During the last four Conferences of the Parties (2009-2012), many developing parties battled for the extension of the Kyoto Protocol to a second period (2013-2020). These efforts eventually bore fruit –even if partially– by the adoption of the Doha Gateway, a package of decisions which includes a second commitment period for the Kyoto Protocol provisionally starting on 1st January 2013.

Developing countries campaigning for the extension of the Kyoto Protocol based their action on the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities” established in the Convention, which supposedly applies to the Kyoto Protocol also.

In practice however the Kyoto Protocol granted developed parties emission rights of 9.7 tonnes of CO₂ per-capita per year in the period 2008-2012. By contrast, developing parties only emitted 2.8 tonnes per-capita per year in the same period. These figures demonstrate that the Kyoto Protocol applies the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities” in reverse, granting developed parties emission rights 3.5 times the emissions of developing parties. The equitable emission right for the period 2008-2012 is 4.8 tonnes of CO₂ per-capita per year.

The extension of the Kyoto Protocol to the period 2013-2020 will grant developed parties
–reduction pledges by United States and former Kyoto parties included– emission rights of 10.7 tonnes of CO₂ per-capita per year, while developing parties will emit 3.3 tonnes only. Once again, the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities” will be applied in reverse, granting developed parties emission rights 3.2 times the emissions of developing parties. The equitable emission right for the period 2013-2020 is 4.t tonnes of CO₂ per-capita per year.

The Kyoto Protocol (and its extension) violates not only the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities”. The Convention states that the parties should protect the climate system on the basis of equity. The Declaration of Human Rights proclaims that all human beings are equal in rights.

An equitable climate treaty would be much simpler than the Kyoto Protocol and its intricate flexibility mechanisms.

Under an equitable climate treaty the parties agree on an annual global emission target that is equitably distributed among all inhabitants on the planet. Each party receives absolute emission rights proportional to its population. Parties emitting more than their absolute emission right purchase unused emission rights directly from parties emitting less than their emission right.

An equitable climate treaty would be more effective than a regime based on the Kyoto Protocol’s architecture by avoiding inequity, which is the fundamental cause of the permanent burden-sharing impasse between developing and developed parties.

Any ad hoc climate financing, namely the Green Climate Fund launched at COP 17, would lose most of its ground under an equitable climate regime. Under such regime, trading of unused emissions would provide developing parties with a source of just and immediate financing of their own, substantially higher than the Green Climate Fund.

During the first commitment period 2008-2012, developing parties have lost 52.8 billion tonnes in carbon trading due to the inequitable emission rights granted by the Kyoto Protocol to most developed parties. This amount includes losses due to emissions of the United States (not a Kyoto party) over the equitable emission right.

During the second commitment period 2013-2020 under the Kyoto Protocol, developing parties will lose another 61 billion tonnes in carbon trading due to the inequitable allocation of emission rights to most developed parties. This figure includes losses due to emissions over the equitable level of United States and former Kyoto parties that presumably will not participate in the second commitment period (Japan, Canada, New Zealand and the Russian Federation).

Ironically, for developing countries the Doha Gateway is rather a Giveaway: 61 billion tonnes of CO₂ will be graciously given up for the benefit of developed countries…

Note: For the sake of simplicity, all emissions figures above correspond to CO₂ emissions from fossil fuel combustion alone..

Data source

Mhai Selph, December 2012

© 2012 Mhai Selph  All rights reserved