The signing of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) at the Earth Summit in 1992 seemed a great step forward in international efforts to tackle climate change. But 8 years later, there is little sign of the commitment and action required to cut emissions to the levels required to avert dangerous climate change.
The world's heaviest polluters have taken little action to cut emissions. Greenhouse gas emissions in the OECD countries have risen by 4% between 1990 and 1996 (OECD, 1999), despite the fact that most of these countries pledged to return their greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2000. This is short-termism at its worst as it ignores the future cost to the economy and of climate change.
In 1997, in response to the threat of climate change, the world's governments agreed the Kyoto Protocol. This was the long awaited supplement to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which was adopted at the Earth Summit in Rio in 1992 and requires nations to protect the climate system.
As experts had indicated that a 60-80% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions was necessary to limit greenhouse gases in the atmosphere to sustainable levels, Parties had to take further action. At the first COP in Berlin in 1995, they decided that the specific commitments in the Convention for Annex1 Parties were not "adequate" and launched a new round of talks to decide on stronger and more detailed commitments for these countries. After over two years of negotiations, the Kyoto Protocol was adopted at COP 3 in December 1997. It is not in force and will most probably not enter into force until after 2002.
Industrialised countries (Annex I) promised to cut greenhouse gas emissions by at least 5% from 1990 levels in the period 2008-2012 (the so-called "first commitment period"). The targets cover six greenhouse gases, namely: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs) and sulphur hexafluoride (SF6). The individual targets for each country are listed in the Protocol's Annex B, ranging from an average 8% cut for the EU to a 10% increase for Iceland.
The EU has allocated the 8% reduction amongst its Member States (known as the EU bubble), resulting in a range of different targets for the different countries. At the upper end, Germany and Denmark have to reduce their emissions by 21% over 1990 levels and Luxembourg even by 28%, Finland and France only have to bring emissions back to 1990 levels and at the lower end, Greece and Portugal can increase their emissions by 25% and 27%.
Since 1990, emissions have risen in many countries so that the Protocol targets are tougher to meet. Therefore, for the developed countries as a whole, the 5% Protocol target represents an actual cut of around 20% of emissions levels that are projected for 2010 if no action is taken. As mentioned before, trends show that industrialised countries emissions in 2010 are likely to be 8% above 1990 levels in the absence of action to implement the Kyoto Protocol. The OECD members of Annex B are projected to be 16% above 1990 levels in 2010, whilst Russia, the Ukraine and Central and East European countries are projected to be 12% below 1990 levels in 2010.
Governments are failing to meet their commitment to stabilise at 1990 levels let alone begin making the cuts in emissions as agreed under the Kyoto Protocol. Worrying indeed given that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has indicated that world-wide cuts in carbon dioxide of at least 60-70% percent are necessary to guarantee no further increase in atmospheric concentrations.
Many EU countries are set to miss their Kyoto targets altogether. Among the European nations, only the UK and Germany are even coming close while the rest have actually increased their emissions. The Netherlands committed to a 6 percent emissions cut but has instead increased emissions by 17 percent.
Elsewhere, the same curious absence of efforts for self-preservation is revealed in the fact that greenhouse gas emissions in Australia have also risen. Australia agreed to limit growth in greenhouse gas emissions to eight percent above 1990 levels by 2010. Instead, by 1998, emissions were up 16.9 percent on 1990 levels. Defending this position, the Environment Minister, explained that the rise in greenhouse gas emissions from stationary sources is due to Australia's strong economic growth.
Country % Target % Change 1990-1995 1990-2000 Australia + 8 + 6 + 13 Canada - 6 + 10 + 8 France + 0 + 0 - 7 Germany - 21 - 12 - 14 Italy - 6.5 + 2 na Japan - 6 + 8 na Spain + 15 + 2 + 12 UK - 12.5 - 9 - 11 USA - 7 + 5 + 11
