GLOBAL NEGOTIATIONS ON CLIMATE CHANGE LESSONS FROM MONTREAL AND KYOTO PROTOCOLS

1
GLOBAL NEGOTIATIONS ON CLIMATE CHANGE- LESSONS
FROM MONTREAL AND KYOTO PROTOCOLS
Mohammed Dore Brock University,
Canada http//spartan.ac.brocku.ca/dore
2
Introduction

• Long term public health depends on protection
  from disasters caused by extreme weather events.
• If we accept that extreme variations in climate
  are anthropogenic in nature, then the world needs
  an international legally binding protocol on
  climate change to protect the world population.

3
Introduction

• But efforts to conclude a meaningful Greenhouse
  Gas emissions treaty were dealt a serious blow
  when the United States abandoned the Kyoto
  Protocol in the Spring of 2001.

4
Introduction

• This presentation examines why the Montreal
  Protocol on Ozone Depleting Substances was
  successful and why an international accord to
  control Greenhouse Gas (GHGs) emissions eludes
  the world community. Such and agreement would
  mitigate climate change for the benefit of all.

5
Introduction

• The lack of progress on mitigation makes
  adaptation all the more important for countries
  like Canada.
• C-CAIRN participants need to appreciate what is
  being attempted globally on the mitigation front
  and what it implies for adaptation.

6

• The most important international negotiations
  relevant to global climate change are
• The Montreal Protocol of 1987
• The Rio Conference at which the UNFCCC was signed
  in 1992
• The Kyoto Protocol of December 1997

7

• On ODS, the Montreal Protocol was successful in
  expanding on the Vienna Convention.
• On GHGs, the Kyoto Protocol does not go far
  enough in achieving the objectives of the UN
  Framework Convention for Climate Change (UN
  FCCC).

8

• In this presentation I shall pose several
  questions
• What factors led to success in the case of the
  Montreal Protocol and CFCs?
• Why has success eluded the more important case of
  GHGs?
• What is the crux of the matter in these
  negotiations?

9
The Montreal Protocol

• MP was about the phasing out of the destructive
  ozone depleting substances (ODS), such as CFCs.
  It began as the pressure group of the Toronto
  Group.

10

• What were the mechanisms for decision-making in
  the Montreal Protocol?
• Only 8 LDCs signed in 1987
• Developed countries, with 25 of the population,
  consumed 88 of CFCs only Mexico and Egypt had
  CFC production capacity.

11
Principles of the Protocol

• Acceptance of the Principle of Polluter pays
• Compensation for LDCs for transition costs
• Establishment of assessed contributions from
  Developed countries a net addition to other aid

12

• transfer of new ozone-friendly technology to LDCs
• Protocol to be updated regularly
• Fund to be administered by 14 Member Executive
  Committee 7 from LDCs, 7 from DCs each group
  has veto. Funds administered through the World
  Bank.

13
What role did Developing Countries play?

• India China Mexico Brazil Malaysia
• The strategy of the LDCs
• Demand for non-commercial transfer of new
  technology
• Leadership Role of India she asks for US
  1.2 b

14

• India - US debate
• US loses debate, but India and China each gets
  only 40 m

15
What was the role of the United States as Leader
of the Industrialized World?

• After Molina-Roland, legislation to protect ozone
  in 1977
• US first to impose ban on aerosols in 1978

16

• superiority of US institutions
• NRDC suit against EPA (1984) NRDC wins
• hearings in Congress
• NOAA and NASA
• fear of public class action suits
• Fearing legal action, US industry cooperates and
  leads a reluctant White House

17
Why did the Montreal Protocol Succeed?

• Scientists were able to provide convincing
  evidence that ODS caused Antarctic ozone hole
  and harmful effects to those living in the
  Northern Hemisphere.
• Agreeing to make an effort was easier because the
  economic stakes were lower.

18
(No Transcript)
19
Why did the Montreal Protocol Succeed?

• Producers and users were able to find
  cost-effective substitutes.
• Oligopolistic nature of the CFC industry

20
Why did the Montreal Protocol Succeed?

• Architecture of the treaty effectively matched
  the environmental problem to be solved.
• Scientists demonstrated that even small amounts
  of chlorine bromine in the stratosphere would
  trigger the ozone hole.
• Support of the CFC industry made agreement a lot
  easier. Industry feared class action suits.
• The White House reluctantly agreed to sign.

21
Why did the Montreal Protocol Succeed?

• Framers of MP never had to deal with emissions
  trading involving billions of dollars of assets.
  (MP has only an extremely limited emission
  trading system).
• MP respected technical feasibility and economic
  costs but with an escape clause demanded by
  India.

22
Momentous Nature of MP

• Acceptance of both inter- and intra-generational
  equity.
• US accepts POWER- SHARING, and a novel
  decision-making structure.
• MP was seen as A PRECEDENT-SETTING international
  accord and the working model for international
  environmental treaties.
• Set the stage for first international conference
  on slowing global warming less than 1 year later.

