Global Governance: Environmental

Question 1

What is the name of an international organisation that provides the UN with objective evidence about the origins and impact of climate change?

When was it founded?

Answer 1

International Panel on Climate Change
IPCC

1988

Question 2

What does it produce every few years that brings together the latest scientific evidence?

In a recent report the IPCC reaffirmed that climate change is anthropogenic, why is it important that it asserts that it believes climate change is anthropogenic?

Answer 2

Summary for policymakers of IPCC Special Report

It is important that that the IPCC recognises that climate change is anthropogenic as it is an authoritative body which reaffirms the effects and causes of climate change and that change is needed.

Question 3

What is the UNFCCC

Answer 3

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

Question 4

What was agreed at the Paris Agreement in 2015

Answer 4

Temperature increases needed to be kept below 2c but ideally 1.5c

Question 5

What is the definition of the tragedy of the commons?

Give two examples of the tragedy of the commons

Answer 5

When the short term positive effects go to the individual while the long term negative effects are spread out to the groups.

Question 6

Rio

- The Rio Earth Summit Summit 1992

Answer 6

Positives:

• Attended by nearly all states in the world (172 states)
• -> gave it greater legitimacy
• No state left the resulting framework
• It set up up the UNFCCC which established a framework for future cooperation.
• It recognised that climate change was anthropogenic and that the main cause of it was carbon emissions

Negatives:

• No specific targets –> not helpful in solving the problem.

Conclusion:
- Rio established principles but lacked action
==> It was necessary but not sufficient
==> Anthropocentric, it is not going far enough.

Question 7

Kyoto
Kyoto COP Summit and Protocol
1997
Positives

Answer 7

Positives:

• Kyoto represented the first turning point as it attempted to hold states accountable via legally binding commitments.
• The EU reduced its emissions by around 8% as the EU was able to reassure other EU countries that they are all acting together.
• Even though the USA rejected Kyoto they reduced their carbon emissions.
• 30 states pledged to continue to meet Kyoto’s targets even once the treaty had expired.
• Developing states did not have to cut so they could continue to grow which was more realistic.
• Kyoto introduced carbon credits which created incentives

Question 8

Kyoto
Kyoto COP Summit and Protocol
1997
Negatives

Answer 8

• Difficult to enforce legally binding commitments.
• Legally binding targets were only required of 37 industrialised states and the EU + not all of these states agreed to these targets.

–> The fact that it was not comprehensive led to the USA rejecting the treaty.

• The protocol did not come into force until a decade after the summit which was halfway through the lifetime of the treaty and emissions increased 50% between 1990 and 2009.
• 5% emissions target was insufficient

Question 9

Kyoto
Kyoto COP Summit and Protocol
1997
Conclusion/ Evaluation

Answer 9

• Kyoto failed to stress the urgency of the problem enough.

- It was necessary but not sufficient.

Question 10

Copenhagen
Copenhagen COP 15 Summit
2009
Positives

Answer 10

Positives

• There was agreement that there was a need to limit global temperature rises to 2c.
• They recognised that a method was needed to verify industrialised nations were reducing emissions for greater transparency.
• There was a promise of new resources for developing states.
• The Green Climat fund was introduced to help developing states.
• A requirement that states would make public their plans for reducing carbon emissions by 2020.
• For the 1st time, China and India agreed to reduce emissions

Question 11

Copenhagen
Copenhagen COP 15 Summit
2009
Negative

Answer 11

• The Copenhagen Accord did not include any legally binding targets.
• Unanimous support for the deal was not achieved
• -> powerful states remained unwilling to accept legal targets.
• Developing states felt marginalised.
• There was frustration that developing states were not doing enough.
• States were not yet ready to negotiate as a group of 190.

