Sentences with phrase «vulnerable countries see»

«Many vulnerable countries see 1.5 °C as a limit that should not be exceeded..

Not exact matches

The country has been hit particularly hard by fund outflows as it's seen as vulnerable to an expected U.S. Federal Reserve interest rate increase.

«We also want to see the UK committing to further leadership at the global level to ensure stronger global coordination and action to ensure that the poorest, most vulnerable, countries do not continue to be hit the hardest by tax avoidance.»

Thus, prior to the Six Day War, tiny Israel was seen as a vulnerable country fighting the entire Arab world bent on its destruction.

People were devastated to see that a major city in the wealthiest country was vulnerable and that the people most terribly affected were the poor and African Americans.

«Though poorer countries in hotter regions are most vulnerable to climate change, our findings highlight the extent to which countries are interlinked, and Europe will see increasing numbers of desperate people fleeing their home countries.»

Ten of the 16 most vulnerable countries are in Asia (see map).

The case study illustrates how three groups of charter management organizations (CMOs)-- High Tech High in San Diego; Uncommon Schools, KIPP Foundation, and Achievement First in New York; and Match Education in Boston — saw big gaps in the traditional teacher education programs that left their aspiring teachers with no place to learn how to teach effectively in their specific schools or in a way that would allow them to succeed in working with the country's most vulnerable students.

Experts say this strain of the virus, called H3N2, was first seen in Asia but only recently appeared in the U.S., meaning dogs in this country are highly vulnerable.

Caroline Kisko, Kennel Club Secretary, said: «The Pembroke Welsh Corgi is one of the country's most iconic dog breeds and so it is worrying to see the breed dip to a historic low and become one of our vulnerable breeds for the first time ever.

Despite the unified positions stated in Dhaka, you'll see increasing divisions among poor, vulnerable countries in the next few years, particularly if rich countries finally start ramping up the flow of money and technical help pledged in past climate agreements.

Also, while poor nations see the amounts as insufficient, powerful countries, including China (which long hid behind its status as a developing country), have pledged money and technical aid to help shield the world's most vulnerable communities from climatic and coastal hazards.

However, countries also agreed on a more aspirational goal at Paris to try to limit warming to 1.5 degrees, which was seen as a safer level for low - lying island states and other more vulnerable countries.

For many the Copenhagen Accord was seen as a tragic failure because it failed to: (a) achieve once again enforceable ghg emissions reduction commitments from developed countries sufficient to prevent dangerous climate change, (b) identify dedicated sources of funding for adaptation or capacity building in vulnerable developing countries, or (c) stop the deforestation that is a major contributor to climate change.

Because none of the developed countries were willing to make emissions reduction commitments congruent with what scientific community said was necessary to protect them, some of the most vulnerable developing countries saw the developed countries» positions in Copenhagen as ominous, perhaps a death sentence.

I think that from the point of view of the vulnerable countries, the 1.5 C limit in the Paris Agreement was always seen as an upper limit.

For example, representatives of countries that are particularly vulnerable to the threat of loss and damage associated with the adverse effects of climate change, such as the members of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), want to see greater representation of these countries in the decision - making body.

As we shall see, these countries, among others, have continued to negotiate as if: (a) they only need to commit to reduce their greenhouse gas emission if other nations commit to do so, in other words that their national interests limit their international obligations, (b) any emissions reductions commitments can be determined and calculated without regard to what is each nation's fair share of safe global emissions, (c) large emitting nations have no duty to compensate people or nations that are vulnerable to climate change for climate change damages or reasonable adaptation responses, and (d) they often justify their own failure to actually reduce emissions to their fair share of safe global emissions on the inability to of the international community to reach an adequate solution under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

However, we were disturbed to see Canada associated with some of the more regressive positions of the U.S. and allies on other key areas in the negotiations (notably, seeking to undermine efforts to create a forum for examining strategies that help those climate vulnerable countries that experience climate - related «loss and damage»).