Laws

1. KYOTO PROTOCOL
(APPLICATION, SUCCESS,
FAILURE)
BY:
KANWAL NISA

2. INTRODUCTION
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC) was established in 1992 to provide an international
forum for countries to address climate change.
By 1997, the UNFCCC had adopted its first legally binding
international climate treaty with greenhouse gas (GHG) emission
reduction targets in what was called the Kyoto Protocol. The
UNFCCC adopted the Kyoto Protocol at COP-3 in Kyoto, Japan,
on December 11, 1997, marking a turning point for international
climate action and set the stage for the Paris Agreement. Kyoto
was the first ever international climate treaty that established
legally binding GHG emission targets and timetables.

3. UNITED NATIONS FRAMEWORK
CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE
(UNFCCC)
The significance of the UNFCCC cannot be overlooked as it finally provided a
hard objective in the fight against global warming, as well as providing the basic
principles and obligations and establishing procedures and institutions that would
come to provide the framework for future political and diplomatic action in the
fight against this phenomenon. The three main principles embodied in the
UNFCCC were:
• Sustainable development (development that takes into account the needs of the
current generation without compromising those of future generations);
• The precautionary principle (which implies an obligation on states to take action
even where the science is uncertain if irreversible damage could be caused); and
• Common, but differentiated responsibilities (which takes into account the differing
stages of development of a country in setting obligations for them to meet).

4. KYOTO PROTOCOL
• treaty was finalized in Kyoto, Japan, in 1997, after years of
negotiations, and it went into force in 2005. Nearly all nations
ratified the treaty, with the notable exception of the United
States. Developing countries, including China and India,
weren't mandated to reduce emissions, given that they'd
contributed a relatively small share of the current century-plus
build-up of CO2.
• The major feature of the Kyoto Protocol is that it sets binding
targets for industrialized countries for reducing greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions. As of 2008, 183 parties have ratified
the protocol, which includes India also.

5. • Protocol places a heavier burden on developed
nations under the principle of “common but
differentiated responsibilities.” Under the protocol,
the developed countries are required to reduce
emissions of GHGs by an average of 5.2 per cent
below 1990 levels by 2012.

6. DEFINITION OF 'KYOTO
PROTOCOL'
It is an international agreement that aims to reduce
carbon dioxide emissions and the presence of
greenhouse gases. Countries that ratify the Kyoto
Protocol are assigned maximum carbon emission
levels and can participate in carbon credit trading.
Emitting more than the assigned limit will result in a
penalty for the violating country in the form of a
lower emission limit in the following period.

7. OBJECTIVES OF KYOTO
PROTOCOL
• The objectives of the Kyoto protocol were-
• 1. To achieve stabilisation of greenhouse gas
concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would
prevent anthropogenic interference with the climate
system within a time-frame sufficient to allow
ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change;
• 2. To ensure that food production is not threatened; and
• 3. To enable economic development to proceed in a
sustainable manner.

8. SIGNIFICANT PROVISIONS OF
THE KYOTO PROTOCOL
1) The six gases targeted for reduction included carbon
dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons (used
in air conditioning), perfluorocarbons (often produced by
aluminum production) and sulfur hexafluoride (used in the
electrical industry). Carbon dioxide was the gas that
policymakers were most concerned about.
2) The general target that the developed countries have to
meet is to reduce their greenhouse-gas emissions by about
5% below their 1990 levels in the timeframe addressed by
the Kyoto Protocol, namely 2008-2012.

9. 3) To compensate for the sting of "binding targets," as they are called,
the agreement offers flexibility in how countries may meet their
targets. For example, they may partially compensate for their
emissions by increasing "sinks" -- forests, which remove carbon
dioxide from the atmosphere.
4) According to article 3.2 of the Kyoto protocol, by 2005, countries
are expected to have made demonstrable progress, though this
has not been specifically defined. Countries have been asked to
create an effective greenhouse gas accounting system.
5) Article 3.13 of the protocol incorporates a banking provision, which
provides that if the emissions of the countries mentioned in
annexure 1 are less than its assigned amount for the first
commitment period, then this difference can be used to stay within
the assigned amount of that country in subsequent commitment
periods.
6) According to article 4, two or more countries can meet their
reduction targets jointly, and can set their own individual targets so
long as the entire group under the ‘bubble’ meets their target in
aggregate.

