Abstract
Kofi Annan, Secretary General to the United Nations, has argued that:”The recognition that the industrialised countries should take the lead in tackling climate change is one of the political cornerstones of the Convention.” 2 He was referring to fact that the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change explicitly states that the developed countries should take the lead3 and includes articles that implicitly emphasise that developed countries should take the lead.4 This was urged during the Climate Change Convention negotiations, where the developing countries argued that the primary burden of action lies with the North and the developed countries (initially) acknowledged this responsibility.5
Kevin R. Gray is the Research Fellow in Public International Law and British Institute of International and Comparative Law in London, UK. Joyeeta Gupta is head of the Programme on International Environmental Governance, and interim head of the Department of Environmental Policy Analysis at the Institute for Environmental Studies at the Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Kofi Annan (1997), ‘We need decisive action in Kyoto to limit Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Climate Change Bulletin, 154th Quarterly at 4.
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, (1992) 32 I.L.M. 849, (herinafter Climate Change Convention); see Article 3(1) and 4(1).
See, for example, Articles 4.3 and 4.7 of the Climate Change Convention and the Preamble, See for more details on leadership in the Climate Change Convention, Joyeeta Gupta, ‘Leadership in the Climate Change Regime’, RECEIL (1998), Vol. 7, Issue 2.
See, for example, pre-negotiation Declarations on Climate Change, such as the (1989) Noordwijk Declaration on Climate Change and the (1990) Declaration of the Second World Climate Conference.
(1998) 37 I.L.M. 22.
This is stated in Article 3 of the Climate Change Convention.
Principle 7 of the Rio Declaration. (Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, (1992) 31 I.L.M. 874).
C. Alzamora (1987), Environment and Development in the Context of the North-South Debate”.
Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, (1987) 26 I.L.M. 154.
For an interesting discussion, see D. French (2000),”Developing States and International Environmental Law; The Importance of Differentiated Responsibilities”, 49 ICLQ 35.
Art. 3.2.
Notably, Iceland, Australia and Norway who are allowed to increase their emissions by 10%, 8% and 1% respectively in the period 2008–2012 with respect to levels in 1990; see Annex B of the Kyoto Protocol.
For example, Ukraine and Russia are, in effect, allowed to increase their emissions to 1990 levels. Given that both economies have collapsed considerably, their emissions have decreased substantially since 1990.
This includes the European Union countries that have to reduce their emissions by 8%, USA by 7% and Japan and Canada by 6% respectively; see Annex B of the Kyoto Protocol.
South Africa, Nigeria and Egypt are not included in this calculation.
Arts. 4(1)(a), 12, Climate Change Convention. This would include a national inventory of emissions, steps taken to implement the Climate Change Convention and other information relevant to the achievement of the Convention’s objectives.
See for example, Article 4.1 of the Climate Change Convention, and Art 10 of the Kyoto Protocol.
The countries subject to emission reduction requirements are listed in Annex I. These include both industrialised countries as well as the countries of eastern and central Europe.
Art. 2.
See, for example, Article 4.3 and 4.7 of the Climate Change Convention.
Under the Kyoto Protocol, Australia is permitted to increase their emissions by 8% while Iceland is permitted a 10% increase.
Art. 4.8
Art. 4.9
Funding is to be additional to what is given through both bilateral ODA (Overseas Development Assistance) and multilateral assistance, as well as what is allocated to the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) climate change focal area. Bonn Agreements on the Implementation of the Buenos Aires Plan of Action-Decision 5/CP.6, July 27, 2001). At the 6th Conference of the Partiesbis of the parties, the creation of a special climate change fund was to be established and funded by both Annex I and Annex II countries, to finance activities, programmes and measures related to climate change in the following areas: adaptation; technology transfer; energy; transport; agriculture; industry; forestry; waste management; and activities to diversify the economies of developing countries.
Art. 4(2)(e).
Climate Change Convention, Art. 3(4), Kyoto Protocol, Arts. 2(1), 4(1)(d), 10, 12(2).
Kyoto Protocol, Article 4(7).
The Umbrella Group Countries (Canada, Australia, Japan, Russia) wanted this issue to be put on the formal agenda of the 8th Conference of the Parties, which was opposed by the G77 and the EU.
However, Kazakhstan still remains an Annex I party under the Climate Change Agreement.
