1. Mechanisms of international cooperation The IPCC, the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol Session 5

2. Introduction • An apparent paradox • The action of a single country in the fight against climate change is meaningless. • At the same time, the participation of some countries is a necessary condition for a successful agreement. • Problem of the free-rider • How to translate a scientific consensus into collective action • Took a long time to build up • Relationship between science and policy • International cooperation on climate change was first a story of scientific cooperation

3. The need for international cooperation • Climate change as a global public ‘bad’ • Climate change as a market failure: global externality • Affects all peoples and all generations, though diversely • The protection of climate can only be provided through international cooperation • Difficulties of international cooperation • Tragedy of the commons • Free rider • Need for a global climate regime

4. Three key mechanisms of international cooperation

5. 1. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change • Established in 1988 jointly by UNEP and WMO • Open to all member countries of UNEP and WMO • Main task: assess the risks and impacts of climate change • Main outcome: the Assessment Reports, issued every 5 or 6 years (4 reports so far) • About 2,500 (unpaid) scientists, appointed by their government: lead authors, contributing authors, reviewers

6. Structure of the IPCC

7. The scientific process • The IPCC does not carry out any research • The Assessment Reports are just a synthesis of previously published works • Triple peer-reviewing • Peer-review at the time of publication of original works • Scientific peer-review by experts • Political peer-review by governments • The reports need to be approved by both all scientists and all governments: they are bpth a scientific and a political document • Reports organised on the basis of scenarios

8. Comments and criticisms • Highly authoritative, due to intensive peer-reviewing • But this authority is currently being questioned: ‘climate gate’, mistake about the Himalaya glaciers, etc. • The IPCC as a political actor • How to address these criticisms? • Can we doubt about climate science? • Minimal consensus • Are the reports too prudent and conservative? • Scenarios underestimate reality • Need for revision • Need for a global reform of the IPCC?

9. 2. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) • Main outcome of IPCC and the Rio Earth Summit (1992), and first international agreement on climate • Choice between 2 possible options: • A global treaty on the atmosphere • A treaty focused on climate change • General objective: the stabilisation of a GHG concentration at a level that would avoid dangerous interference with the climate • Two key priciples: • Common but differentiated responsibility • Respective capacities.

10. Not binding, no mandatory limits for GHG emissions. Sole obligation: GHG inventory to be submitted each year. • Three important mechanisms: • Mandatory protocols • Countries divided in Annex I countries, Annex II countries (a subset of Annex I) and developing countries • COP to be held every year

11. 3. The Kyoto Protocol • Mandatory update of UNFCCC • Opened for signature in 1997, entered into force 8 years later • Conditions: 55 parties, and 55% of CO2 emissions • 176 countries have ratified. Only 37 have to reduce their emissions

13. General design of the Protocol • Fixed term: expires in 2012 • General objectives: cut GHG emissions by an average 5% from 1990 (base year) • Underpinning principle: common but differentiated responsibility • Distinction between Annex I countries and non Annex I countries • Flexible mechanisms • Heavy emphasis on mitigation, little emphasis on adaptation

15. Kyoto and Europe • All EU-members’ ratifications deposited simultaneoulsy on 31 May 2002 • EU counted as an individual entity • EU produces about 22% of gas emissions • Agreed to a cut of 8% from 1990 levels • One of the major supporters of the treaty • EU elected to be treated as a ‘bubble’, and created an EU Emissions Trading Scheme • France: 0%. No need to cut emissions • Germany: -21%. Has reduced its emissions by 17.2% between 1990 and 2004. • UK: -12.5%. Appears to be on course to meet its target.

16. Different commitments

17. Flexible mechanisms • Innovative aspect of the Kyoto Protocol • Mechanisms relying on the market, rather than on states • Highly criticised as paramount of ‘environmental liberalism’ • Three mechanisms: • Carbon market (‘cap and trade’) • Clean Development Mechanism • Joint Implementation

18. The carbon market:The EU Emission Trading Scheme • General principle: maximisation of economic efficiency – at the expense of ethics? • Industries are given quotas of emission allowances • Application of the ‘polluter pays’ principle • Scheme started in 2005, all 27 countries take part • Problems: • Price of carbon highly versatile • Covers about half of the EU’s CO2 emissions • Too many quotas on the market • Second phase 2008-2012, with auctioning and a central authority

19. Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) • Aims to combine development and climate, equity and efficiency • Economic efficiency: costs of abatment are cheaper in developing countries • Functioning: • Alternative to domestic reductions • Allow Annex I countries to invest in projects that reduce emissions in developing countries • New carbon credits: Certified Emission Reductions (CERs)

20. Geographical distribution of CDMs

22. Criticism • Reality of avoided emissions • Principle of additionality • Incentive to misrepresent reality • Overpricing and overestimation • Unlimited credits • A country could completely externalise its efforts • Transfer of emissions? • Development objectives ? • Almost no CDM projects in Africa

23. Joint implementation • Similar mechanism as CDMs, but in Annex I countries (i.e. In Eastern Europe and Russia) • Provides Emission Reduction Units (ERUs), where 1 ERU = 1 ton of CO2 • No new credits • Long and fastidious process

24. Some final words • Kyoto is an agreement between industrialised countries, where developing countries are mostly oberservers: • No limits on emissions • Do not benefit from flexible mechanisms • Treaty focused on mitigation, not adaptation • Role of civil society in international cooperation