Addressing the Challenge of Global Climate Mitigation an Assessment of Existing Venues and Institutions
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
STUDY Addressing the Challenge of Global Climate Mitigation An Assessment of Existing Venues and Institutions CAMILLA BAUSCH AND MICHAEL MEHLING August 2011 n Recent setbacks in the climate negotiations have given new impetus to a debate about the adequacy of alternative venues and institutions for global cooperation on climate change mitigation. n A survey of existing venues and institutions ranging from formal treaties and organi- zations to technical dialogues and political summits shows that no alternative forum can currently replace the technical capacity, negotiating experience and broad back- ing embodied in the United Nations climate regime. Nevertheless, the UN process is expected to remain slow in delivering results. n Complementary processes offer interesting opportunities to address divisive issues that have stalled progress in the past, while also helping to advance complex tech- nical discussions and identify new options. An approach involving multiple fora, but centered on the UN climate regime, is therefore recommended to take forward the mitigation agenda. C. BAUSCH AND M. MEHLING | ADDRESSING THE CHALLENGE OF GLOBAL CLIMATE MITIGATION Contents Executive Summary . 2 List of Abbreviations . .. 5 1. Introduction . 7 2. Clinching the Need for Global Emission Reductions . 7 2 1. What Mitigation Levels Are Needed? . 8 2 .2 Who Should Reduce Emissions, and By How Much? . 8 2 .3 Are We on Track? Mitigation Offers on the Table . 10 2 .4 Interim Conclusions . 10 3. Which Mitigation Approach is Best? Alternative Regime Architectures . 11 4. How Successful is International Climate Cooperation in Reducing Emissions? An Assessment of Current Cooperation Venues . 14 4 1. Classical Multilateralism: The United Nations . 14 4 1. 1. The UNFCCC and its Kyoto Protocol . 15 4 1. .2 The Montreal Protocol . 21 4 .2 New Impetus from Outside the UN? . 23 4 .2 1. Alternative Climate-Specific Venues . 23 4 .2 .2 Alternative Venues with Broader Agendas . 26 4 .2 .3 Coalition of the Willing: The Cartagena Dialogue . .. 34 4 .2 .4 Political Summits and Conferences . 36 4 .2 .5 Sectoral and Technical Initiatives . 39 5. Many Venues, Few Achievements, Dire Prospects? . 42 5 1. Necessary Conditions for a Breakthrough . 42 5 .2 Why Different Venues are Needed, and Associated Risks . 43 5 .3 Climate-specific Initiatives and their Contribution . 44 5 .4 Broader Initiatives and their Future Role . 45 5 5. The Future of the UN Climate Regime . 46 6. Conclusion: What Does this All Add Up To? . 48 Annex : Mingling Science and Politics: The Allocation of Mitigation Efforts . 52 Emission Trends for Annex I Parties . 53 Emission Trends for Non-Annex I Parties . 55 Per Capita Emissions . 55 Cumulative Emissions . 56 References . .57 1 C. BAUSCH AND M. MEHLING | ADDRESSING THE CHALLENGE OF GLOBAL CLIMATE MITIGATION Executive Summary fora for international climate cooperation . It starts with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Climate change is now widely recognized as a political Change (UNFCCC) and Kyoto Protocol (KP) as the most priority, but different views exist on how to shape an prominent venues in the collective effort to achieve miti- international response . Following recent setbacks in the gation objectives, but also covers another influential climate negotiations, this question has also grown to en- instrument adopted under the auspices of the United compass the adequacy of different venues and institu- Nations (UN), the Montreal Protocol . tions for addressing the challenge of climate change miti- gation . As an aim of international cooperation, mitigation It proceeds to survey venues outside the UN context that can encompass multiple dimensions, and hence can be concentrate on climate change, with an analysis of the measured against different benchmarks . For its point of Major Economies Forum (MEF) and the no longer ac- departure, this paper focuses on the objective of keeping tive Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and average global temperature increases below 2 °C above Climate (APP) . Thereafter, it shifts attention to relevant preindustrial levels, an objective that has been endorsed institutions with a broader agenda, focusing on the by the international community on various occasions . achievements and potential roles of the Group of Eight (G8), the Group of Eight and Major Emerging Economies Authoritative surveys of the mitigation pledges adopted (G8+5), the Group of Twenty (G20), and the Organisa- to date by different countries strongly suggest that these tion for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), will fall far short of what is required to achieve the 2 °C with its affiliated International