Such measures may be the result of internal transformation and the need for local companies to become competitive; see, for example, Gupta, J., J. Vlasblom and C. Kroeze with contributions from C. Boudri, K. Blok and K. Dorland (2001), An Asian Dilemma: Modernising the Electricity Sector in China and India in the context of Rapid Economic Growth and the Concern for Climate Change, Institute for Environmental Studies, Report number E-01/04, Amsterdam.
J. Gupta, (1997) The Climate Change Convention and Developing Countries- From Conflict to Consensus? (Environment and Policy Series, Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dodrecht) at 24.
R.N. Cooper’ (1998), “Towards a Real Global Warming Treaty” 77:2 Foreign Affairs 66.
R. Spalding-Fecher, K. Matibe & G. Simmonds, (1998), “The Clean Development Mechanism: Energy Project for Africa” in UNEP/DANIDA. The WRI estimates this figure to be 7.6% World Resources Institute, (1996–1997) World Resources: A Guide to the Global Environment 1996–97, (WRI/UNEP/UNDP/World Bank; Oxford University Press, New York USA)
O. R. Davidson & Y. Sokona (1998), “African and the Clean Development Mechanism: Perspectives for Growth” at 11 in UNEP/DANIDA, African Perspectives on the Clean Development Mechanism, Regional Workshop New Partnerships for Sustainable Development: The Clean Development Mechanism under the Kyoto Protocol, Accra, Ghana, 21–24 September 1998).
As of March 6, 2002, 49 parties have either ratified or acceded to the Kyoto Protocol. Article 25(1) states that 55 Parties, incorporating Parties included in Annex I accounting in total for at least 55 per cent of the total carbon dioxide emissions for 1990. Although reaching the number of required parties will probably be met by the end of 2002, it will take all of the OECD country ratifications to meet the 55% target in light of the US current policy of withdrawing from the climate change process.
Marrakech Accords, www.unfccc.org, doc. FCCC/CP/2001/13.
P. A. Cham (2000), African Interests and Stakes Under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, (Paper delivered at the Climate Change Capacity Project-Africa Workshop in Dakar, Senegal, July 17–21, 2000) at 5.
For discussion, see infra.
R.T. Watson, M.C. Zinyowera, R.H. Moss (eds.)(1988),The Regional Impacts of Climate Change: An Assessment of Vulnerability, (Special Report of IPCC Working Group II: Cambridge University Press) at 31.
Mike Hume (ed) (1996), Climate Change and Southern Africa: an Exploration of Some Potential Impacts and Implications in the SADC Region., (CRU/WWF).
Ibid. Hume explains that it is expected that regional temperatures may rise by between 1 degree and 2 degrees Centigrade in the 21sth century, and about 15–20% of the nature reserves will experience a change in biome.
Cham (2000) at 5.
Abira, M.A. (1997). “Water Resources” in M. A. Abira, V. O. Awuor (eds.) (1997), Potential Impacts of Climate Change in Kenya, (Climate Network Africa: Nairobi) at 52.
J.C.O. Onyango, J.C.O., E.O. Massawa and M.A. Abira (1997), “Biodiversity and Climate Change” in J. S. Ogala, M.A. Abira, V.O. Awuor (eds.) (1997), Potential Impacts of Climate Change in Kenya, Climate Network Africa, Nairobi at 60–61.
IPCC (1998), See also World Resources Institute (1996–1997),The Regional Impacts of Climate Change: An Assessment of Vulnerability at 33. (World Resources Institute: Washington, D.C.).
Cham (2000) at 14. Under the Bonn Agreement on the Implementation of the Buenos Aires Plan of Action (2001), a fund for least developing countries was established to support a work programme for LDCs.
Art. 4.3.
Art. 4.1 (e).
See Arts. 4.3, 4.1(e) and 4.4. Under Article 4.8, assistance should be provided to those developing countries that are small island countries, have low-lying coastal areas, arid areas, areas prone to natural disasters, desertification, high urban atmospheric pollution; countries with fragile ecosystems, economies that are highly dependent on fossil fuels and land-locked countries.
Art. 12.8. of the Kyoto Protocol
Article 4(7).
Kyoto Protocol, Art. 12(10).