Question 12

Copenhagen
Copenhagen COP 15 Summit
2009
Conclusion/ Evaluation

Answer 12

Copenhagen was a failure as it lacked the legal force to make real change and instead highlighted divisions between developed and developing states and between powerful developing states (BASIC) and less powerful developing states (G77)

Question 13

Paris
Paris Summit COP 21
2015
Positives

Answer 13

Positives

• Paris was the 1st international climate change deal that committed all states to cut emissions/
• There was an agreement to keep global temperatures below 2c but ideally below 1.5c.
• It was agreed nearly universally –> giving it legitimacy.
• A fund of $100 billion was allocated for developing countries.
• It helped resolve disagreements between the developed and developing world.
• INDCs (intended nationally determined contributions) meant that states could set their own targets.
• Paris was legally binding.

Question 14

Paris
Paris Summit COP 21
2015
Negatives

Answer 14

• America has since withdrawn which disincentivises other countries and could potentially set a precedent.
• INDCs might be hard to enforce
• Developing states found the process of completing INDCs to be difficult due to lack of expertise.

Question 15

Climate change

• Problem
• Solution

Answer 15

Climate change is the ultimate collective problem our world is currently facing; therefore, it requires a collective solution.

In order to solve the problem of climate change states need to cooperate to create solutions through multilateral institutions and INGOs.

Question 16

Obstacles hindering effective action on climate change by state and non-state actors

Answer 16

• State sovereignty and self interest
• disagreements over responsibility and measures to be taken by developed and developing states
• climate change scepticism and denial

Question 17

How does state sovereignty and self interest hinder effective action on climate change?

Answer 17

Realists believe that we live an anarchical world where states are sovereign, and no authority can force a state to do something.

Because of this, compelling states to act on issues of climate change is challenging as there is a lack of supranational authority.

Furthermore, realists assert that states are self-interested as we live in an anarchical order, there is no one to rely on for help so states must help themselves.

Therefore, states are often reluctant to implement sustainable measures as they would not want to sacrifice short term economic growth.

Example:
An example of the result of self-interested states is the tragedy of the commons, whereby self-interested states will exploit the global commons, such as the air, land or seas to benefit themselves but at the expense of the rest.

Although in the past states have been reluctant to sacrifice their sovereignty and self-interest in order to advance action on climate change, this has begun to change.

–> In 1992, 172 states attended the Rio Earth Summit which set up the UNFCCC and no state has subsequently left. This shows how states are becoming more willing to sacrifice their sovereignty in pursuit of tackling climate change.

However, during the Kyoto protocol in 1997, the USA and Canada both rejected the protocol.
–> This was likely because Kyoto was the first attempt to hold states accountable via legally binding commitments, and the USA and Canada were not prepared to sacrifice their sovereignty to achieve this.

–> Furthermore, the USA pulled out of the 2015 Paris Agreement likely for the same reason, however, in this instance America should be seen as an exception rather than a rule since no other state has pulled out.

==> Overall, sovereignty and the self-interest of states do hinder effective action on climate change as it makes it hard to enforce any action to be taken by states, however, recently states appear to be more willing to sacrifice their sovereignty and short-term self-interest in order to finally tackle climate change.

Question 18

How do disagreements over responsibility and measures to be taken by developed and developing states hinder effective action on climate change?

Answer 18

Another significant obstacle that has hindered effective action on climate change is the differences between developing and developed states and the action and responsibility these states should take.

Developing states have argued that the pressure that it put on them to address the issues of climate change is not fair as developed states did not have to consider these issues when they were developing.

Developing states argue that environmental measures negatively impact the speed and success of developing states progress. Furthermore, it is argued that the current restriction on developing states are a result of historical emissions and damaged caused by developed states in the past.

On the other hand, developed states argue that emissions in developing states are increasing rapidly whereas in developed states they are stable, and that it is the poorest states that are the most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change due to the risk of natural disasters.

The view that developed states should take more responsibility for climate change has had very adverse reactions and caused tensions between developed and developing states.

Examples:

In the 1997 Kyoto Protocol developing states did not have to cut their emissions and legally binding targets were only required of 37 industrialised states. This caused resentment from developed states towards developing states and also meant that Canada and the USA pulled out of the protocol.

