our people is being affected by climate change. So for us now, especially in Africa, the time is now for action, not just words. We know what we have to do. It's not just about economic growth rate. All of us are really looking to great performance when it comes to great economic rate. But beyond that, especially in Africa, where we have most of the last mineral resources, important, very important to the world economic growth, if we go on this way, there will not be any access to those resources at all. Because our people will be dissatisfied. We're going to civil strife, civil war. And you will also have a big problem when it comes to immigration. You will have a third of the continent wanting to cross the Mediterranean to go to Europe. So a global problem, a global solution. As I said, no one on its own can win. And I hope we are able to meet the challenges. If we were to meet in Cape Town a decade from now, I don't know if we could have access to this convention in our center. Because to do that, we will probably need all the police forces to be able to have the security for us. Because our people will be so angry. So the best security is the well-being of the people. The well-being of the people is really to tackle this problem and find solutions. And the solutions are there. This money is there. How much do we spend on the arms industry? Figures are enormous. But the best security is not to spend on weapons. It is to take care of the well-being of our people. And it comes through solving this problem of climate change. Thank you very much. Thank you, sir. Prime Minister Odinga, would you like to give your last talk? Thank you. I agree that figures on numbers don't add up. And they will not add up if we just look at public sector funding. And that's really the reason why we are saying that the private sector must come in and partner. Secondly, I believe that if everything is a priority, then nothing is a priority. So we therefore need to be much more focused on what you want to do. A French minister for energy told me that Africa is a dark continent. And he said he was going to show me that it is true that Africa is a dark continent. So he showed me a satellite map, how they were looked at in the night. And Europe is a city, it's lit, you can see. But Africa is not visible, it's all darkness. So we agreed that we didn't need to light Africa. Because if we give people access to electricity, then we prove the quality of life. And that's the reason why we came up with this Paris-Norobi Initiative. Now, we have a lot of resources available to us, which are natural. Suited mostly in the equator, we have a lot of sunshine. So solar energy is a source. Wind is available in larger quantities on the continent. There's another one. Then we have geothermal resources that is available in other parts of the continent, which we can exploit. Then, of course, the biofuels. So he said, let us look at this and use these to be able to provide clean energy for the continent of Africa. And this is something that we want to use and prepare as we come to Durban. So the nuclear will always remain controversial for Kushima or not for Kushima. I believe that if you own a car and you drive, when you have an accident once, don't say, I will never drive again. Now, Africa must be able to increase its leverage in the climate change negotiations. And we need to influence the G777 plus China. And also, we must engage with G8 and G20 in these negotiations. South Africa will be spearheading these negotiations on behalf of the continent. They are actually our flag bearers. But we know that they are equal to the task, having very successfully hosted the World Cup here last year. President Zuma did invite us here. And he told us that this is your cup. It is an African cup. South Africa is just a theater, or a scene. And the deed is proud. We want South Africa to be there. We will give them full support so that the African voice can be heard loud and clear at the German conference. Thank you. Thank you very much indeed, sir. And to President, last word from you, sir. Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Prime Minister. That's our understanding that South Africa is hosting this on behalf of the continent. And therefore, we are definitely together as the African continent. I want to respond to my good sister here that the issue is taken to heart. We will certainly ensure that the question of Batubili, people first, will be prominent, as well as the question of gender, the women and children. After all, when we talk about the threat of the climate change, in reality, we are talking about the people. And therefore, the people can't be at the background. So the point raised, I think, has been understood and has been picked up. It's part of our notes. I want to be sure that it has been taken up very seriously. I also want to say that if somebody said this is the question of economics, question of economy, if that is the case. And I know that the private sector is part of the process is making a contribution. I'm not certain whether we should be saying right now we cannot raise the money. I think we should try to raise the money. There are savings in the world of different kinds. Are we prepared to sing with them, having not used them to try to save our lives? And therefore, say, we can't have the resources. Whilst we know the resources are there to help us at least eliminate or reduce the impact of the climate change, I think we should look at a possibility of raising the funds. I think we need just to agree that we do need the funds. It is just like the question of common but differentiated responsibilities. It doesn't mean that we are going to have, if we are to reach our ultimate, the legally binding agreement will have to apply it equally in the same way. We are different. That's what it says. The common thing is that we are all being threatened by this. But we have to react and act and contribute in different levels, different sizes. I think that's what it means. It doesn't mean you need a one-size-fits-all. It means you need an agreement that will take into account that all of us have different capacities, different contributions. Some of us would have no contribution to make, need to be assisted. I think the philosophy understands that when we say, let us have an agreement that it will take all of that into consideration. I'm just hoping that when we get to Deben, we would be in a position to really identify the issues, not have every other issue to talk about. There are other issues that there has been consensus. There has been common understanding and commitments. There may be issues that we have not necessarily agreed. What are these issues? I would be happier if our agenda in Deben is very clear. Where do we differ? How do you close the gaps? Where could we agree so that we don't come to Deben and meet and just make speeches as we always do and go away saying, look, we could not make it? We need to say, these are the issues. These are the priorities. These are the issues we cannot go away without agreeing. And those who will be empowered by their people to come to the conference must have mandates that on this issue we have got to come back with an agreement. I think that's what we must aim for. That's what we are looking forward to. That is why we are saying we need to succeed in the Deben conference. We can't fail. Otherwise, we'll be failing ourselves. I just hope psychologically all of us could actually be at one that in Deben is an opportunity offered to us that we must not lose. Thank you very much. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much indeed for being with us. Could you please give a hand to all the panelists? And I don't know about you, but I'm certainly going to watch the webcast of this myself as part of my own preparation for Deben. I think it's been an excellent session. Thank you again, everybody.