10. 7) Article 6 further incorporates the provision on joint
implementation, which allows the industrialised countries to
transfer or acquire emission units from other industrialised
countries, through projects aimed at reducing emissions from
sources, or enhancing removal by sinks.
8) Article 10 calls for effective transfer of technologies that are
publicly owned or in the public domain. According to article 11
developed countries are required to assist the developing
countries vulnerable to adverse effects of climate change in
meeting the cost of adaptations.
9) Some mechanisms of the Protocol had enough support that
they were set up in advance of the Protocol's entry into force.
The Clean Development Mechanism, for example -- through
which industrialized countries can partly meet their binding
emissions targets through "credits" earned by sponsoring
greenhouse-gas-reducing projects in developing countries
already had an executive board before the Kyoto Protocol
entered into force on 16 February 2005.

11. COMMON BUT DIFFERENTIATED
RESPONSIBILITIES (CBDR)
PRINCIPLES
• The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
divided the world into two parts i.e. the countries that had “historical
responsibility” and those that did not. The first were put in an
annexure, called Annex-1 of the UNFCCC document, while the
others came to be known as non-Annex countries, which had to
follow the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities
(CBDR).
• Common but Differentiated Responsibility (GBDR) principal has two
matrices. The first is the shared responsibility for shared resources.
In fighting climate change, there are common responsibilities which
all States should accept due to the common resource which is the
environment we share. The second is the differentiated responsibility
because of the variations in the economic, social and technological
levels of States. Under this notion, because developed nations have
a higher capability they should lead the fight against climate change.
Also, because the developed nations gained their current capability
by “past economic exploitation of global commons”, they should
shoulder greater responsibilities.

12. APPLICATION OF KYOTO
PROTOCOL/ BREAKING DOWN
'KYOTO PROTOCOL'
• The first commitment period, during which countries were bound to meet
these targets, ran from 2008-2012. At that time 37 countries and the
European Union had binding goals. Developing countries like China and
India were excluded from the list because, as the UN put it, “the Protocol
places a heavier burden on developed nations under the principle of
‘common but differentiated responsibilities.’” Planning for the Protocol
began in 1992, but it wasn’t until 1997 that members met in Kyoto,
Japan, to agree to broad outlines for emission targets. Members would
set a target based on carbon-dioxide emission outputs in 1990. The
average target was a 5% cut from 1990 to 2012. The second
commitment period began on 1st January 2013 and will end in 2020.
• The individual targets the Protocol assigns for the countries vary from 7%
for the United States (although it has since withdrawn its support for the
Protocol), to 8% for the European Union which, however, it can distribute
among its member states. Some countries, on the other hand are
allowed to increase their greenhouse gas emission – such as Iceland
(may have a 10% increase of emissions) or Portugal (27% increase
allowed).

13. THE KYOTO MECHANISM
Under the Treaty, countries must meet their targets primarily through national
measures. However, the Kyoto Protocol offers them an additional means of
meeting their targets by way of three market-based mechanisms. They are
Emissions trading – known as “the carbon market", Clean development
mechanism (CDM), Joint implementation (JI).
1) Emissions trading - Carbon trading
Countries with commitments under the Kyoto Protocol have accepted
targets for limiting or reducing emissions. These targets are expressed as
levels of allowed emissions, or “assigned amounts”. The allowed
emissions are divided into “assigned amount units” (AAUs). Since carbon
dioxide is the principal greenhouse gas, it was termed carbon trading.
Carbon is now tracked and traded like any other commodity. This is often
termed the carbon market.
2) Clean Development Mechanism
The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), defined in Article 12 of the
Protocol, allows a country with an emission-reduction or emission-
limitation commitment under the Kyoto Protocol to implement an emission-
reduction project in developing countries. Such projects can earn saleable
certified emission reduction (CER) credits, each equivalent to one tonne of
CO2, which can be counted towards meeting Kyoto targets.

14. 3) Joint implementation The mechanism known as “joint
implementation,” defined in Article 6 of the Kyoto
Protocol, allows a country with an emission reduction or
limitation commitment under the Kyoto Protocol to earn
emission reduction units (ERUs) from an emission-
reduction or emission removal project in another country,
each equivalent to one tonne of CO2, which can be
counted towards meeting its Kyoto target.

15. SUCCESS
- The 37 industrial nations that stuck with the protocol after the
US pulled out in 2005 say they exceeded their promises,
cutting their emissions for the period from 2008 to 2012 to an
average of 16 per cent below 1990 levels, compared with the
4.7 per cent promised in the agreement. But the protocol only
ever applied to rich industrialised nations. Most of the cuts
came from Eastern European countries when their economies
collapsed after the fall of the Berlin Wall – reductions that
would have happened anyway.
- But on a technical level Kyoto has seen dramatic
developments it can account for. It introduced the idea of a
multinational carbon market – the Clean Development
Mechanism (CDM) – and delivered new rules for reporting,
accounting and verifying emissions.
- And its rules-based architecture influenced the creation of low
carbon legislation across the world – notably the UK’s 2008
Climate Change Act.

