(Thumnail image from Financial Times) 

China announced its goal to reduce carbon emissions by a "notable” margin by 2020 at this week's UN summit on climate change. China's statement follows Japan's pledge  earlier this month to cut emissions 25 percent by 2020. Though the two countries are taking different approaches, their announcements put pressure on other nations, especially the United States, to set emissions goals. (Video: Channel 4)
 
For more on the issue, we’re looking at perspectives from Reuters, The White House, BBC, Forbes.com and Oxfam.

First BBC Earth Watch notes that while Japanese Prime Minister Hatoyama’s pledge is praiseworthy, Japan needs global support to achieve the ambitious goal.
 
“The Democratic Party government hasn’t said what will happen if there isn’t a global deal, but you can be fairly sure Japan won’t hold to the 25 percent figure as an unilateral pledge.”

President Obama addressed the United Nations Tuesday during the summit. He reminded the world nations while the U.S. and other developed nations like China and Japan must lead the charge to clean energy – developing nations can not be complacent and rely solely on developed nation’s support. (White House)

“Yes the developed nations that caused much of the damage to our climate over the last century still have a responsibility to lead, and that includes the United States […] But, those rapidly growing developing nations that will produce nearly all the growth in global carbon emissions in decades ahead must do their part as well.”

A Reuters reporter says this global deal will be difficult to reach as the priorities of rich and poor countries clash. For India, the focus is on lifting millions of people out of poverty before investing in climate change efforts.  

“India says it is taking steps not only to adapt to climate change but also limit and reduce planet-warming emissions, but will not take on any binding targets because it needs to burn energy to lift million from poverty.”

Former Chief Economist of the Asian Development Bank, Arvind Panagariya says on Forbes.com developed nations have more resources, so they should stop pressuring poorer nations that are struggling to maintain their economy.

“Surely, rich nations can undertake to do just a bit more in the early decades to accommodate the poor, with today's poor nations joining the clean-up effort later.”

Conversely, international anti-poverty organization Oxfam says that the focus shouldn’t be all on the large countries because other developing nations have higher emissions.

“Singling out China and India is unfair, since many other “developing countries” now have per capita incomes and emissions far higher than the EU, or even the US, Canada and Australia.”

So which side is right in this tug of war: the developed or the developing?