View
54
Download
2
Category
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Mechanisms of international cooperation. The IPCC, the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol Session 5. Introduction. An apparent paradox The action of a single country in the fight against climate change is meaningless. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Mechanisms of international cooperation
The IPCC, the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol
Session 5
Introduction
An apparent paradox The action of a single country in the fight against climate change is
meaningless. At the same time, the participation of some countries is a necessary
condition for a successful agreement. Problem of the free-rider
How to translate a scientific consensus into collective action Took a long time to build up Relationship between science and policy International cooperation on climate change was first a story of
scientific cooperation
The need for international cooperation
Climate change as a global public ‘bad’ Climate change as a market failure: global externality Affects all peoples and all generations, though diversely The protection of climate can only be provided through
international cooperation
Difficulties of international cooperation Tragedy of the commons Free rider Need for a global climate regime
Three key mechanisms of international cooperation
1. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Established in 1988 jointly by UNEP and WMO Open to all member countries of UNEP and WMO Main task: assess the risks and impacts of climate
change Main outcome: the Assessment Reports, issued every 5
or 6 years (4 reports so far) About 2,500 (unpaid) scientists, appointed by their
government: lead authors, contributing authors, reviewers
Structure of the IPCC
The scientific process
The IPCC does not carry out any research The Assessment Reports are just a synthesis of
previously published works Triple peer-reviewing
Peer-review at the time of publication of original works Scientific peer-review by experts Political peer-review by governments
The reports need to be approved by both all scientists and all governments: they are bpth a scientific and a political document
Reports organised on the basis of scenarios
Comments and criticisms
Highly authoritative, due to intensive peer-reviewing But this authority is currently being questioned: ‘climate gate’, mistake
about the Himalaya glaciers, etc. The IPCC as a political actor How to address these criticisms? Can we doubt about climate science?
Minimal consensus Are the reports too prudent and conservative?
Scenarios underestimate reality Need for revision Need for a global reform of the IPCC?
2. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
Main outcome of IPCC and the Rio Earth Summit (1992), and first international agreement on climate
Choice between 2 possible options: A global treaty on the atmosphere A treaty focused on climate change
General objective: the stabilisation of a GHG concentration at a level that would avoid dangerous interference with the climate
Two key priciples: Common but differentiated responsibility Respective capacities.
Not binding, no mandatory limits for GHG emissions. Sole obligation: GHG inventory to be submitted each year.
Three important mechanisms: Mandatory protocols Countries divided in Annex I countries, Annex II countries (a
subset of Annex I) and developing countries COP to be held every year
3. The Kyoto Protocol
Mandatory update of UNFCCC
Opened for signature in 1997, entered into force 8 years later
Conditions: 55 parties, and 55% of CO2 emissions
176 countries have ratified. Only 37 have to reduce their emissions
General design of the Protocol
Fixed term: expires in 2012 General objectives: cut GHG emissions by an average
5% from 1990 (base year) Underpinning principle: common but differentiated
responsibility Distinction between Annex I countries and non Annex I
countries Flexible mechanisms Heavy emphasis on mitigation, little emphasis on
adaptation
Kyoto and Europe
All EU-members’ ratifications deposited simultaneoulsy on 31 May 2002
EU counted as an individual entity EU produces about 22% of gas emissions Agreed to a cut of 8% from 1990 levels One of the major supporters of the treaty EU elected to be treated as a ‘bubble’, and created an EU
Emissions Trading Scheme France: 0%. No need to cut emissions Germany: -21%. Has reduced its emissions by 17.2% between 1990
and 2004. UK: -12.5%. Appears to be on course to meet its target.
Different commitments
Flexible mechanisms
Innovative aspect of the Kyoto Protocol Mechanisms relying on the market, rather than on
states Highly criticised as paramount of ‘environmental
liberalism’ Three mechanisms:
Carbon market (‘cap and trade’) Clean Development Mechanism Joint Implementation
The carbon market:The EU Emission Trading Scheme
General principle: maximisation of economic efficiency – at the expense of ethics?
Industries are given quotas of emission allowances Application of the ‘polluter pays’ principle Scheme started in 2005, all 27 countries take part Problems:
Price of carbon highly versatile Covers about half of the EU’s CO2 emissions Too many quotas on the market
Second phase 2008-2012, with auctioning and a central authority
Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)
Aims to combine development and climate, equity and efficiency
Economic efficiency: costs of abatment are cheaper in developing countries
Functioning: Alternative to domestic reductions Allow Annex I countries to invest in projects that reduce
emissions in developing countries New carbon credits: Certified Emission Reductions
(CERs)
Geographical distribution of CDMs
Criticism
Reality of avoided emissions Principle of additionality Incentive to misrepresent reality Overpricing and overestimation
Unlimited credits A country could completely externalise its efforts Transfer of emissions?
Development objectives ? Almost no CDM projects in Africa
Joint implementation
Similar mechanism as CDMs, but in Annex I countries (i.e. In Eastern Europe and Russia)
Provides Emission Reduction Units (ERUs), where 1 ERU = 1 ton of CO2
No new credits Long and fastidious process
Some final words
Kyoto is an agreement between industrialised countries, where developing countries are mostly oberservers:
No limits on emissions Do not benefit from flexible mechanisms Treaty focused on mitigation, not adaptation
Role of civil society in international cooperation
Recommended