Should the Kyoto Treaty be ratified?

Résumé du document

Taking note of the reality of global warming in the 1990s, and of the human responsibility in this change, political leaders initiated a policy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The Kyoto Protocol, which came into effect on February 2005, is an amendment of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), assigning mandatory targets to lower greenhouse gas emissions to signatory nations. However, this policy has divided both industrialized countries, not very inclined to discuss their model of growth, and countries of the South, anxious to maintain their projects of development. The US's refusal is the most striking, we can wonder. Is global concern surrounding an environmental agreement such as the Kyoto Protocol an answer to an emergency? Let us first have a look on the Kyoto Treaty's contents, before trying to understand why some countries refuse to ratify it and why so many others keep on trying to make it work.

Extraits

[...] How to deal with countries that will not participate in effort for controlling emissions, while enjoying the benefits of the preservation of the climate, a collective good? How to protect the collectiveness of countries that impose environmental constraints on their producers? And finally, is it consistent to act for the benefit of future generations while we do so little for certain present populations of the planet?this is what will be seen in the second part where we'll ask ourselves if the KP is really efficient and necessary. II. Is the Kyoto Protocol necessary? [...]

[...] Will the countries have enough political strength to make the firms respect the credits system ? (command and control) - We can notice that many criticisms lie on the market credits system, which may sound surprising for an environmental issue, particularly on a so important one which implies the very living of human kind. However if it is believed that the market in general is an efficient tool, the credits market may be a good way to reduce emissions The Kyoto Treaty remains, after all, an exemplary intend of global agreement - maybe a first step to a global governance, with the coordination of environment policies - it has been a big deal to make the countries come to an agreement, it would be a pity to renounce - the European Union has to show it is able to lead the protocol, because of the absence of the US, and this could have important consequences on tomorow's credibility of the EU - But, since 1995, there has been little change on the global scale. [...]

[...] - A quarter at least of the emissions are from the US, then if they don't participate It cannot really be efficient on a global scale, given that the emissions are dangerous for everyone, whatever the part of the world these are from the very principle of binding quantitative targets - Right now, scientists are not able to quantify properly the ‘risk' of global warming, even though it is real. Thus it sounds a bit idealistic to define quantitative targets while we don't even know if those targets will be able to overpass the risk. - The quotas used to define the quantitative targets of the signatories countries have been defined in 1995. Unfortunately changes in potential emissions have occurred and change the legitimacy of the quotas. [...]

[...] Notable exceptions include the United States and Australia. Other countries, like India and China, which have ratified the protocol, are not required to reduce carbon emissions under the present agreement despite their relatively large populations The application of the Protocol and its opponents The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change agreed to a set of a "common but differentiated responsibilities." The parties agreed that: - The largest share of historical and current global emissions of greenhouse gases has originated in developed countries; - Per capita emissions in developing countries are still relatively low; - The share of global emissions originating in developing countries will grow to meet their social and development needs. [...]

[...] All parties to the UNFCCC can sign or ratify the Kyoto Protocol, while non-parties to the UNFCCC cannot. The objective of the treaty is the "stabilization of greenhouse gases concentration in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system." Countries that ratify this protocol commit to reduce their emission of carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases, or engage in emissions trading if they maintain or increase emissions of these gases. Explanation: The protocol organizes a right to emit for each country, refering to the quantity of greenhouse gases they were emiting in the 90's and fixing the quantity they shouldn't exceed between 2008 and 2012. [...]