Global Environmental Regimes An Overview Presentation on Occasion

Global Environmental Regimes: An Overview Presentation on Occasion of the Staff Education Program of GTZ Gustav-Streseman-Institute, Bonn 20 August 2002 Detlef Sprinz PIK - Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research & University of Potsdam http: //www. sprinz. org 1

Overview z“Modern” Global Environmental Regimes z. Dimensions of Comparison z. Conclusions 2

“Modern” Global Environmental Regimes z(Mostly) Global Environmental Regimes Since the 1990 s (> 1992 UNCED Conference at Rio de Janeiro) yclimate change ystratospheric ozone depletion (from 1980 s) ybiodiversity ydeforestation ydesertification ypersistent organic pollutants (global) 3

Overview of Agreements & Institut. Design (1) Climate Change Legally binding agreement s Major institutions Stratospheric Ozone Depletion Framework Convention on Climate Change (1992), Kyoto Protocol (1997, did not yet enter into force) Vienna Convention (1985), Montreal Protocol (1987) and amendments COP & MOP (Kyoto Protocol), Secretariat (Bonn, Germany), SBI, SBSTA, Financial Mechanism (GEF) COP & MOP, Secretariat (UNEP, Nairobi), Multilateral Fund (MLF), various panels 4

Overview of Agreements & Institut. Design (2) Loss of Biodiversity Deforestation Legally binding agreement s Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD, 1992), Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (2000, not yet in force) International Tropical Timber Agreement (ITTA, 1993), Forest Principles (1992, not legally binding) Major institutions COP & MOP (Cartagena Protocol), Secretariat (Montreal, Canada), SBSTTA, Clearing House Mechanism, Financial Mechanism (GEF) Intergov. Panel on Forests (IPF, abandoned in 1997), Intergov. Forum on Forests (IFF, now UNFF), ITTO, TFAP, UNFF 5

Overview of Agreements & Institut. Design (3) Desertification Persistent Organic Pollutants Legally binding agreement s Convention to Combat Desertification (CCD, 1994); various regionspecific annexes LRTAP POPs Protocol Major institutions COP, Secretariat (Bonn, Germany), Committee on Science and Technology (CST), Global Mechanism (IFAD), new Committee for the Review of the Implementation of the Convention (CRIC) INC, Criteria Expert Group as subsidiary body to INC; global convention stipulates: COP, Secretariat, Subsidiary Body, POPs Review Committee, Interim Finamcial Mechanism (GEF) (Europe and North America, 1998), Stockholm POPs Convention (2001, not yet in force) 6

Comparing Global Environmental Accords: Decision Making (1) FCCC & Kyoto Protocol Vienna Convention & Biodiversity Montreal Protocol (CBD) Failed to arrive at rules of procedure; unanimous voting in most cases; in practice: exceptions from consensus if number of opposing countries is small and does not include a major country Strong voting mechanism: adjustments (without need for national ratification) to already controlled substances by 2/3 majorities, plus majorities of DC & IC; for the addition of new substances: 2/3 of the parties; decisions on financial mechanism: 2/3 majorities plus majorities of DC & IC Failed to arrive at rules of procedure; amendments to the convention require consensus or twothirds if consensus fails; annexes require two-thirds majority decisions 7

Comparing Global Environmental Accords: Decision Making (2) Desertification (CCD) Failed to arrive at rules of procedure; simple majority only for procedural decisions; amendments to the convention: two-thirds majority; parties that do not approve the amendment will not be affected by the amendment Persistent Organic Pollutants (POP Convention) COP-decisions require twothirds majority; amendments to the convention require threefourths majority 8

Comparing Global Environmental Accords: Reporting & Compliance (1) FCCC & Kyoto Protocol Vienna Convention & Biodiversity (CBD) Montreal Protocol Regular reporting on efforts to achieve the objectives of the convention; noncompliance procedure for Kyoto Protocol agreed (30% penalty) Yearly reports on production, exports, and imports; strong implementation review; soft and hard noncompliance procedures, including sanctions for illegal trade and threat of terminating funding Reports on measures to implement provisions of the convention; only general rules on arbitration, conciliation, and compliance (Cartagena Protocol); extensive information provision (Cartagena Protocol); clearing house mechanism 9

Comparing Global Environmental Accords: Reporting & Compliance (2) Desertification (CCD) Reports on measures to implement provisions of the convention; countries affected by desertification have to provide a detailed description of the implementation of the convention, including the implementation of national action programs (NAPs); only general rules on arbitration and conciliation; new Committee for the Review of the Implementation of the Persistent Organic Pollutants (POP Convention) Will report on measures to implement provisions of the convention; COP shall decide on a non-compliance procedure 10

Comparing Global Environmental Accords: Development Component (1) FCCC & Kyoto Protocol Vienna Convention Biodiversity & Montreal Protocol (CBD) Common but differentiated responsibilities; no targets and timetables for developing countries within the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol; CDM designed to reward developing countries for emission reductions and provide access to Different reduction schedules for developing countries; MLF finances incremental project costs of developing countries; preservation of the ozone layer mainly perceived by developing countries as an interest of the North; considerable bargaining power of developing Industrialized countries aim at protecting and preserving biodiversity; developing countries want to protect their right to exploit their own genetic resources 11

Comparing Global Environmental Accords: Development Component (2) Desertification (CCD) Scale of environmental problem mostly local but with global effects for climate change; developing countries demand financial assistance from industrialized countries; strongly connected with development goals due to socioeconomic causes of desertification Persistent Organic Pollutants (POP Convention) Developed countries shall provide new and additional financial resources to developing countries as well as economies in transition to meet the agreed full incremental costs of implementing measures; developing countries won the right to produce and use DDT to fight vector-borne diseases 12

Comparing Global Environmental Accords: Funding & Regime Effect (1) FCCC & Kyoto Protocol Funding: Vienna Convention & Montreal Biodiversity (CBD) Protocol Funding: Global Environmental Facility Multilateral Ozone Fund Global Environmental Facility Regime effectiveness: Some effect Major effect Minor effect 13

Comparing Global Environmental Accords: Funding & Regime Effect (2) Desertification (CCD) Funding: Persistent Organic Pollutants (POP Convention) Funding: Global Mechanism hosted by the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) (temporary solution) Interim Financial Mechanism to be provided by the Global Environmental Facility Regime effectiveness: Minor effect Not yet in force 14

Conclusions z. Not All Conventions or Protocols Have Yet Entered Into Force z. Broad Similarity in Institutional Setup Across Global Environmental Regimes z. Development Component Clearly Visible z. Rules of Procedure Are Contentious z. Substantial Variation in Regime Effectiveness 15

Where to Find More z. Full text: Urs Luterbacher and Detlef F. Sprinz (eds. , 2001): "International Relations and Global Climate Change, " Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 247 -277 z. Further Information & Update: dsprinz@pik-potsdam. de http: //www. sprinz. org 16