You are here: Home » University » BA Politics With Human Rights » Third Year » Environmental Politics

Environmental Politics

Lecture 1 - Definitions of Human Rights
Lecture 2 - How Plausible is Limits to Growth?
Lecture 3 - Driving Forces in Environmental Politics: Affluence, Security and Value Change?
Lecture 4 - The changing green movement: from radicalism to reform?

Lecture 1 - The Discourse of Limits

In 1968, a group of scientists, educators and economists came to discuss the problem of growth. They came up with a model and computer simulated it. The results of this was in the book, "The Limits To Growth" by Meadows, Meadows, Randers, and Behrens in 1972. The purpose of the model was to see what would happen over time of what would happen with nonrenewable resources. It are the "fossil fuels" and especially oil as the underpinning nonrenewable resource. A standard run was produced and runs of the model using different starting conditions or varying other variables. They found even if we had more nonrenewable resources, we only postponed the eventual problems.
There were five interacting factors modeled:

Population
Industrial Production
Food Production
Nonrenewable Resources
Pollution

Population and industrial production tends to grow exponentially and this generates exponential growth in pollution and use of nonrenewable resources unless limited by natural processes or human intervention.

Positive Causal Feedback - exponential growth in population and industrial production are the results of this. Bigger the population, more children are born. With higher rates of investment from the new capital from birth brings a greater increase in production from the investment.
Negative Causal Feedback - e.g. pollution is leading to birth defects and shortening life expectancies in Russia.
Growth can not continue indefinitely. There are limitations on food, the rate of which the environment can hold the pollution .e.g. the carbon cycle and the rate of non-renewable resources can be recycled or substituted. This growth does not stop suddenly but slows down. This suggests there is a carrying capacity for sustainable human economic and population. These limits can be overshot as they operate with delays. For example, pollution can push up mortality but a negative feedback signal only initially effects the growth of the population rather than its level. The effects of pollution is not necessarily noticeable straight away. Pushing the limits of the environment can damage the ecosystem for the future, e.g. over fishing, cattle farming in former rain forests. The natural pollution sinks, such as trees from the carbon cycle may not only be overloaded but destroyed. This leads to the collapse of human population and industrial capacity as the limits themselves fail and therefore pushing human activity lower. There is a need for a sustainable society!

Sustainable Society

A sustainable society has mechanisms in place to keep check on positive feedback loops that cause exponential population and capital growth. The birth dates are similar to the death rates and investment is similar to the depreciation rates. the use of renewable recourses can not exceed their rate of regeneration, e.g. timber. Likewise with non-renewable resources, alternative renewable resources should be developed. Pollution should not exceed the environment's capacity to assimilate it. Some societies are not sustainable and changes have to be made for them to have longevity.

Lecture 2 - How Plausible is Limits to Growth?

Progression in the Limits to Growth

The debates has moved on from a collapse and overshoot of population. More attention is made of declining resources, pollution and a bigger focus on regional impacts. There is a greater concern of the loss of ecosystems and more detailed planning of sustainability. Overshoot and collapse is still a used and valid argument. The earth foot print team (Wackernagel et al) try to track the waste humanity produces and resources used. they see that we have overshot 20% of the earth's capacity since 1970.
It has been forcasted that the population will stablise by the UN. There is a chance of the population declining but this can be due to the people become wealthier and not having as many children rather than it failing due to the reasons in the Limits to Growth theory.
a formula used to define imapact

Polution can still be a problem with a stable high population. regional population growth is concerning in poorer areas as it causes social and ecological strains.

Lecture 3 - Driving Forces in Environmental Politics: Affluence, Security and Value Change?

Lecture 4 - The changing green movement: from radicalism to reform?

What makes up the environmental movement: pressure groups, green parties, members of these groups, protestors, scientific and professional groups that support the green movement. Some members of public who listen to the green message and the NIMBYs (not in my back yard - e.g. airport expansion protestors)

1st Wave - single issue pressure groups - 1880s - WW1

The preservation of animals and land, etc
A reaction to industrialisation and wastefulness of natural resources
In the UK - RSPB, National Trust, local wildlife trusts founded
Heavily supported by the middle class where many supporters worked in the system, e.g. to create national parks, like Yellowstone.
UK - ‘outdoor’ movement - ramblers and cyclists
They did not try to challenge the societal structures

2nd Wave - social movement activities - 1960s-70s

Usually young middle class educated people trying to change society fundamentally,
2 nd wave saw that the 1 st wave wasn’t radical enough to deal with the ever growing problems
Pro limits to growth
Environmental movement associated with other social movements
Environmental problems were deeply rooted in modern industrial societies
The movement adopted some ‘back to basics’ ideals of what individuals can do to help, e.g. LETS schemes, growing your own food, house insulation, etc
The emergence of political groups

Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth (ecology groups) are seen as radical and concerned with the whole earth and structural causes rather than individual species. North => limit consumption South => redistribution from the north to the south. They adopt a more international NGO status with a Local => regional => national system.
Local activists - though there was a move to less extremities and to professionalism where radicalism started to subside.