Furthermore, the Copenhagen Summit of 2009 further highlighted divisions between developed and developing states as there was a general frustration that developed states were not doing enough and developing states felt marginalised.

However, more recently the division between these two types of states has started to subside.

Developing states have become more accepting of the idea that they also need to tackle action on climate change, this can be seen in the Paris Agreement of 2015.

• -> Paris was the first international climate change deal that committed all states to cut emissions. Some of the largest developing countries, such as Brazil and India, made clear commitments.
• -> India promised to generate 40% of its energy from non-fossil fuels by 2030 and Brazil said it would increase renewable energy sources to 45% of all energy consumption by 2030.

==> Therefore, although the divisions between developed states and developing states have posed a significant obstacle to effective action on climate change in the past, this has started to subside in recent times, as can be seen, most clearly with the Paris Agreement.

Question 19

How does climate change scepticism and denial threaten effective action on climate change

Answer 19

Not all states accept the causes and scale of climate change and are therefore not able to adequately tackle the problem.

Accepting that climate change is real and the scale of climate change is a necessary step for states, as without it states cannot agree on any action they should take.

However, this problem was tackled in the 1992 Rio Earth Summit which was attended by 172 states and recognised that climate change existed, that it was anthropogenic and that the main cause was carbon emissions.

Now that the majority of states had agreed on climate change and its causes, it made dealing with the issue easier.

However, although this issue appeared to be resolved in 1992, recent developments in global politics have led to questionable people being elected who hold uneducated views about the existence of climate change and its causes.

In 2012, Donald Trump argued that climate change had been invented by China to make US manufacturing non-competitive.

Unfortunately for those who care about the planet, he was elected president of the USA in 2016 and in June 2017 he withdrew the USA from the Paris Agreement. Trump has taken questionable actions since assuming his role as president, as well as withdrawing America from the Paris agreement he has approved the construction of an oil pipeline from Canada to Texas despite the fact that it ran through sacred Native American sites and threatened to damage sensitive environments along the pipeline’s path.

Therefore, although scepticism and denial surrounding the issue of climate change appeared to be resolved over 25 years ago recently, powerful states such as America have made this obstacle reappear.

==> Therefore, scepticism around climate change does continue to pose a problem as if powerful states do not believe in the effects of climate change they will not take the necessary solutions and if one state appears not to be doing its part others will follow.

Question 20

Why does the environment require global governance?

Answer 20

Climate change is the ultimate collective problem

There is a collective impact and collective cause = Needs collective solution

Question 21

Obstacles to progress and cooperation

Answer 21

• Sovereignty and anarchy
• -> Compelling states to act is very difficult, there is a lack of supranational authority.
• States will act with self interest
• -> States are often reluctant to sacrifice short term economic growth
• Disputed evidence
• -> Not all accept the causes and scale of climate change

Question 22

The Montreal Protocol 1989
Measures:
Outcomes
Why was it successful:

Answer 22

Measures:
- CFCs were banned as their emissions had harmed the ozone layer

Outcomes:
- The Montreal Protocol was hugely successful in reducing non-carbon dioxide emissions. Had it not been for the Montreal Protocol non-carbon dioxide emissions would have become more serious and harmful than carbon dioxide emissions in their contribution to global warming.

• A total of 197 states have now ratified the Montreal Protocol, it has encouraged collective action.
• It was the first use of the precautionary principle which set a precedent.

Why was it successful:

• States did not think that their economic interests would be harmed through ratifying the treaty.
• States felt as though they were sharing the burden of action equally

Question 23

IPCC

Answer 23

Established in 1988 to provide the most scientifically up-to-date assessment of the causes and likely effects of climate change on the planet.

Its focus on achieving consensus between the world’s most eminent climate change scientists and strict governmental neutrality has given it particular authority, so that its reports are treated with great respect.