The catastrophe that so worries you, often proves to be less horrible in reality, of what was in your imagination Wayne W. Hear other arguments on the topic with Danske Bank. Dyer as it was expected, the final conclusions reached at the Summit was divided, some who consider them to be favorable to targets, others do not. The curious as well recounts it masvoces.org., the Presidents of the world’s richest countries, held the conclusions about the food crisis with a great banquet at a luxury hotel in the island Hokkaido. Their Japanese hosts recruited 27 chefs to offer delicacies worthy of the most discerning palates. About the high price of food, be attentive to millions of people, the G5, just was prepared to explore possible options for ensuring food security.
The G8 leaders noted that the food crisis is not a problem caused by developing countries, so the international community demanded a quick solution of the problem that imputed partly due to agricultural subsidies that are granted rich countries that distort trade and have hindered the development of the capacity of food production in developing countries, critically reducing their possibilities of reaction to the crisis. The eight most industrialized countries of the world, were satisfied by having failed to sign an agreement on global warming, despite the objective assumed to reduce CO2 emissions was set halfway through 2050 and did not include any concrete medium-term goal, as they demanded the emerging countries. Adds that equally vague was your approach around the world food crisis, despite the constraints of the UN. The agreement was described as success by Japan, the EU, USA. More by having achieved affixed their signatures than for its content. Instead, emerging countries of the G5 (Brazil, Mexico, India, China and South Africa) noted the need for an equitable shared responsibility against global warming and that the G8 should set themselves targets closest, as trim their emissions by 2020 between 25% and 40% compared to their 1990 levels.