Although most signatories to the Kyoto Protocol have succeeded in reducing emissions, global levels of CO2 in the atmosphere have soared, rising by 35% since 1997. Most of this increase comes from the same large developing countries that were not included in the protocol – China and India are now the world`s first and third largest emitters, with the United States moving from first to second place. Effectiveness: Effectiveness is one of the key issues in environmental policy and policy analysis. Effective policies are those where negative externalities and suboptimal outcomes are limited (Shepsle, 2010). An effective policy would be one where cooperation is developed by one or more institutions and not by many fragmented forums (Blum, 2008). Given the time and effort devoted to the negotiation and preparation of the Kyoto Protocol and the considerable resources allocated to the implementation of the various COPs, the question arose as to whether the Protocol was effectively achieving its objective. Some believe that this is not the case (Rosen, 2015). Over the past decade, the climate regime has fragmented into many institutions and forums with overlapping functions and issues (Karlsson-Vinkhuyzen and McGee, 2013). Some of these forums include the G8, the UN Security Council, meetings of major economies, etc., and a host of other bilateral agreements (Eckersley, 2012). New ones are constantly emerging. This suggests inefficiencies in the protocol itself, as the new fragments are the result of the protocol`s inability to address climate issues (Raustiala and Victor, 2004). While it can be argued that fragmentation in itself is not a bad thing, it represents a flaw in the design of the protocol, as it should act as the main institution in the fight against climate change. Given the amount of time, effort and resources invested in the ongoing negotiations that have not diminished over time, this represents real and rewarding costs for global mitigation efforts.

Therefore, the protocol did not pass the efficacy test. 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. In 1995, the first COP (COP-1) was held in Berlin. The Conference of the Parties concluded that the UNFCCC had not gone far enough in setting binding emission reduction targets. As a result, a resolution known as the ”Berlin Mandate” was adopted, which was a first step towards establishing legally binding GHG emission reductions (Genest, 2012).

The COP 1 meeting was the context that launched the process of negotiating a protocol to the UNFCCC that would set legally binding emission reduction targets. These negotiations culminated in the third COP in Kyoto, Japan, in 1997, where COP members adopted the Kyoto Protocol to the UNFCCC (Genest, 2012). UNFCCC 2015. 10th Anniversary of the Kyoto Protocol: Timely Reminder of Climate Agreements. A Climate Change News Room, available on newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/kyoto-protocol-10th-anniversary-timely-reminder-climate-agreements-work/#downloads, accessed November 11, 2017. BULGAKOVA, M. 2011. The pros and cons of the Kyoto Protocol [Online].

Expert Advisory Center Legal Analytics homepage. Available from www.legalanalytics.com.ua/en/zakonodavstvo0/mizhnarodnidogovory0/58-kyoto.html. [Accessed Nov 22, 2017]. ”The Kyoto Protocol did not seriously affect global emissions because the largest emitters [the United States and China] did not participate,” he said. ”But Paris affects all countries.” UNFCCC. 2014a. Kyoto Protocol [online]. [Accessed November 12, 2017.

Available at unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/items/2830.php.]. That`s not all. Some of the reductions could be due to ”carbon leakage”: emissions are shifting to developing countries like China instead of stopping altogether. The protocol also does not include rapidly increasing emissions from aviation or shipping. And many will say that the goals were far too modest in the first place. Was the 1997 Kyoto Protocol a success? It depends on how you interpret the numbers. President George W. Bush then removed America completely from the minutes, saying the treaty was ”fatally flawed in fundamental terms.” But even without the participation of the United States, the global community has moved forward. ”The rest of the world decided, in a rather unusual move, that they would continue to negotiate the protocol, which eventually entered into force without the United States,” Claussen said. CONNECTUS. 2015. 4 Notable advantages and disadvantages of the Kyoto Protocol.

Available at connectusfund.org/4-remarkable-pros-and-cons-of-the-kyoto-protocol [Online]. [Accessed Nov 22, 2017]. Permalink: www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2016/4/failures-of-kyoto-will-repeat-with-the-paris-climate-agreement But emissions from former Soviet states had collapsed before the agreement was signed, meaning that a reduction of 2.2 GtCO2 per year is not due to the protocol. Ignore this, and the 38 have not reached their goal. Under the Kyoto Protocol, most developed countries, with the exception of the United States, have committed to meeting targets to reduce or slow down their emissions of the main greenhouse gases that cause climate change. The objectives varied from nation to nation. Some have been allowed to increase their emissions by a certain amount; others had to make significant cuts. The average target was a reduction of about 5% from the 1990 level in 2012 (or more precisely 2008-12). Overall, the result is that global emissions showed no signs of slowing down, as shown in the chart below. In this sense, the Kyoto Protocol has failed.

But it was undoubtedly an important first step in global climate diplomacy. The question is whether a second, more ambitious step will follow in time to avoid the unacceptable risks of devastating climate change. Overall, there are more successes than failures, and the sum of emissions from countries with Kyoto targets has decreased significantly. Meanwhile, however, emissions in the rest of the world have risen sharply, especially in China and other emerging markets, as the chart below clearly shows. And the Kyoto Protocol should not be judged solely on the basis of emissions figures, Shishlov says: it also helped lay the groundwork for the Paris Climate Agreement late last year. The Kyoto Protocol was adopted in Japan in 1997. The first commitment period of the Protocol is expected to run from 1998 to 2012. Article 3.1 of the Protocol requires countries listed in Annex 1 to the UNFCCC to ensure, individually or collectively, that their aggregate anthropogenic emissions of anthropogenic carbon dioxide equivalent of their greenhouse gases are reduced by at least 5 per cent below 1990 levels during the 2008-2012 commitment period. Section 3.2 also states that, according to Annex 1, each country must have made demonstrable progress in meeting its commitments by 2005 (UNFCCC, 1998). Annex A to the Protocol contains greenhouse gases and their sectors/source categories, while Annex B contains signatory States and their quantified emission limitation or reduction commitments.

In the first commitment period, Parties shall meet the target set out in Annex 1 while remaining individually below the GHG emissions allocated to them in accordance with Annex B to the Protocol. These amounts range from 92% for countries such as Austria and Belgium to 110% for Iceland (UNFCCC, 1998). Article 3.5 of the Protocol allows countries with economies in transition (EIT Parties) to use 1988 or 1989 instead of 1990 as the base year for their GHG extraction. Indeed, their greenhouse gas emissions were higher in the years before 1990 (Genest, 2012). Silvio is a Director at Marcacci Communications, a full-service clean energy and climate policy public relations firm based in Oakland, California. 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? GENEST, S.

2012. Combating global warming: progress and priorities for a successor to the Kyoto Protocol. Revue Juridique Themis, 46, 525-579. We now know that they were right. The EU, one of the most vocal advocates for reducing global greenhouse gas emissions, has barely met half of its Kyoto greenhouse gas targets. However, what can be said with certainty is that global CO2 emissions have increased by 51% since 1990. Moreover, 42% of global CO2 emissions come from the United States and China alone, two countries that have not signed the Kyoto Protocol. Another contentious issue concerned joint actions between Annex I countries to the UNFCCC, as well as between Annex I and non-Annex I countries.