International Climate Change Policy: an introduction

1
International Climate Change Policy an
introduction

• Lecture
• Thursday 18 September
• Stephen Howes, Crawford School, ANU

2
The problem
3
The solution?
4
The free-rider problem/prisoners dilemma

• Climate change mitigation is a pure international
  public good.
• There is no global government.
• Every country has an incentive to free ride.
• Climate change mitigation is an intertemporal
  public good
• Governments dont represent the unborn.
• Every generation has an incentive to free ride.

5
The history
6
UNFCCC

• Agreed 1992, came into force 1994, 192 Parties
  (everyone)
• Articulates a global goal of stabilization of
  atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations.
• Everyone called on to take action against climate
  change but on the basis of equity and in
  accordance with their common but differentiated
  responsibilities and respective capabilities
  developed countries (Annex I)
• should take the lead in combating climate change
  and the adverse effects thereof
• Should bear the cost of the financing needed by
  the developing country Parties to meet the agreed
  full incremental costs of implementing measures

7
Kyoto Protocol

• Agreed 1997, came into force 2005, without US and
  Australian backing.
• Commits developed and transition countries commit
  to reduce greenhouse gas emissions national
  targets collective effort of 5 in 2008-12 from
  1990.
• Clever treaty
• Embodies the principle that developed countries
  move first.
• Embodies flexibility (when, what and where)
• Implementation deficient.

8
Kyoto Protocol
9
Bali Roadmap to Copenhagen

• A road with two tracks
• The Protocol track to reach agreement on second
  commitment period.
• The Convention track to work towards a shared
  vision for long-term cooperative action
• Developed countries to consider nationally
  appropriate mitigation commitments or actions,
  including quantified emission limitiation and
  reduction objectives
• Developing countries to consider measurable
  reportable and verifiable mitigation actions
  supported and enabled by technology, financing
  and capacity-building.
• How far does this take us from the Convention of
  1992?

10
Prospects for an agreement
11
The good news only a few countries matter
12
The bad news the stand-off

• Developing countries
• Have the most to lose in the future from climate
  change
• But face the most pressing current concerns
• Will dominate future emissions growth
• But have low per capita emissions and low
  cumulative emissions
• Perceive the developed world as not having
  fulfilled its side of the bargain.

13
Cumulative emissions
14
Per capita emissions
15

• Developed countries
• Focus on future emissions, and the futility of
  cutting developed country emissions if developing
  country emissions continue to grow rapidly.

16
Future emissions to 2030
17
Future emissions to 2100
Annex I declines from 47 in 2005 to 29 in 2030
to 18 in 2100
18
The ozone problem a relevant parallel

• A successful agreement.
• Involved quantitative targets, and the West
  paying.
• But
• A few countries AND a few (unimportant) sectors
  AND good technological solutions AND good CBA AND
  quicker payback AND no scientific controversy
• However, no other route?

19
The way forward
20
Principles for accelerating action

• Developed country leadership
• Developed countries do SOMETHING even if
  developing countries do NOTHING
• Developing country participation
• Developed countries do MORE but developing
  countries do SOMETHING
• Regional and individual initiative needed
• Building on existing architecture

21
How to structure a global agreement

• Three key agreements
• A global emissions trajectory
• Agreed national emissions actions
• Agreed international collaborative actions

22
1. A global emissions trajectory

• With what total emissions?
• With what release of emissions over time?
• With a commitment over what period of time?

23
Emissions trajectories
24
Concentration trajectories
25
2. Agreed national emissions actions

• Key debates
• Quantity or price?
• If quantity, around what allocation principle?
• Binding or voluntary?
• Uniform or flexible?

26
The quantity-price debate

• The debate operates at two levels
• The international level (my focus)
• The national level
• At the international level,
• Key arguments for the price approach
• Avoid a distributional debate
• Avoid international trade
• Embed flexibility
• Key arguments for the quantity approach
• Building on existing systems
• Difficulties of commiting in terms of policies
• Can obtain flexibility through other means
• Commit in terms of entitlement, which provides
  trading opportunities for developing countries.
• Important to realize that this is only one of
  many debates

27
Garnaut Approach

• Binding targets for high income countries and
  China.
• Treat 2020 as a transition period for developing
  countries.
• One-way targets for other developing countries
  till 2020
• No targets for least developed countries till
  2020.
• Protection of emissions in developing countries
  till 2020 through linkage to growth rates.
• Have a framework for the allocation of emission
  entitlements.

28
Contraction and convergence

• Move over time to a per capita allocation of
  emissions.
• Key parameters
• Starting date
• Convergence date
• Trajectory between the two

29
Illustration for 550 scenario
30
Illustration for 450 scenario
31
Summary targets
32
Agreed international collaborative actions

• International public funding for mitigation and
  adaptation
• International public good justification
• Equity justification.
• Incentive provision
• Sectoral agreements
• WTO

33
Postscript on geoengineering

• Greenhouse gases only one cause of global warming
• You can increase aerosols, cloud cover, earth
  reflectiveness.
• These will all counter warming.
• Advantages
• They get round the international prisoners
  dillemma.
• They are cheap
• They are quick-acting.

34

• Disadvantages
• Unknown side effects (and some known)
• Climate wars?
• May weaken mitigation effort
• Only a partial solution (will not save the sea)
• What to do?
• More research