Traduction de «groupe de travail pays industrialisés » (Français → Anglais) :

11. Recognises that if we are to have a 50-50 chance of restricting climate change to +2°C industrialised country emissions need to be reduced by at least 80-95% by 2050 as against 1990 levels; underlines the specific responsibility of developed countries to take the lead in reducing emissions and considers that aggregate reductions by industrialised countries at the high end of the 25-40% range recommended by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) by 2020 are necessary; in this context, considers that all the industrialised countries need to adopt targets that require ambitious reductions from current emissions levels an ...[+++]d calls on Russia to reconsider its request for a growing emissions target, in keeping with its large mitigation potential and the IPCC recommendations, with a view to facilitating a swift agreement in Copenhagen;

11. Recognises that if we are to have a 50-50 chance of restricting climate change to +2°C industrialised country emissions need to be reduced by at least 80-95% by 2050 as against 1990 levels; underlines the specific responsibility of developed countries to take the lead in reducing emissions and considers that aggregate reductions by industrialised countries at the high end of the 25-40% range recommended by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) by 2020 are necessary; in this context, considers that all the industrialised countries need to adopt targets that require ambitious reductions from current emissions levels an ...[+++]d calls on Russia to reconsider its request for a growing emissions target, in keeping with its large mitigation potential and the IPCC recommendations, with a view to facilitating a swift agreement in Copenhagen;

1. Welcomes the broad scientific and political consensus on the seriousness of climate change; urges the conclusion of an ambitious, worldwide post-Kyoto agreement, in line with the scenario of IPCC Working group III, on the need to limit temperature increases to 2°C and for corresponding adjustments to be made to other international agreements concerning trade, civil aviation and intellectual property; considers that a post-2012 framework should allow different countries to participate, according to their national circumstances, through a short-term, multi-stage approach and that, in the medium-term, emissions should be allocated on a ...[+++] per capita basis, first to developed countries, but eventually to all countries; calls on the Council and the Commission working towards building a consensus on a post-2012 framework through broadening engagement, to include key parties currently outside of the Kyoto Protocol, notably the US and Australia, and to collaborate with individual states and businesses in the absence of a commitment made by governments;

The ban on money-lending is an extreme example but there are other, more contemporary cases of countries having different social arrangements for the organisation of the labour market. This is true of Europe and the US: as the OECD has shown, they have differently organised labour markets (emphasis on providing people with security in Europe, greater flexibility in the US), giving rise to different forms of innovation (incremental and cumulative in Europe, more abrupt in the US) which in the end prove to be complementary, even in sectoral terms (technology sector geared to aircraft engineering and vehicle manufacture in Europe, precision ...[+++] instruments and software in the US). The even more flagrant differences between developing and industrialised countries are another one of the fundamental divisions of international labour.

To some delegations it is decisive that the tax will only apply above a certain level of emissions related to the EC average; NOTES the progress made in the Ad Hoc Working Party on the Commission's proposal for a carbon/energy tax, and that a decision on a fiscal instrument of this nature will need inter alia to define the base for the calculation of the tax; PLEDGES its commitment to the rapid adoption of the proposals for the SAVE directive and ALTENER programme of the Community, and URGES the European Parliament to forward its opinion on these proposals before the meeting of the Council (Energy) in June 1993; STRESSES the importanc ...[+++]e of joint efforts and effective measures on the part of industrialized countries to combat climate change and therefore AGREES that the Community will also rapidly take an initiative in the OECD framework in order to promote the use of fiscal instruments with a view to an effective and coordinated effort to reduce CO2 emissions, consistent with the Community's own strategy; that at the same time it will continue a constructive dialogue with its other trading partners, energy producers and developing countries; WELCOMES in this context the US administration's proposal for new energy taxes as an important contribution which, together with the tax initiatives of the other OECD countries in this field, helps to meet the Community's demand that the effects on competitiveness of any corresponding tax initiative by the Community be reduced; URGES the Presidency to establish a basis for a decision on a fiscal instrument with a view to accelerating the work in the Council (ECOFIN).

I know there have been discussions about developing and industrialized countries, and the discussion was accurate about how the UPU works, but 95 per cent of this mail is going from one industrialized country to another industrialized country.