NEW DELHI: India and China signalled a willingness to move away from the watertight 1992 classification of developed and developing countries in determining the level of responsibility countries have in tackling climate change. In an unusual move, climate change was the only issue singled out for a standalone joint statement by India and China at the end of two-days of talks between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Xi Jinping . Perhaps an indication of the seriousness with which both countries view the global challenge and the ongoing negotiations ahead of the Paris summit, when a new global compact is expected to be finalised.The joint statement is geared more towards addressing the international climate negotiations rather than an elaboration of bilateral action and partnership. It is, therefore, for the most part a reiteration of existing co-operation between the two countries in dealing with climate change, which has been in place since 2009, and the partnership between New Delhi and China in international climate negotiations.Both countries have been working together as part of the developing country bloc, G-77 and China. Since 2009, the two countries began work more closely first as part of the BASIC, a grouping which was activated by former environment minister Jairam Ramesh , and then following the Durban round of talks in 2011 as part of the Like Minded Developing Countries group, and more recently as part of BRICS.Two elements in the joint statement make it noteworthy. First, India and China’s willingness to consider ways to differentiate the level of responsibilities that countries have in tackling climate change, other than the strict 1992 classification, which divides the world into two—industrialised developed and poor developing countries. Second, the emphasis that the two countries are putting on enhanced efforts by industrialised countries in reducing emissions and providing support to developing countries in the period ahead of 2020, when the Paris agreement will come into force. How far India and China push this line will be something to watch out for in the June negotiations in Bonn. As developing countries, India and China have consistently maintained that the classification of countries into Annex I (or developed countries) and non-Annexe I (developing countries) agreed to in 1992 to operationalise the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities set out in the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change must be strictly adhered. The US-China deal of November 2014 recalibrated this classification to include the phrase “national circumstances”, a concession to the changed circumstances of many countries since the 1992 agreement. A rework that was accepted by India and all other countries at the Lima round of negotiations.The joint statement elaborates the manner in which differentiated responsibilities of countries can be determined while taking into account the developments in the 23 years since the convention was inked. India and China said that the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities will take into different historical responsibilities, development stages, and national circumstances between developing and developed countries.While industrialised countries do not refute the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, they argue that the categories agreed on in 1992 were meant to ensure that developing countries would be able to focus on their development goals without the additional burden of reducing emissions. The European Union and United States argue that the 1992 premise is no longer valid as in the intervening 20 years, many developing countries have growing economically and their emissions have increased manifold.Differentiation between developed and developing countries is a key political question and resolving it is central to ensuring a robust agreement in Paris. With India and China signalling willingness to revisit the method of determining the level of responsibility that countries must take on in the global effort to tackle climate change, the logjam on this vexed political issue could finally be broken. What could evolve is a system that would balance the development needs of developing countries, historical responsibility of industrialised countries, and changed economic realities of countries.“Though it is surprising that the two countries issued a joint statement specifically on climate change, the statement does not necessarily allude to any new strand or aspect of the Indo-China relations on climate change. The statement does build on the Lima Outcome specifically in relation to common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities (CBDR &RC). The addition of words like different historical responsibilities, development stages and national circumstances within the statement clearly mark a subtle shift in positioning on this crucial issue,” said Siddharth Pathak, International Policy Co-ordinator of Climate Action Network International , an umbrella group of environmental non-governmental organisations working on climate change.It opens the possibility of considering options that are already on the table such as proposals by BASIC partners, Brazil and South Africa. These proposals attempt to find way to balance development needs of developing countries, the historical responsibility of industrialised countries, and the need to take into account the changed global economic realities. These options amplify the principles enshrined in the Convention. The Brazilian proposal recognises that the industrialised countries (listed in Annexe I of the Convention) must shoulder the main responsibility for addressing climate change. At the same time, it also recognizes that over a period of time developing countries too must graduate and take on more responsibilities. The South Africa-backed Africa Group’s proposal of an Equity Reference Framework provides a measurement or assessment for the efforts each country needs to do as its share to address climate change. It takes into account historical responsibilities, current capabilities and development needs to measure a country’s level of responsibility.Pathak however suggests a wait and watch policy. “It is yet to be seen whether both countries build on this in the upcoming round of UNFCCC negotiations in June,” he said.The other important intervention the statement makes is the focus on efforts to tackle climate change in the period between 2015 and 2020, when the new agreement comes into force. So far, the pre-2020 conversation has been fashioned by the UN Secretary General’s Climate Summit held in September 2014, which looks at efforts being made by cities, regional and subnational bodies, and businesses. All these are outside the ambit of the UNFCCC. The joint statement brings focus to efforts and commitments made as part of the UNFCCC process—this would include the commitments under the Bali Action Plan, the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol and the Cancun pledges. Countries like India and China have argued that if industrialised countries do not raise their efforts to reduce emission before 2020, it will effectively pass the burden on to developing countries, which did not contribute to the creation of the problem.“The two sides stress the equal importance and urgency of implementing the outcomes of the Bali Road Map in order to increase the pre-2020 ambition and build mutual trust amongst countries. The two sides urged the developed countries to raise their pre-2020 emission reduction targets and honour their commitment to provide US$100bn per year by 2020 to developing countries,” the statement says.“The statement also lays out clearly a major pre-requisite of meeting previous commitments by developed countries especially around provision of finance as well as increasing mitigation ambition within the pre 2020 period. This issue will have to be dealt with appropriately before we move into a post 2020 regime,” Pathak said.Increased efforts to reduce the amount of carbon pollution and provision of finance and other support by the industrialised countries in the pre-2020 period is according to New Delhi and Beijing central to building trust among countries. This could pave the way for ensuring robust efforts by all countries under the Paris agreement.However, the joint statement falls short of elaborating on areas where the two countries could enhance co-operation. A rather catchall paragraph in the statement lists out the possible areas with no elaboration. “The two sides decide to enhance high-level bilateral dialogue on domestic climate policies and multilateral negotiations and to further strengthen practical bilateral cooperation, including in areas of clean energy technologies, energy conservation, energy efficiency, renewable energy, sustainable transportation including electronic vehicles, low-carbon urbanization and adaptation,” the statement says.And it becomes more of a response to the international negotiations rather than an effort by the two countries to deepen their partnership to address climate change and its impact in the domestic context. “It is unfortunate that collaboration of renewable energy was not given as much space. It would have been a step change if both countries had released a joint statement on renewable energy and climate change, with clear areas of collaboration as both countries face similar dilemmas when it comes to energy security,” Pathak said.