23
Global Warming and the Worlds Carbon Accounts

• The most important GHGs are Carbon Dioxide
  (CO2), Methane (CH4) and Nitrous Oxide (N2O) and
  CFCs.
• CH4 from past emissions contributes 20
• N2O, other industrial gases and ODS contribute
  20 (CFCs are stabilizing under MP)
• CO2 is currently responsible for over 60 of the
  enhanced greenhouse effect

24

• Current annual emissions amount to over 23
  billion metric tons of CO2 or 1 of the total
  mass of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere
• CO2 levels appear to have varied by less that 10
  during the 10,000 years before industrialization
  - in the last 200 years levels have risen by over
  30
• Even with half the emissions absorbed by oceans
  and vegetation levels, will rise by gt10 every 20
  years.

25
Worlds Carbon Reserves

• Reservoir Gt C
• Atmosphere 750
• Forest 610
• Soils 1580
• Oceans 39120
• Fossil-fuels
• Coal 4000
• Oil 500
• Natural gas 500
• TOTAL FOSSIL-FUEL 5000

26
Human Perturbations to the Carbon Budget

• CO2 sources __Flux
  (Gt C/yr)
• Fossil-fuel burning 5.5
• Tropical deforestation. 1.6
• Total anthropogenic emissions. 7.1
• CO2 sinks_______________________________
  
• Storage in the atmosphere 3.3
• Uptake by the oceans 2.0
• North. Hemisphere forest regrowth.. 0.5
• CO2 and N fertilization, climate.. 1.3
• 7.1

27
(No Transcript)
28
Who wields the biggest threat of global warming?

• Just three countries have 82 of the worlds
  coal
• China 13
• USA 24
• Russia, Ukraine
• Kazakistan 45
• Share of World 82

29
Atmospheric CO2

• Stabilizing atmospheric concentrations of CO2
  requires a major effort.
• Without emissions controls, concentrations are
  expected to rise from 367 ppm to 490-1260 ppm by
  2100 (a 75 - 350 increase since 1750).
• Stabilizing concentrations at 450 would require
  emissions to fall below 1990 levels within the
  next few decades.

30

• Stabilizing CO2 concentrations requires
• drastic improvements in energy efficiency, and a
  major boost to renewable energy sources
• fundamental changes in other economic sectors,
  including a new distribution infrastructure

31
THE UN FCCC

• What are its Objectives?
• Stabilization of GHGs at a level that would
  prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with
  the climate system.
• To be achieved within a time-frame sufficient to
  allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate
  change
• Ensure secure food production
• Promote sustainable development

32
What are its Guiding Principles?

• Protection of climate system for future
  generations, on the basis of EQUITY.
• Full protection of LDCs and their development
  goals.

33
What are it Provisions?

• Developed countries to provide finance for LDCs
  to cover incremental costs for investments for
  emission reduction targets.
• LDCs may do this on a voluntary basis.
• Developed countries to transfer appropriate
  technology to LDCs to reduce GHGs not covered by
  MP.

34

• Special needs of LDCs to be taken into account
• e.g. small island states, countries prone to
  disasters, droughts, desertification, fragile
  ecosystems, etc.
• countries dependent on fossil-fuel production.
• Annex I to take the lead in reducing GHGs

35

• All Developed Countries Annex I G7 Western
  Eastern Europe Australia New Zealand.
• Annex IIG7 Western Europe only Australia
  New Zealand. (i.e. excludes all former Soviet
  republics).
• Annex II to provide new and additional financial
  resources to meet the agreed full costs incurred
  by LDCs to reduce their GHGs

36
How were the Objectives and Provisions to be
Implemented?

• Conference of Parties (COP), each with one vote,
  is the Supreme body. It established a
  Secretariat in Bonn, with two subsidiary bodies
  (a) a Subsidiary Body for Scientific Research
  Information and
• (b) a Subsidiary Body for
  Implementation (SBI), composed of govt officials
  from the COP.
• SBI to operate through WB, UNEP,GEF etc.

37
THE KYOTO PROTOCOL

• Under ARTICLE 17 of the Convention, the Parties
  could sign various protocols to achieve the
  objectives of the Convention. The Kyoto Protocol
  comes under this article. It affects only Annex
  1.
• KP was opened for signature at the UN March 16,
  1998.
• KP comes into effect 3 months after 55 Parties of
  Annex 1 to the Convention which account for at
  least 55 to the total CO2 emissions have
  ratified KP. the double trigger.

38

• objective of KP was to reduce over all
  emissions of GHGs by at least 5 below 1990
  levels by 2008 to 2012. Each Annex 1 country was
  assigned a target as a percentage of their 1990
  emissions. E.g. for Canada, it is 94 ( or a
  reduction of 6 ) USA 93 EU 92 Australia 108
  NZ 100 UK 92, Russia 100. For most other Annex
  1 countries the target is between 92 and 94.
• Parties are allowed to trade surpluses and
  deficits, as long as the total of that particular
  group is observed.

39

• The targets cover mostly fossil-fuel emissions.
• China, India Mexico, Brazil, Argentina and all
  other LDCs are NOT parties to KP, although they
  are Parties to the Convention.
• Most other articles of KP deal with reporting of
  emissions.
• To implement the objectives of the FCCC, Annex 2
  will provide finance including the transfer of
  technology needed by developing countries to
  cover the full incremental cost of implementing
  Article 4 of the Convention.