16. FAILURE OF THE PROTOCOL-
• the protocol didn't become international law until more than
halfway through the 1990–2012 period. By that point, global
emissions had risen substantially. Some countries and
regions, including the European Union, were on track by 2011
to meet or exceed their Kyoto goals, but other large nations
were falling woefully short.And the two biggest emitters of all
– the United States and China – churned out more than
enough extra greenhouse gas to erase all the reductions
made by other countries during the Kyoto period. Worldwide,
emissions soared by nearly 40% from 1990 to 2009,
according to the Netherlands Environmental Assessment
Agency.

17. SOME PROBLEMS OF THE KYOTO
PROTOCOL MUST BE DISCUSSED:
1) The use of removals by sinks as a form to mitigate climate
change is controversial. Some argue that reforestation projects
do not address the main causes of greenhouse gas emissions
(industrialisation and energy use).
2) There are no side payments as an incentive for developing
countries to assume commitments. Commitments are set only
for developed countries. This problem contributes to a smaller
fall of emissions at a higher cost.
3) Developing countries may additionally increase their emissions
because of the leakage from developed countries. That is,
investors may favour developing countries because of a less
stringent environmental law and absence of environmental
commitments.

18. 4)Emission reductions cannot be precisely measured. This is the so-called baselines
problem. It questions the effectiveness of the environmental investments for climate
change mitigation. One needs to establish a methodology to measure liquid gains in
GHGs emissions that have a consensus between researchers in the field.
5)The final flaw and the one that caused the most issue was the fact that developing
countries were not required whatsoever to reduce their emissions, giving them what
many developed countries saw as an economic advantage. No developed country
succeeded in cutting their emission levels unless their economy completely crashed
(like Russia).
6)The minimum participation clause (at least 55 developed countries responsible for
at least 55% of carbon dioxide emissions) acts to deter free-riding until this limit is
reached. From this point on there is no incentive to adhesion and the countries shall
have the benefits without cost; and
7)There is no mechanism to enforce compliance of the commitments. The initial
Brazilian proposal of CDF would work to enforce compliance, with incentives in the
form of emissions trading and punishment in the form of a monetary contribution to a
fund proportional to the difference between actual data and commitments.
8)The banking provision which allows the industrialised countries to bank emissions
for future use creates inequity. For example, if an industrialised country reduces more
than its targets for 2010, then it can bank them, even though it already has very high per
capita emissions. But India has very low per capita emissions today and hence cannot
bank anything today for their future use.

19. SECOND COMMITMENT PERIOD OF
KYOTO PROTOCOL
Formally the protocol lives on. Climate talks in Doha in December created a
second “compliance period” stretching to 2020. (14) In Doha, Qatar, on 8
December 2012, the “Doha Amendment to the Kyoto Protocol” was adopted.
The amendment includes:
 New commitments for Annex I Parties to the Kyoto Protocol who
agreed to take on commitments in a second commitment period
from 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2020;
 A revised list of greenhouse gases (GHG) to be reported on by
Parties in the second commitment period; and
 Amendments to several articles of the Kyoto Protocol which
specifically referenced issues pertaining to the first commitment
period and which needed to be updated for the second commitment

20. CONCLUSION
• To conclude we can say that climate change threats are real and the countries
around the globe recognize this fact, including the USA. Domestic initiatives by
the countries and the binding targets for the reduction would be the likely path to
follow. Three things are required for successful treaty: mandate numerical
emission reduction targets for emissions, second, effective transfer of technology
and investment to poor countries for sustainable development, and third, result
oriented enforcement mechanism
• Clearly the Kyoto Protocol has been ineffective in institutionalising any change.
As Aldy said, “because no single approach guarantees a sure path to ultimate
success, the best strategy may be to pursue a variety of approaches
simultaneously”. It should begin with non-governmental organisations
influencing the general public to stimulate change from their local and regional
councils, which will then feed up into national governments. This domestic
action approach to climate change mitigation provides autonomy and flexibility,
allowing countries to develop legal responses to climate change that reflect the
particularities of their own jurisdictions. In doing so, the domestic regimes can
provide the momentum for an international response that can encompass a
broader jurisdictional scope. As this movement gathers momentum, steps should
be put in place to implement a global climate change authority based on a
trusteeship model to protect the environment for the benefit of mankind.