International Climate Negotiation Factors by Wytze Gaast

Author:Wytze Gaast
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: Springer International Publishing, Cham

4.3 Concluding Negotiations on the Berlin Mandate—The Kyoto Climate Conference

At COP-3 (Kyoto, Japan, December 1997), negotiations continued based on a list of articles which had been suggested by Parties during the AGBM process for a legal instrument or protocol10 and several text proposals for each article. The main focus was on the proposed Article 3 of the protocol which was about commitments for countries and which had been so heavily discussed during the AGBM process (especially whether and how to differentiate these commitments, and what flexibility to offer developed countries in terms of accounting for greenhouse gas emission reduction, location and timing).

The debate on commitments took place in the context of Estrada’s11 ‘big bubble’ proposal (IISD 1997b, p. 7). In this proposal, the EU was to reduce its emissions by 8 % below 1990 levels during a proposed commitment period of 2006–2010 (note that before AGBM-6, the EU had proposed to collectively reduce its emissions by 15 %). Estrada proposed a −5 % target for Canada, the Russian Federation, the USA, and Ukraine, and −4.5 % for Japan. Countries like Australia and Norway had to limit their greenhouse gas emissions to 5 % above 1990 levels. Together, developed countries would reduce their emissions by 5 % below 1990 emission levels. The differences in targets in Estrada’s proposal were a reflection of different national circumstances of the Parties (e.g., large reliance on renewables, or strong coal sector), although no formal calculation method for differentiation, as proposed at a number of AGBM sessions, had been used for this. The proposed targets in the ‘big bubble’ could be achieved by reducing emissions of three greenhouse gases (CO2, CH4, and N2O).

Informal discussions persuaded the Chair to make several adjustments to his proposal, especially with respect to flexibility, the number of gases covered, delaying the commitment period (the period during which countries would be held accountable for their achieved greenhouse gas emission reductions or limitations) to 2008–2012, and voluntary commitments for developing countries. On the last day of the COP, when negotiations continued ‘round the clock’, the Russian Federation and Ukraine expressed their dissatisfaction with the differentiated targets because they did not reflect both countries’ proposals to stabilise their greenhouse gas emissions at 1990 levels (when they were still part of the Soviet Union, and thus before the disintegration of the communist system). Eventually, Article 3 was adopted with quantified emission reduction or limitation commitments for developed countries (QELRCs; note that the word objectives was replaced by the legally stronger term commitments), which were listed in Annex B to the Protocol (UNFCCC 1998a).

On aggregate, developed countries agreed to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions (for six gases, listed in Annex A of the Kyoto Protocol) by 5.2 % during the period 2008–2012 (the so-called first commitment period) compared to 1990 emission levels. These commitments were defined as national emission budgets (so-called assigned amounts), which were expressed as a percentage of developed countries’ emissions levels in 1990. For example, a country with an assigned amount of 93 % must reduce its emissions by 7 %.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.