By David Newman and Scott J. Stone¹
The international climate negotiations in Durban, South Africa, concluded with new momentum toward a comprehensive agreement on climate change. It is a remarkable turnaround from two years ago in Copenhagen, where negotiations fell far short of expectations and raised questions over whether a multilateral process could address climate change. Now the race is on, once again, for a new treaty.
The process launched in Durban seeks to yield a legal instrument applying to all countries by the end of 2015, to enter into force in 2020. As part of this process, major economies such as China, India, Brazil, and South Africa are expected to undertake emission mitigation commitments in the post-2020 period, along with developed countries.
In the meantime, a second commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol will commence in 2013, with its duration and other details, including mitigation targets, to be decided in the coming year. This preserves existing carbon market infrastructure, such as the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). However, the second commitment period is not expected to spark a meaningful increase in demand for carbon credits, as it likely will apply only to the European Union, Norway, Switzerland, New Zealand, and potentially Australia. Canada, Japan, and Russia are not expected to take part, nor will the United States, who never ratified it.
The seminal question is how serious this new, three-year negotiating process will be, particularly given that the last push for a climate treaty ended in chaos in Copenhagen in 2009. However, there are several differences in the process leading up to Copenhagen and the process just launched in Durban.
First, major emitting developing countries, such as Brazil, South Africa, India, China, and others, are expected to take on emission reduction commitments as part of any long-term deal. This both reflects and prefigures a gradual re-ordering of the world, recognizing the rising economic and political power of the so-called BASIC countries and their increasingly significant greenhouse gas emission profiles. This also is essential for the participation of developed countries, including in particular the United States and Canada, who would not be expected to join any agreement that limits their emissions without comparable (though not necessarily identical) limits on emerging economies.
Second, the negotiations will occur in a single track, to be known as the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action. In the run up to Copenhagen, negotiations were conducted along two separate tracks, one focusing on future commitments for developed countries under the Kyoto Protocol and another focusing on a broader agreement covering all other countries. Although not without merit, the two-track process added to rather than reduced the complexity of the negotiations, particularly with respect to the perpetually controversial need to ensure ‘balance’ among the outcomes of each track. The new, single track will commence in the first half of 2012, with the old two-track process winding down and terminating by the end of next year.
Third, new institutions have been established and are in the process of being implemented that will have a significant impact on the credibility of the international process and the willingness of governments to accept future limitations on emissions. Heading into Copenhagen, these institutions, for finance, technology, adaptation, new market mechanisms, forestry, and other climate-related instrumentalities, were words on a page. Heading toward 2015, these institutions have been negotiated and are already being implemented. In effect, major pillars of a future agreement already are in place.
(….)
To read all the article: http://www.vita.it/news/view/117348
[1] David Newman is the Vice President of the International Solid Waste Association (ISWA). Scott J. Stone is an attorney with the law firm of Hunton & Williams LLP and the Chair of the Climate Consensus Workshops. The authors retain full copyright and publishing rights to this article.