3rd Wave

Radicalism - this subsided but brought with it a call by some to bring back ecotage and monkey wrenching and violence.
1980s - Direct action returns, e.g. preventing road building and site occupation.
Battle of Seattle - December 1999 - anti-globalisation protest emerged.

Lecture 5 - Resource mobilisation and collective action

Pluralism

The greens fight against the farmers, developers and businesses etc to be heard. The government is relatively neutral. The greens can say to win support that they operate in the public interest. Businesses lobbies opposed to greens are usually better funded with politicians backing them with trade union support. Pluralism is about the idea that groups interact with each other but show sufficient respect and tolerance to fruitfully coexist and interact without conflict or assimilation.

Critique of Pluralism

Resource mobilisation - It is a big leap from agreeing with green views and to give away money and or joining a group. It costs a person time, resources and money to join a join and people argue how much difference they would make by doing anything.
Olson - free riding on other people’s greenness
The effectiveness of the green movement relates to government structures and the political norms and values so some things are always off the agenda.
There is competition between green groups to attract members. Less moderate groups get less support which leads to moderation overall by green groups. The green movement is fragmented. Businesses however have the CBI and the trade unions have the TUC.
The pluralist view of environmental movements is false as they find it hard to get support and face better mobilised opponents and have to appeal to the mainstream to get support.

Resource mobilisation theory

It is difficult to mobilise supports and use resources effectively.
The 2 nd wave groups became moderate like the 1 st waves in their structure to become part of the ‘protect business’ (Jordon and Maloney)
Even people who are concerned about the environment will not necessarily participate until the quality of life drops because of it.

What groups can do to get support:

Show what the group can change things
Avoid negative coverage in the media from direct action/political theatre
Focus on local campaigning for local issues
Mass marketing tactics
Make environmental issues seem more ‘real’
Give members fringe benefits.

To gain resources, big efforts are made on getting members, as member turnover is high. Activism is low so leaders have considerable autonomy bit can steer the group off course from the views of the members. There needs to be effective bureaucratic and formal organisation. A hierarchy allows governments to talk to the people at the top. Economies of scale - easier for a big group to form as it will have a brand image. By exploiting a market niche, in the environmental movement, the group can win support. The main activities of a green group is fundraising and providing information and trying to persuade governments.

Lecture 6 - green political parties: movement to the mainstream?

Where green politics features:

Electoral system
As part of a liberal left party, e.g. Lib Dems taking on some green views
Social movement activities
Greens doing well in local government.

Support base - usually young better educated, professional/technical and working in the public sector

Tactical voting - there is bias against small parties, especially in the first past the post electoral system. Not everyone votes green as it is seen as a wasted vote.

Party competition - European greens emerged from left social movements in the 1970s. There was a move to moderation to maintain support (German Greens). There is fighting against other parties who incorporate green ideals. There can be ‘selling out’ to moderation and can lose votes too. To gain support, adopting ‘ecological modernisation’ can help.

Green parties are not usually in a favourable position in coalition governments but can act as a bargaining power between two bigger parties or blocs. Greens usually have to make large concessions. Compromises occur in coalition governments to ensure stability and minimise election defects.

Lecture 7 - Constraints in Domestic Politics: The State in Capitalist Society and Environmental Regulation

Neo-Weberian - Governments change but administrative structures and procedures and intuitions do not greatly change in modern democracies.

Marxists - governments rely on business for borrowing so it gives capitalists power. Capitalist societies empower business. Business can move to countries where environmental regulations are lighter so governments can be forced to consider their views. Governments can avoid upsetting businesses by keeping out anti-business policies.

Lindblom (pluralist in 60s) - Business does not get its way on everything but it does in ‘grand issues’. Not all environmental policies are anti-business. Slower economic growth and lowering consumption is. Environmental policy is fine unless it enters into ‘imprisoned zones’ that is off the agenda.

Can environmental problems really be tackled with only reform? The media shy away from fundamental changes and push sustainable development and ecological modernisation with ‘no real alternative’ to the way in which we ive now.

Marxists - false consciousness?

International system - treaties, customary international law. States can free ride by not doing much based on domestic interest and/or pressures.

Boom-bust cycle - businesses are especially concerned of losing their power base during economic downturns.

Anthony Downs - scientific people make a concern a big issue. The media focus on it and governments may change legislation in the response to this. Usually things get watered down and/or delayed. Legislation can be next to useless or counter-productive. Attention is then made to another issue.

Policy-community closure - environmental movement tend to be left out of secondary issues as such as economics since it is not seen as directly relating to them.

