The Kyoto Protocol which did not achieve general success is about to expire. To replace it is the new climate treaty that will be forged in Copenhagen this December. More than thought of as a historic global agreement, the Copenhagen treaty is ‘the culmination of a 20-year process,’ and is ‘the last chance to save the planet from a temperature rise of two degrees Celsius or higher.’
Many deem that the Kyoto Protocol was not thought out well enough. This is probably the biggest reason why it lacked teeth and authority. Originally just ‘a deal between the European Union and the United States, in which developing countries signed on but did not undertake commitments of their own,’ developing countries were in reality relegated to ‘an observer position, just making sure that there were not commitments imposed on them through the backdoor.’
Things have changed. Developing countries feel the environmental crunch now more than ever. They are ‘much keener to only commit to things they consent to — now they are really negotiating.’
But the biggest difference between the old Kyoto Protocol and the upcoming Copenhagen climate deal is that people now realize that ‘current commitments are just not strong enough because the problem has become more dramatic.’ The Kyoto Protocol only defines commitments until 2012.
Deforestation which accounts for 20 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions today is a focal point of discussions in Copenhagen as it is an ‘important factor for the developing countries’ and ‘was excluded from the Kyoto Protocol.’
One thing is certain, the Copenhagen climate deal, unlike the Kyoto Protocol, must have ‘measurable, reportable, and verifiable’ objectives for both developed countries and developing countries.
