Creating Space for Consensus: High-Level Globe-trotting into the Bali Climate Change Conference

2011 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-108 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pamela S. Chasek
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Kyoto Protocol ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Fundamental Problem ◽  
Commitment Period ◽  
Innovative Solutions ◽  
Global Regime ◽  
First Commitment Period ◽  
High Level ◽  
Global Initiatives

AbstractThe international community has been trying to find a comprehensive and effective solution to the problem of anthropogenic climate change for well over two decades. The fundamental problem posed by climate change is that any solution, if it is to be effective, requires collectively agreed upon global initiatives. If enough countries do not take sufficient action, any collective endeavors to mitigate the problem will be less effective or may even fail. As a result, mitigating climate change requires a high level of international cooperation. In the climate change arena, negotiators spent much of 2007 searching for common ground and securing universal participation in a new global regime to take effect when the first commitment period under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change’s Kyoto Protocol expires at the end of 2012. This article examines one of the strategies used to address this challenge in the lead up to the December 2007 Climate Change Conference in Bali, Indonesia: a variation of track-two diplomacy, where climate change was addressed at numerous workshops and high-level meetings to enable parties to the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the 1997 Kyoto Protocol to create space for building trust and exploring innovative solutions in determining whether or not to embark on negotiations on a post-2012 regime.

scholarly journals Sharing the burden of climate change

2008 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
David Parker
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Kyoto Protocol ◽  
Global Response ◽  
Commitment Period ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
Tackle Climate Change ◽  
First Commitment Period

I have been asked to talk about ‘sharing the burden of climate change’.1 Of course, that means all of us playing our part. It is unfortunate that the language of this topic is in itself loaded to the negative. ‘Playing our part’ sounds far more desirable than ‘sharing the burden’! Right now, the primary global response hinges on the Kyoto Protocol. The first commitment period of the protocol ends in 2012, so our next challenge will be looking at the options for tackling climate change after this date. Here I would like to explore some of the key issues countries will need to consider post-2012 to effectively tackle climate change.

scholarly journals Analysis of Russia's Approach to Kyoto Protocol: Russia's Withdrawal from Second Commitment Period (2013-2020)

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 116
Author(s):  
Nur Yasmin Ghafiel ◽  
Paramitaningrum Paramitaningrum
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Kyoto Protocol ◽  
Qualitative Methodology ◽  
Economic Security ◽  
Commitment Period ◽  
Offensive Realism ◽  
Mitigate Climate Change ◽  
First Commitment Period ◽  
Fossil Fuel Energy ◽  
Change Mitigation

In 2004 Russia ratified Kyoto Protocol, one of the international agreements which focuses on climate change mitigation. Kyoto Protocol was established as a framework for countries to mitigate climate change globally by reducing their greenhouse gas emissions accordingly to their respective targets. Russia officially participated in the first commitment period of Kyoto Protocol in 2005 after ensuring the benefits by doing so. Entering the second commitment period, in 2011 Russia decided to withdraw. In consideration of Russia’s position as the largest fossil fuel energy exporter and as a country whose economy is in restoration, Russia’s approach to Kyoto Protocol is based on its interests and benefits which it gains from the framework. This paper analyzes the factors behind Russia’s withdrawal from the second commitment period of Kyoto Protocol through the perspective of offensive realism with qualitative methodology. The thesis finds that Russia’s reasoning of withdrawal was an act to protect its national interest, which is economic security, specifically its energy sector.

scholarly journals Compliance of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol in the first commitment period

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 768-782 ◽  
Author(s):  
Igor Shishlov ◽  
Romain Morel ◽  
Valentin Bellassen
Keyword(s):  
Kyoto Protocol ◽  
Commitment Period ◽  
First Commitment Period

Toward Effective International Cooperation on Climate Change: Numbers, Interests and Institutions

2006 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 90-103 ◽  
Author(s):  
David G. Victor
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Kyoto Protocol ◽  
International System ◽  
Climate Agreements ◽  
The North ◽  
Large Numbers ◽  
The North Sea ◽  
Ambitious Program ◽  
High Level ◽  
Effective Use

Arild Underdal's “law of the least ambitious program” is properly pessimistic about the prospects for cooperation in the international system where nations must give their consent to be bound by meaningful commitments. Those pessimistic expectations are now being revealed in the collective efforts to address the problem of climate change, notably through the Kyoto Protocol. Over-coming Underdal's law requires narrowing the numbers of countries that participate in key climate agreements and tailoring membership so that just the most important countries are engaged and there are strong incentives to avoid defection. At the same time, the effectiveness of cooperative efforts would gain from fuller use of nonbinding instruments, review procedures and high level conferences—as were put to effective use in the North Sea cooperation, for example— in addition to legally binding international law through instruments such as the Kyoto Protocol. Sadly, most of the conventional wisdom runs the opposite direction, favoring binding treaties among large numbers of countries.

