8.0 CLIMATE CHANGE NEGOTIATIONS

Global warming issue became a part of the international agenda in 1988. The climate issue came up at the UN General Assembly in December 1988, as part of a discussion on 'the common heritage of mankind' and was initiated by the small island nation Malta. The UN resolution of 1988 thus recognized climate change as a common concern for mankind. The resolution set up a preparatory committee to work towards an international agreement. The concern for global warming particularly by the industrialized countries heated up since then and 'climate politics' matured with a series of international conferences and formal negotiations that followed. The momentum culminated in the signing of a Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) and opened for signatures at the Rio Earth Summit in June, 1992. The FCCC aims at stabilization of greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations, in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. Subsequently, the parties to the FCCC adopted the Kyoto Protocol in December, 1997. In the eyes of the developing nations the Protocol is fraught with loopholes as economic concerns, rather than ecological or social justice concerns are invariably the driving force. The main area of contention between the developed countries and the developing countries lies in the sectors pertaining to equity and sustainability. However, the operational details of the Kyoto Protocol have now been finalised after intensive deliberations at Marrakech, on November 10, 2001, which was participated by 171 countries The way for widespread ratification by governments and the Protocol's entry into force is now made which is acceptable to governments across nations more or less [As of 17 September 2002, 94 countries have so far ratified the Protocol]. The Kyoto Protocol can therefore now enter into force and become legally binding after it has been ratified by at least 55 parties to the convention, including the industrialized countries representing at least 55% of the total 1990 carbon dioxide emissions from this group. However, with the US having backed out there seem a remote chance for the Protocol to finally become a meaningful reality.

The protocol has been guided by Article 3.0 of the FCCC, and marks the first global attempt to place legally binding limits on greenhouse gas emissions from developed countries. In addition to carbon dioxide, the primary GHG, the protocol focuses on five other greenhouse gases viz. methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs) and sulphur hexafluoride (SF6). The Protocol calls for 5.2% reduction from their 1990 level of GHG emissions by the developed countries during the period 2008-2012. It also specifies the amount each country must contribute toward meeting the reduction goal. Nations with the highest CO2 emissions like the United States, Japan and most European nations are expected to reduce emissions by a range of 6 to 8 per cent. By 2005, all industrialized nations that ratify the accord must also show 'demonstrable progress' toward fulfilling their respective commitments under the Protocol. Unfortunately, with the withdrawal from the negotiations by the United States in March 2001, the Protocol now hangs in a crucial balance of any effective implementation. The reconvened 7th Conference of Parties (COP-7) to the UNFCC, in November 2001, in Marrakesh, Morocco, however brought some hope of possible ratification as major decisions have now been agreed upon, including concessions given to Russia and other nations. Key decisions taken at COP-7 included the following:

· Allowing emissions credits generated under the Clean Development Mechanism, Joint Implementation and Emissions Trading among Annex-1 (developed) countries to be treated equally;
· Creating the removal of units to represent credits generated in Annexe-1 countries via sinks;
· Establishing guidelines for banking unused emissions credits;
· Allowing non-Annexe-1 countries to unilaterally undertake a CDM project and market the resulting emissions credits;
· Giving Russia an increase in the ceiling for forest management credits; and
· Requiring Annexe-1 countries to report on efforts to protect bio diversity in the context of sink activities.

Some complex issues of the Kyoto Protocol :

Baseline and its implications - The target of 5.2% reduction beyond 1990 level in the commitment period 2008-2012, were dependent on 1990 emissions. This meant that if a country which had high emissions in 1990 and had reduced them between 1990 and thereafter, then it could actually increase its emission once again, or only stabilize these, and not carry out any reductions.

As an example one can analyse the case of Australia. In 1990, as much as 30 percent of the emissions were from deforestation, which eventually became a blessing for the country - for, instead of penalizing for creating the problem in the first place, Australia has been able to use its emission to its advantage, by winning the right to count any improvement from its 1990 level as its national credit. And as its deforestation rate has been controlled, it actually can increase its emission above and beyond the figure of 8 percent it is expected to reduce. On the other hand, USA and Japan were lobbying hard to change the date of baseline from 1990 to 1995. The reason for this lies in the fact that both the countries have made a significant increase in carbon emissions between 1990 and 1995.

Flexible mechanisms - The Kyoto Protocol includes three mechanisms - Art.6 (Joint Implementation), Art.12 (Clean Development Mechanism) and Art.17 (Emissions Trading), paving an explicit way for developed countries to meet their Kyoto targets easily. The cheapest and the most attractive option for meeting the emission targets of the North (i.e developed countries-Annexe I) being the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) that will be operated on the project basis invested in the South (i.e under developed countries). This implies that, as global warming is bound to be unsolved even by the end of this century, the South would have to pay a heavy price in future once they have reached a high level of energy efficiency through means like CDM. For by then the cost of carbon cutting will be very high even for the developing countries, which would eventually have to do the carbon cutting on their own. So what form of international would exists than is not answered by the protocol. The next issue comes on the question of energy-efficient technology, which the North wishes to push to the South through CDM. As technology up-gradation is a continous process, hence what is the most efficient technology at the time of implementation of the CDM project, may be obsolete within few years that follows.

Principle of equity: Defining the rights and responsibilities of all nations within an equitable framework is not placed in the Kyoto Protocol. So long as the world remains within a carbon based energy economy, equitable sharing of the 'atmosphere' shall remain a critical issue, especially for poor developing countries who need a maximum space for their future economic growth.