Kyoto Protocol Success Pdf

The overall results show that between 1990 and 2012, the original Parties to the Kyoto Protocol reduced their CO2 emissions by 12.5%, well above the 2012 target of 4.7% (CO2 only and not greenhouse gases and including Canada*). The Kyoto Protocol was therefore a great success. Well, at least that`s what politicians are going to bravely tell us. But does the deeper divide reveal the same story? But this still leaves open the question: “Was the Kyoto Protocol a success of climate change or a failure of global warming?” Montreal Protocol, 1987. Although the Montreal Protocol [PDF] was not designed to combat climate change, it was a historic environmental agreement that has become a model for future diplomacy on the issue. All countries in the world eventually ratified the treaty, which required them to stop producing substances that damage the ozone layer, such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). The Protocol has succeeded in eliminating almost 99 per cent of these ozone-depleting substances. In 2016, the parties agreed on the Kigali Amendment to also reduce their production of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), powerful greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change. The Kyoto Protocol (`the Protocol`) is a highly influential IEA affiliated to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

This protocol aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It was adopted in Kyoto in 1997 and entered into force in 2005. In 2016, there were 192 Parties to this Protocol. The parties are composed of 191 states and the European Union (EU) [10]. In 2016, the Paris Agreement was also adopted as part of the UNFCCC regime to prepare for the next step in the fight against climate change [11]. The Kyoto Protocol was opened for signature in 1998, but entered into force only after at least 55 parties had ratified it. They also had to account for at least 55% of the total carbon dioxide emissions of Annex I countries. This political process lasted 7 years and it was the ratification by Russia that finally promulgated the treaty in 2005. This is an important milestone in the history of the Kyoto Protocol and the final signature required for its entry into force. But it is only now that it appears that it was also a political masterpiece that would ensure the success of the Kyoto Protocol before it had even begun. What for? Headlines make the Kyoto Protocol appear to be a major success on climate change and a valuable contribution to environmental sustainability, but further analysis makes it look like a failure of global warming.

The reality is that it can be somewhere in between. Unfortunately, we will never know for sure. We never know how high the emissions of the parties to the Kyoto Protocol would have been without the Treaty. It is suspected that most countries have not gone far enough and this is only obscured by the success of a minority. However, it is recognised that without the Treaty, these countries` greenhouse gas emissions could have risen faster – we simply never know for sure. In line with the fundamental principle of the 1992 UNFCCC, called “common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities”, the Protocol takes into account differences in emissions, prosperity and the ability to change the sharing of emission reduction commitments between the Parties [12]. Annex I to the Protocol lists the main sources of greenhouse gas emissions. The list includes the member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development as well as the countries in transition at the respective times.

As a result, a heavier burden of internationally binding emission reduction targets has been imposed on Annex I Contracting Parties. In addition, the Protocol introduces three market-based mechanisms – international emissions trading, the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and joint implementation – to help countries successfully meet their emission reduction targets [13, 14]. Such flexible market mechanisms shall assist Annex I Parties in meeting their cost-cutting obligations in a more cost-effective manner [15]. The Arctic ice is thawing. At least once a century, the Arctic would experience a summer without sea ice, which has not happened in at least two thousand years. Forty percent of Arctic permafrost would thaw by the end of the century. Quote: Kim Y, Tanaka K, Matsuoka S (2020) Environmental and Economic Efficiency of the Kyoto Protocol. PLoS ONE 15(7): e0236299.

doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236299 Before completing the document, the limits must be mentioned. First, there could be other improvements related to the marginal costs of damage. .