True or False: China, India and other developing countries are exempt from the Kyoto Protocol.
Answer with commentary below.
The answer is FALSE:
Despite there being a widespread belief that China and India are totally exempt from the Kyoto Protocol, this is not strictly true. Both countries have ratified the treaty under the principle of "differentiated responsibility" and are involved in discussions regarding commitments by large developing countries which will kick in post 2012 -- the second phase of the Protocol. By contrast, the U.S. as a non-signatory can only observe discussions and cannot participate in them directly.
The Kyoto Protocol was signed in accordance with the principles of the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, which requires all countries -- including developing countries like China and India -- to take action to address their individual greenhouse gas emissions tallies. The same treaty also requires certain industrialized countries to cut back their emissions to 1990 levels. The idea is that developed countries -- who are responsible for more than 75 percent of greenhouse gas emissions to date -- should take the lead in addressing greenhouse gas emissions, and this principle is consistent with the 1992 treaty, which was originally signed by the current U.S. president's father, George Bush and ratified by the U.S. Senate.
Some thoughts early on a Monday;
To me, the key issue in future negotiations is this: "The idea is that developed countries -- who are responsible for more than 75 percent of greenhouse gas emissions to date -- should take the lead in addressing greenhouse gas emissions."
Two schools of thought here (I'm sure there are more):
1) Existing polluters pay. Developed countries are historically responsible for the majority of emissions and therefore should be responsible for the majority of reductions. Not unreasonable, but polluter pays may be economically costly in this case. Since carbon emissions are intimately tied to infrastructure and economic development, large scale reductions in emissions mean massive changes in established infrastructure. This could be very costly and has the potential to limit future economic growth.
2) New polluters pay. Developing countries are responsible for much of the current growth in carbon emissions (particularly if you look at emissions per $ GDP). Preventing additional emissions is least costly in these developing countries since the infrastructure is not as well established. But this raises an important equity concern: Do developed countries have the right to be developed if it means developing countries can't?
I only see two clear cut answer here: 1) Deny climate change exists and move on, or 2) Establish a global carbon price. The former ignores uncertain damages but is easy to implement. The latter is efficient and in my view equitable, but unlikely to occur.