The state can also be hindrance for environmentalists because of its close connection with business.

Lecture 8 - The theory of ecological modernisation.

Ecological modernization: not only can economic growth be ‘uncoupled’ from further ecosystem damage but achieving sustainability simultaneously increases economic efficiency, once environmental costs and benefits are properly allowed for. It is simultaneously:

interpretation of certain trends and developments in society;
policy analysis of what is 'best-practice' in environmental regulation involves;
normative position with a view of how humankind should relate to nature and what the best form for economic and political systems is.

Ecological modernization theory as interpretation of social trends

Developed by sociologists in the 1980s, the most significant authors being Huber and Mol.

Systems adaptation: ecological problems posed new systemic challenges to societies which had been dominated by economic issues and the marketplace. Social systems can adapt by, first, developing a conception of what is functional from an ecological standpoint to achieve sustainability, second, by integrating ecological functionality with economic rationality so that markets take account of ecological constraints and ecological requirements are satisfied in a cost-effective way.

We can all eventually benefit from solutions. It recognises resistance to modernisation, e.g. business, workers, and consumers whose economic interests are affected in short-term. It claims that it is inefficient to harm the environment. Beside persuasion and self-regulation through encouraging business to adopt best-practice, these external costs can be built into their decision making through green taxes and related instruments.

The state is a key to ecological modernisation, just as in other sets of large-scale progressive reforms. The state can encourage voluntary codes of practice among business and an ethic of responsibility among citizens enforced by law and subsidies.

Why ecological modernisation? : these adaptations are seen as the latest in a series of 'modernising' reforms within capitalism whereby it has transformed itself by democratising, adapting to deal with issues of social justice and inequality, and regulating capitalist competition and the macro-economic cycle.

tradition of industrial society theory (e.g. Bell/Galbraith) that downplays underlying conflicts within society and emphasises stages of reform through which all industrial societies move ending up with liberal democracy and reformed capitalism.

The theory was largely applied to rich, developed countries, but more recently it has also been used to interpret change in some countries going through rapid periods of economic development. More progressive countries can be expected to impose their environmental standards through threats to block the imports of goods produced in 'dirty' ways; so being nationally competitive in world markets will mean being clean.

Some evidence relating to adaptation.

Examining the OECD’s environmental statistics, we find a mixed picture, depending on the measure we consider and depending on the country:

Air quality - SO2 emissions generally gone down since 1990, Despite catalytic converters, NOx emissions have increased in some states and harder to reduce because of growth of traffic;
While emissions of total greenhouse gasses have fallen in some countries, both measured per capita and per-unit gnp, in others they continue to increase. The energy intensity of many economies per-unit of gnp and per-capita continues to grow. There is little evidence for overall de-coupling of greenhouse gas emissions from economic growth since 1990;
Consumption of CFCs and Halons has fallen in most OECD countries, there are problems with methyl bromide and HCFCs, (CFCs substitute) with considerable global warming potential;.
Except for organic pollution, the OECD reports that ‘improvements in freshwater quality are not always easy to discern’ and it expresses doubts about the sustainability of the levels of use of internal water resources in some countries.
The amount of waste generated has often not been decoupled from economic growth;

Ecological modernisation sees capitalist economy restructuring as a relatively conflict-free process. More ecologically functional practices need not be imposed on business for there is often money in it for them, as long as they can be encouraged to see things in a more far-sighted way:

pollution is often the symptom of the waste of inputs, and production costs can often be cut by reducing pollution;
sophisticated consumers demand products produced in a clean way that have low impact in their lifetimes and can be recycled;
Dynamic and highly profitable domestic and export markets in pollution control technology.

Business of environmental management standards - ISO 14000.

Harming the environment should be seen as costly, because it harms human welfare. Once these costs are adequately accounted for over the whole of society and over the long term, they can more than offset the immediate costs to the producer of pollution of cleanup.

Ecological modernisation as policy analysis of policy principles and ‘best practice' in environmental regulation

Ecological modernisation is based upon an interpretation of how environmental regulation developed in rich capitalist economies - particularly on how it developed in Germany, Netherlands and Scandinavia.

The 2nd wave of environmental movement (1970s) created a realisation of the implication of environmental problems - articulated in the limits to growth debate - pushed governments into action. At first the changes were adaptations of existing systems for the regulation of environmental harms, which long pre-date the 1960s. These patterns were somewhat specific to different countries. A common sequence emerged in rich capitalist democracies:

the appointment of expert commissions to consider environmental problems;
the institutional innovation of a new department of state to deal with the environment (e.g. the EPA in the USA or the Department of the Environment in the UK);
Legislation on some highly symbolic and visible issues connected with public health, notably air quality, water quality, and waste disposal.