Yamin et al. (2001) at 203. The authors note that the same incentive does not exist for JI since overstatement by the CIS countries can result in lower emission limits for themselves.
Art. 12.5(c)), Kyoto Protocol.
Estimates are that Africa attracts only 3% of total FDI. See UNCTAD (1999), World Investment Report 1999: Foreign Direct Investment and the Challenge of Development, (UNCTAD: Geneva).
AIJ projects resulted from the pilot phase of Joint Implementation projects under the Kyoto Protocol. Sokona et al. (1998) notes that Africa was excluded from the AIJ pilot phase due to its focus on emissions reductions and its reliance largely on market forces. See Y. Sokona, S. Humphreys and J-P Thomas (1998)The Clean Development Mechanism: What Prospects for Africa?, (ENDA: Dakar, Senegal).
Yamin (2000).
R. S. Maya and J. Turkson “CDM Baseline and Additionality in the African Context- The Issues” at 19 at 33 in UNEP/DANIDA, African Perspectives on the Clean Development Mechanism, Regional Workshop New Partnerships for Sustainable Development: The Clean Development Mechanism under the Kyoto Protocol, (Accra, Ghana, 21–24 September 1998).
Sokona et al. (1998).
Climate Network Africa, (1998) Preliminary Report of the Regional Workshop for Eastern and Southern Africa on Clean Development Mechanism in the Context of the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, (Nairobi, Kenya).
Spalding-Fecher (1998) at 67.
B. V. Braatz et al (1995) “African Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventories and Mitigation Options: Forestry, Land-Use Change, and Agriculture” in J. F. Fitzgerald et alAfrican Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventories and Mitigation Options: Forestry, Land-Use Change, and Agriculture, (Kluwer Academic Publishers; Dordrecht) at 10.
A natural gas pipeline is being built that will start from Nigeria and go through Benin, Togo and Ghana to Cote D’Ivoire, displacing the fuel oil use at thermal generation stations with significant local cost savings. Discussion has surfaced about extending the pipeline to include Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger.
Annex I countries are restricted to use sink projects only up to 1% of their base year emissions.
In Kenya for instance, 71% of the energy supply comes from the forests. See Onyango (1997). For all of Southern Africa, this statistic has been recorded as high as 80%. See S. Moyo (1996), “Improving Access to Natural Resource Potentials and Regional Cooperation in Southern Africa”, at 167 in T. Abdul-Raheem, Pan Africanism: The Politics, Economy and Social Change in the Twenty-first Century, (London: Pluto Press) at 171.
Over 80% of Southern African People rely on wood for fuel — due to inaccessibility of available electricity resources and technologies that depend on energy. The poor and working class rely on charcoal, which consumes word in its production, and coal, which is unsound for health. S. Moyo, (1996) “Improving Access to Natural Resource Potentials and Regional Cooperation in Southern Africa”, at 167 in T. Abdul-Raheem, Pan Africanism: The Politics, Economy and social Change in the Twenty-first Century, (London: Pluto Press) at 171.
Arts. 4(1)(j) and 12(1).
Arts. 4(3)(7).
Of these only Liberia and Somalia have not ratified the Convention. Twelve African countries have thus far ratified the Kyoto Protocol (as of March 28, 2002).
See Gupta (1997); R.S. Maya and A. Churie, “Critique of the African Approach to Negotiating JI-Bargaining or Posturing?” in R. S. Maya & J. Gupta (1996), Joint Implementation: Carbon Colonies or Business Opportunities?” (Southern Centre for Energy and Environment; Harare).
Maya & Churie (1996) at 35.
Gupta (1997) at 117.
H.W.O. Okoth-Ogendo, J.B. Ojwang, A. Churie (1992), Global Climate Change and the Environment: Setting an African Agenda for Policy Responses to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, (African Centre for Technology Studies, Nairobi).
Cham (2000).
For instance, Latin American countries have been divided about whether CDM projects should include all types of forestry projects.
These are prescribed as renewables up to 15 MW, energy efficiency up to 15 GWh, and small projects up to 14 ktCO2e.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2003 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gray, K.R., Gupta, J. (2003). The United Nations Climate Change Regime and Africa. In: International Environmental Law and Policy in Africa. Environment & Policy, vol 36. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0135-8_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0135-8_4
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-6287-1
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-0135-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive