-
11 Beyond Kyoto?
- Wilfrid Laurier University Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
Introduction C limate change is one of the most important and vexing global challenges facing the world. Increasing numbers of people in Canada and around the world believe it is essential to find ways to control the buildup of greenhouse gases (ghgs) in the atmosphere. However, increasing economic competition means that few nations are willing to pass regulations to control emissions without a global framework to ensure that the costs are shared equitably. Moreover, effective international cooperation to address climate change requires that the measures taken actually reduce ghg levels and not just give the illusion of doing so. We argue that the main impediment to action is the lack of a viable architecture for international cooperation—an architecture that both achieves results and assures that the playing field is not tilted against some nations. The previous chapter has described the process leading from the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio, to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (unfccc), to the general agreement reached amongst a number of countries in Kyoto five years later. The Kyoto agreement, which required significant further definition of the rules and, of course, ratification , has been the source of much debate during the ensuing years. At the seventh Conference of the Parties (cop 7) in Marrakech in the fall of 2001, governments agreed on nearly all the final details for the Kyoto Protocol; yet, at this writing, some states are facing the choice of whether and when to ratify . Difficult negotiations remain, as well as ongoing debates regarding the Kyoto agreement’s long-term effectiveness in reducing ghgs, mechanisms to achieve commitments, equity issues, and economic costs. 215 11 5 Beyond Kyoto Gordon S. Smith and David G.Victor The United States, which accounts for about one-quarter of the world’s emissions, has indicated clearly that it rejects the Kyoto framework and will neither ratify the Kyoto commitments nor implement alternative commitments that would have a similar effect. Australia has also indicated that it will not ratify. Non-ratification by major industrialized countries presents a major problem to the success of the Protocol, which must be an international agreement to work effectively. Despite a considerable body of literature detailing the objectives and possible alternatives, there has been little clear thinking about its possible resolution. After the Marrakech conference, Canada faced a set of unattractive policy choices within the Kyoto framework. Down one path, Canada could have simply followed the United States and withdrawn, claiming that it could not implement commitments that its largest trading partner had rejected. Such a path would have been politically costly, both nationally and internationally, possibly harming Canada’s relations with the European Union (EU) and Japan. Most Canadians are concerned about climate change and wanted to see some effective action; in Canadian political debate, such action became equated with ratification of Kyoto. Down the alternative path, Canada ratified the treaty and followed the European Union and Japan in an effort to bring the treaty into force. That approach was both politically and economically attractive because the US will not be competing for emissions credits; these credits constitute a major component of the Protocol, allowing nations time to implement stricter regulations to control national emissions while fulfilling Kyoto objectives to decrease global emissions (see chap. 10 for more information on emissions trading). Although the government of Alberta, Canada’s largest petroleum extraction and refining province, and some in the business community —particularly in the energy-producing sector—have asserted that the economic costs of implementing Kyoto commitments would be high for Canada, these claims have not been proven. It seems that dissenters were not taking into account the US exit, which has eliminated the main source of demand for Kyoto emission credits. Moreover, the EU is implementing its Kyoto obligations through an internal EU emission trading system that will probably limit or prevent the import of surplus credits.With the US out, low or zero demand for surplus permits in the EU, and Russia likely to ratify the treaty, prices for emission credits will be very low—the market will be flooded with surplus permits.1 As well, accounting changes adopted in 2001 will make it easier for countries with substantial forests, such as Canada, to meet the Kyoto targets at low cost as credit is given for additional carbon sequestration through “sinks” (see chap. 5). 216 Hard Choices [3.145.8.42] Project MUSE (2024-04-17 08:48...