NEWS RELEASE: Developing countries' voluntary efforts to reduce CO2 emissions must be measured differently from industrialized countries
For more information, journalists can contact:
Paul Mackie, senior media officer, +1(202) 729-7684, pmackie@wri.org
|
|||
Related publications:
|
|||
|
WASHINGTON, DC, May 28, 1999 -- For over a decade international efforts to address the threat of human-induced climate change have grappled with the respective roles and responsibilities of different countries. A new study released by the Washington, DC-based World Resources Institute addresses a key issue in this perennial debate-the nature of quantitative commitments to rein in greenhouse gas emissions. While the yet-to-be ratified Kyoto Protocol would require the United States and other industrialized countries to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases by over 5 percent below 1990 levels, the treaty does not include quantitative commitments for developing countries. The United States is anxious for poor countries to also make such commitments, and has even made "developing country participation" a pre-condition for ratifying the Kyoto Protocol. However, according to the report, there is currently no environmentally sound and politically acceptable approach for developing countries to make quantitative commitments. What might a developing country climate commitment look like? challenges the prevailing assumption that a developing country should take on commitments in the same form as those accepted by the US and others-a limitation on the absolute level of emissions. Because developing countries have extremely low per capita emission levels and are often just beginning industrialization, they are not in a position to limit or reduce emissions. "The climate challenge over the next few decades in developing countries," according to the report's authors, "is to reduce the greenhouse gas intensity of economic growth, not to reduce overall emission levels." Towards this end, the authors have developed "GHG intensity indicators" that express a country's emissions per unit of economic output. Because of the voluntary nature of new commitments from developing countries, the authors argue that developing countries should be able to choose the form of the commitment that is most compatible with the goals of the climate treaty and domestic priorities. Not only are GHG intensity indicators more appropriate for developing country circumstances, they are also provide a more environmentally sound framework for developing countries that wish to make quantitative commitments. The report stresses the potential harmful interaction between so-called growth caps, which would allow a developing country to increase absolute emission levels, and international emissions trading. The best predictor of future greenhouse gas emission growth is gross domestic product-a country's total economic output of goods and services. So, "growth caps" could be tantamount to guessing on a country's future economic performance. Such an outcome would have a perverse interaction with an international emissions trading system that is envisioned under the climate treaty. If a country's economy collapsed, it would be allowed to sell unused pollution permits to other countries, which would then be able to increase their domestic emissions. |
|||
|
|
|||
For more information, contact:
|
