Editor's note: Freddie Reidy is a freelance writer based in London. He studied history and history of art at the University of Kent, Canterbury, specializing in Russian history and international politics. The article reflects the author's opinions and not necessarily those of CGTN.

The Group of 20 (G20) Summit in Rome last weekend was very much viewed as the warm-up event for the 26th United Nations (UN) Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26) in Glasgow. The UN 'conference of parties' focused on climate change has been held since 1995.

The conferences of Kyoto in 1997 and Paris in 2015 stand out as landmark events that set the tone for a global response to climate change and global warming.

COP26 in Glasgow is significant, as it represents the date at which leaders committed to setting radical new emissions targets and accompanying plans to support them, as agreed in Paris in 2015.

It is also certainly true that since Paris, the green agenda has grown in importance at a political level but has also given rise to great strides in more sustainable technological innovation.

Despite the recognition of the enormous challenges posed by global warming and climate change, the pace and depth of measures are at the heart of what have been significant negotiation challenges ahead of, and likely during COP26.

While countries, such as the United Kingdom as host nation, have made legally binding pledges on carbon emissions by 2050, other nations such as India have resisted such ties. It is understandable why such concerns exist. A World Economic Forum report in 2020 found that over 220 million Indians live below the poverty line. Therefore, how can India or comparable countries hope to commit such vast sums of money while limiting the means of production?

Just as Thomas Malthus' theory that population levels being governed by levels of resources in agriculture were countered by Ester Boserup's theory that innovation and intensification would respond to those limitations, Boris Johnson has been on a campaign trail employing that same logic.

Johnson argues that committing to net-zero by 2050 can become a growth engine in itself with "not a hair shirt in sight", with technological innovation through green investment, responding to the needs of achieving such ambitious targets.

Johnson himself has come through something of a "Damascene Conversion" from climate sceptic to activist. The environmental cause had long been dictated to by people the Prime Minister referred to as "tree huggers" but the central argument trumpeted ahead of COP26 is, in Johnson's typically colorful style is, "It's vital for all of us to show that this is not all about some expensive politically correct, green act of bunny-hugging ... This is about growth and jobs."

The great threat to COP26 is that risk and expense are posited as the main drivers and concerns over opportunity. The opportunity to invest and retool economies for the future, leading to sustainable economic growth while protecting the environment and safeguarding future generations and resources.

While there is always a sense that more needs to be done, it would be remiss not to appreciate the essential commitments governments have already made. U.S. President Joe Biden is attempting to set the United States on course for about a 50-percent reduction in emissions by 2030, while China has pledged to become carbon neutral by 2060. Even nations dependent on hydrocarbons, such as Saudi Arabia, have also committed to net-zero by 2060.

At the Welsh opening of parliament, head of state of the COP26 host nation, Queen Elizabeth II, was overheard as saying, "It's really irritating when they (politicians) talk, but don't do." For COP26 to join the ranks of Kyoto and Paris, commitments must be made to "do." The commitments must also deliver economic, social and environmental benefits.

After all, U.S. President Biden may have promised about a 50-percent reduction in emissions. But that promise is contingent on his $100 billion "green bill" being passed by Congress, something unlikely to happen unless the proper case is made.

If climate change policies are to be universally adopted by all nations, there needs to be a technology-led revolution that acts as a growth engine, rather than an economic drag anchor. Paris signaled the political intent. Glasgow must signal the beginning of the delivery; only then will COP26 be seen as a turning point and not go down as a historic missed opportunity.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com.)