Energy Agency (IEA) . goal . Unsurprisingly, current approaches to climate miti- gation are therefore undergoing critical scrutiny, along The Cartagena Dialogue for Progressive Action is de- with the venues and institutions facilitating the relevant scribed as an attempt to combine high-level political international cooperation . and working-level technical discussions among actors seeking an ambitious, comprehensive and legally bind- For a number of years, observers of – and participants in ing climate regime . – the international climate negotiations have debated the merits of the mainstream approach to cooperation, based What follows is a discussion of high-level meetings with on a binding international treaty with centrally agreed little or no institutional structure . This starts with an principles, objectives and commitments, flanked by nu- evaluation of the Petersberg Climate Dialogue launched merous procedures, mechanisms and institutional bodies . to complement the formal negotiations under the Recent developments at the international level, notably UNFCCC, as well as the Cochabamba Conference con- the Copenhagen climate summit held in late 2009, have vened as a counterpoint to mainstream multilateral renewed claims that cooperation would be more effective cooperation . In this section, attention is also briefly under a less formal approach, driven by decisions taken at devoted to the upcoming Rio Plus 20 Summit and its the national level, with greater flexibility to accommodate potential role in promoting future efforts to mitigate domestic circumstances and priorities . climate change . While each of these contending paradigms undoubted- Finally, initiatives centered around technological cooper- ly has its own strengths and weaknesses, the authors ation are analyzed, drawing on the International Partner- argue that such binary distinctions do not reflect the re- ship for Mitigation and MRV, the REDD+ Partnership and ality of current interactions on climate change between the comparatively recent French-Kenyan Clean Energy states . Instead, the main section of this paper reviews Initiative as examples representative of a broader range the actual achievements of existing venues and institu- of similar endeavors . tions, focusing on a broader range of criteria, such as geographic inclusiveness, institutional resources, and Drawing on the foregoing assessment of international the level and nature of engagement . venues and institutions, and based in particular on their past achievements in climate change mitigation, the Against this premise, the paper assesses the structure analysis concludes that a forum will successfully tackle and achievements of a number of existing and proposed climate change mitigation if it meets at least six central 2 C. BAUSCH AND M. MEHLING | ADDRESSING THE CHALLENGE OF GLOBAL CLIMATE MITIGATION criteria, of which four are structural in nature, while two mate regime . The actors necessary to achieve adequate link to the political vision and will of the parties involved: political agreement on and successful implementation (i) all major current and future emitters are participants; of the 2 °C goal have various national constraints and (ii) it has sufficient resources and expertise to deal with conflicting views on the appropriate approach to inter- the complex aspects of mitigation; (iii) it is able to ensure national climate protection . In each setting, this leads to transparency, both procedurally, but also with regard to difficult hurdles when searching for a common strategy . efforts and emissions; (iv) it can facilitate agreement on Just changing the venue does not necessarily solve the mitigation and take relevant decisions; (v) it is backed by underlying problems . a firm political will to act swiftly to achieve the 2 °C goal; and (vi) it reflects a common vision on how this goal Rather than identifying a single panacea for climate should be achieved . change mitigation, the analysis shows that different approaches to climate cooperation exhibit distinct While the UN climate regime meets a number of these strengths and shortcomings, typically accompanied by criteria, including greater institutional experience and correlating trade-offs . What this situation affords is the resources than any other contending forum, it currently prospect of harnessing complementarities resulting from seems to lack political will among important parties and varying degrees of political weight, formality, institutio- a common vision on the way forward . However, as the nal capacity, and specificity of mandate . recent climate summit in Cancún has shown, the vast majority of countries are willing to continue their en- And that is indeed the path currently in evidence in glo- gagement in the UN climate regime, investing political bal cooperation on climate change, where mitigation