Case Study Of The Kyoto Protocol To The UNFCCC (2005)

Kyoto Protocol to the UNFCCC (2005)

The Kyoto protocol is an international agreement designed to address the global problem that is climate change, by trying to reduce the emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. Kyoto is at present signed by 192 parties, 191 of which are states while one is a regional economic integration organisation (UNFCCC) [1]. International agreement is necessary to address this important issue, since climate change affects every single country of the world and can lead to dangerous interferences with the climates system if action is not taken (Y. Feng et al 2008) [3]. The Kyoto protocol was very specific and stated that “The Kyoto Protocol is a legally binding agreement under which industrialized countries

Countries were divided into three groups; Annex I, Annex II and Non-annex I. UNFCC described that although it is every country’s duty to address climate change, not all can act in the same way. (UNFCCC, 2008) This is because developing countries should all be given the chance to develop by improving their industries and thus economies. This resulted in targets for Annex 1 countries and flexibility mechanisms to help them achieve these targets. Challenges arose when drafting and deciding what flexibility mechanisms would encompass, for example both “anthropogenic emissions and anthropogenic removals of sinks are treated the same way even though they are not equal” (Missfeldt, 1998) [4]. Challenges also arose when deciding guidelines for flexibility mechanisms for example according to Missfeldt, deciding whether “consideration should be given to whether it is desirable to settle for the smallest common denominator for all Parties, or whether a system should be put in place that allows free trading across gases and sectors with strong participation of the private sector.” is an example of a consideration that must be taken into when deciding the guidelines, due to the many factors that needed to be considered to accurately lay out guidelines, many challenges

It 's now clear that Kyoto is not the path forward to a global solution to climate change. If anything it 's an impediment." Peter Kent, 2011 (The Guardian, 2011) [6]. And by 2003 Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions was “24% above the 1990 levels” (Campbell, 2015) [7] this lead to an increase in global carbon dioxide emissions. This is where dividing countries (that lead USA and Canada to pull out) into two different groups acted as an important factor that determined the slight failure of the protocol, since globally emissions increased while with parties that signed Kyoto there was an overall