An overview of the international context for greenhouse gas reductions

2008 ◽  
Vol 48 (2) ◽  
pp. 251
Author(s):  
Helen Plume ◽  
Roger Lincoln ◽  
Hayden Montgomery
Keyword(s):  
Greenhouse Gases ◽  
Greenhouse Gas ◽  
Kyoto Protocol ◽  
Greenhouse Gas Emission ◽  
Vital Role ◽  
Gas Emission ◽  
International Context ◽  
Agriculture Sector ◽  
Commitment Period ◽  
First Commitment Period

The international context for addressing greenhouse gases, including those from agriculture, is presented. The Kyoto Protocol rules are set for the first commitment period from 2008 to 2012. During this period, industrialised country parties (countries that have both signed and ratified the agreement) are to collectively reduce total greenhouse gas emissions by 5% below 1990 emission levels. Arrangements for a post-2012 agreement are currently being discussed. Science plays a vital role in identifying options for greenhouse gas emission reductions in the agriculture sector.

Climate Multilateralism Within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joana Castro Pereira ◽  
Eduardo Viola
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Global Warming ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Greenhouse Gas ◽  
Kyoto Protocol ◽  
Ghg Emissions ◽  
United Nations Framework Convention ◽  
Commitment Period ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Dangerous Climate Change

The signing of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) by 154 nations at the Rio “Earth Summit” in 1992 marked the beginning of multilateral climate negotiations. Aiming for the “stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system,” the Convention divided parties according to different commitments and established the common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities (CBDRRC) principle. In 1997, parties to the Convention adopted the Kyoto Protocol, which entered into force in 2005. The Protocol set internationally binding emission reduction targets based on a rigid interpretation of the CBDRRC principle. Different perceptions on a fair distribution of climate change mitigation costs hindered multilateral efforts to tackle the problem. Climate change proved a “super wicked” challenge (intricately linked to security, development, trade, water, energy, food, land use, transportation, etc.) and this fact led to a lack of consensus on the distribution of rights and responsibilities among countries. Indeed, since 1992, greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere have increased significantly and the Kyoto Protocol did not reverse the trend. In 2009, a new political framework, the Copenhagen Accord, was signed. Although parties recognized the need to limit global warming to < 2°C to prevent dangerous climate change, they did not agree on a clear path toward a legally-binding treaty to succeed the Kyoto Protocol, whose first commitment period would end in 2012. A consensus would only be reached in 2015, when a new, partially legally-binding treaty—the Paris Climate Agreement—committing all parties to limit global warming to “well below 2°C” was finally signed. It came into force in November 2016. Described in many political, public, and academic contexts as a diplomatic success, the agreement suffers, however, from several limitations to its effectiveness. The nationally determined contributions that parties have presented thus far under the agreement would limit warming to approximately 3°C by 2100, placing the Earth at a potentially catastrophic level of climate change. Forces that resist the profound transformations necessary to stabilize the Earth’s climate dominate climate change governance. Throughout almost three decades of international negotiations, global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions have increased substantially and at a rapid pace, and climate change has worsened significantly.

scholarly journals Does the Kyoto Protocol as an International Environmental Policy Promote Forest Carbon Sinks?

2022 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Kyoto Protocol ◽  
Control Method ◽  
National Level ◽  
Forest Carbon ◽  
Policy Implications ◽  
Synthetic Control ◽  
Carbon Sinks ◽  
Policy Effect ◽  
Commitment Period

Under the background of carbon neutrality, the carbon sequestration of forest ecosystems is an important way to mitigate climate change. Forest could not only protect the environment but also an important industry for economic development. As an international climate policy that first recognized the role of forest carbon sinks on climate change, the question becomes, has the Kyoto Protocol promoted the development of forest carbon sinks in contracting parties? To explore this, data of forest can be obtained at the national level. Hence, data of economic, social, polity and climate in 147 countries is also collected. The generalized synthetic control method is adopted. The results show that the policy effect of the Kyoto Protocol was obvious and significant. Moreover, the effect was more significant after the enforcement in 2005. Especially after the first commitment period, the policy effect of the second period is more obvious. Some policy implications are drawn.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document