40

• KP targets 6 GHGs divided into two groups Group
  1 are CO2, Methane and Nitrous oxide, for which
  targets are established in KP. Group 2 include
  HFCs, perfluorocarbons, and sulphur hexachloride.
  For these, targets will be established later.
• KP sets up a CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM (CDM)
  to enable LDCs to achieve SD and to contribute to
  the ultimate objective of the Convention and also
  to enable Annex 1 countries to reach their
  emission reduction targets set out in KP.

41
Status of the Kyoto Protocol

• COP6 (The Hague) Nov. 2000 US and EU fight over
  carbon sinks - talks collapse.
• United States abandons Protocol Spring 2001
  Issue of LDCs exemption.
• COP6 (Bonn) June 2001 meetings end with
  political compromise to salvage accord.

42
Status of the Kyoto Protocol

• Overall reduction lower than originally foreseen
  in Kyoto 2 rather than 5.
• Concessions to Russia, Japan, Canada and
  Australia eliminating 2/3 of pledged reductions
  in energy use (carbon sinks).
• Japan agrees to setting rules only after
  binding sanctions dropped.

43
Status of the Kyoto Protocol

• COP7 Nov. 2001 (Marrakech) Agreement on the
  language of the Protocol - aimed at ratification.
• Russia wins further credit for its carbon sinks
  (2x the Bonn amount- 34 million metric tons)
• Japan gets resolution of the issue of legally
  binding targets put off until treaty has gone
  into force.
• Goal of COP-7 was to develop a rulebook but no
  rules - just recommendations.
• Nations dont really know what they are
  ratifying.

44
LDCs and Kyoto

• COP6 Starting in 2005 LDCs in Africa, Asia and
  Latin America will get millions of dollars
  financial and technical aid to cope with their
  specific climate change problems.
• Marrakech agreement strengthens the flow of
  technical and financial support to developing
  countries elected 15 members to CDM.
• But so far 500 million from EU US saves
  300-400 million by pulling out no contribution
  from Japan.

45
LDCs and Kyoto

• LDCs still awaiting generous transfers that the
  treaty was supposed to bring.
• Exempt from the pacts emissions reductions, LDCs
  were promised cash and technology to meet their
  energy needs.
• The aim has been to entice them to accept legally
  binding emissions in the future - not based on
  principles of equity.

46
Why has Kyoto not succeeded?

• Failure blamed on fleeting political will fear
  that short term costgtenvironmental benefits US
  concern over creation of intrusive
  international institutions.
• Crux of the matter Architecture of
  cap-and-trade in the treaty not matched to the
  environmental problem it was trying to solve
  major free-rider problem.

47
Why has Kyoto not succeeded?

• Guided by the success of MP, International
  diplomats decided at COP1 that KP should set
  quantified limitation and reduction objectives
  within specified time frames.
• But comparing controlling CFCs to controlling
  GHGs is like comparing a flea to an elephant.

48
Why has Kyoto not succeeded?

• Berlin Mandatecommitted KP to cap and trade
  architecture but there was no determination if
  the lessons that had been learned with MP were
  relevant for GHGs.
• No immediate health threat as with ODS.

49
Why has Kyoto not succeeded?

• MP mode suitable for a limited class of
  chemicals.
• Not suitable when it means radical transformation
  of entire economies.
• Exemption of LDCs contributes to US resistance.
• Concessions to the gang of four leaves KP
  ineffectual.

50
Why has Kyoto not succeeded?

• Initially, more attention should have been paid
  to allocation, which did not confound the MP.
• No escape clause as in MP to help contain
  compliance costs.
• One country-US- accounts for 35 of GHGs and has
  de facto VETO.

51
What will happen if we fail to control GHGs?

• Global temperature could rise 1.4 to 5.8C by
  2100 (1990 baseline).
• Mean sea level expected to rise 9-88 cm by 2100
  ðflooding and other damage to low-lying areas.
• possible increase in global precipitation and
  changes in severity or frequency of extreme
  events.

52

• possible change in precipitation and evaporation
  patterns ðaffect on water resources.
• Physical infrastructure could be damaged by sea
  level rise and by extreme weather events.
• climatic zones could shift poleward and
  vertically.

53

• Local food shortages are possible
• Economic activities, human settlements and human
  health may suffer direct and indirect effects.
• The poor and disadvantaged are the most
  vulnerable to the negative consequences of
  climate change.

54
Where do we go from here?

• Follow Americans toward an alternative strategy
  using technical innovation to improve
  conservation and market-based systems OR follow
  EU-Developing Countries Alliance (ratify Kyoto)?
• No clear direction on mitigation front Americans
  have no strategy, Kyoto will muddle along.
• Adaptation is increasingly the most important
  means for protecting human health.

55
Where do we go from here?

• Effects of global warming are unavoidable and
  within the realm of our experience society must
  anticipate and adjust.
• Adaptation policies make sense even without the
  threat of global warming, so government
  investment in adaptation research is well placed.
• C-CIARN must champion adaptation.
• IT IS THE ONLY GAME IN TOWN.