It became clear to environmentalists (who had started to work within the system rather than use direct action tactics) politicians and industry that these developments were unsatisfactory:

many problems were worsening; and new problems -- particularly those associated with transboundary flows of pollution such as SO 2 and ozone depletion and climate change
rather than dealing with root causes, regulatory responses treated systems with ‘end of pipe’ devices to capture pollution, which had to be disposed of elsewhere, or by relying on dispersing the pollution through e.g. building taller smokestacks or longer pipes out to sea.
a fragmented response as a with lack of co-ordination between agencies dealing with issues and 'solutions' that displaced pollution to be dealt by another agency;
environmental ministries were weak and environmental considerations were not important particularly in economic decision making and in transport, agriculture and other ministries;
legislative action was reactive rather than defensive, and it failed to be precautionary without a relatively watertight scientific case for action;
lack of monitoring and feedback mechanisms to see if regulatory programmes were working;
little public participation, with decision making by experts and the industry being regulated;
implementation deficits built up, partly because regulators were not willing to risk significant economic effects and partly because the co-operation of industries was needed as they often knew more about the problems.

Some systems began to adapt to these emerging problems. The rates of adaptation varied and no single country can be said to have fully modernised.

Germany - the policy principle of precaution, developed partly in administrative and constitutional courts, whereby it is reasonable to act in advance of scientific proof if there is a reasonable risk of large scale ecosystem damage and significant impact on human well-being, so long as the costs of action are not too high. This principle found its way into EU practice and into international reports and treaties.

Integrated pollution control - to avoid the displacement of problems from one environmental system to others, policies should consider the overall eco-systemic impact of various options such as the 'best practical environmental option not entailing excessive cost', that balance off environmental considerations, engineering practicality and economic considerations.

Green taxes - integrate the external costs of environmental harms into the thinking of economic decision makers by taxes, e.g. tax on solid waste dumping in Britain.

Ecological modernisation is seen as being driven partly by developments within the EU. By the early 1980s the EU had started to develop an interest in environmental issues, partly because of concerns that business should find a level regulatory playing field across Europe. Pushed particularly by Germany in the early stages, the EU started to issue environmental directives, often embodying principles consistent with ecological modernisation. By 1987, the environment had become constitutionally enshrined as a central part of EU politics. The EU began a series of 5 year action-plans, partly aimed at dealing with issues on which it developed a common position in international bargaining forums, such as negotiations concerning global climate change.

Even given pressures towards conformity coming from the EU, there is considerable variation across Western European countries to how they embody 'best-practice'. This relates to ideal-type of corporatism. In the form under discussion here corporatism started as a relationship between organised labour, organised business and the state in which national-level wage bargains constrained inflationary pressures, so that wages grew in line with productivity, but in return business delivered high levels of investment. The argument is that in countries with this sort of political arrangement, environmental groups gained a place around the table, and deals were hammered out that 'squared' the circle of maintaining economic competitiveness and jobs while dealing with environmental issues.

The normative dimensions of ecological modernisation theory

Systems can be seen as adapting to environmental challenges, but this form of adaptation as desirable - from an ecological perspective and preferable on normative grounds to some of the futures envisaged by radical environmental discourses. This normative perspective comes out that eco-modernism shares much with the liberal thought: it stresses the importance of individuals, individual rights and freedoms, and negotiation of reasonable mutually beneficial compromises; it approves of liberal democracy and the efficiency of the (regulated) market; yet it sees an important role for the state; and it is biased towards adaptation and away from radical change.

What can be regarded as the dominant strand of ecological modernisation theory is techno-corporatist: it sees the issues as largely scientific and technical, rather than ethical; it envisages a top-down closed-ended decision process among economic elites, political elites, scientists and moderate environmentalists.

Explaining the political attraction of ecological modernisation: ecological modernisation as a hegemonic discourse.

Environmental problems can be simplified to make it easier to understand. Ecological modernisation, through a hegemonic discourse, helps make sense of complex issues by re-categorising them in familiar economic terms of elimination of inefficiency through 'modernising' reform, rather than in radical terms that challenge the deeper economic and social structure. It generates a set of practices that appeal in a broader ideological context, such as the use of pollution taxes and market incentives rather than prohibition.

Lecture 9 - Ecological modernisation in Dutch politics: how far can ecological modernisation go under the most favourable circumstances?

1989 - This marks the start of a 4 year rolling environmental plan (cycle) called the NEPP.
Sustainable development - reducing pollution and preventing the damage of ecosystems.
It adopted a holistic approach
Thee was setting goals and targets
Green taxes
Reducing damaging activities
Environmental considerations in every part of government.

Will ecological modernisation really work? Most likely to work in The Netherlands where they have the right social and political climate so this is an extreme case?

The Dutch were late to industrialise (post WW2) and so lacks older heavy industries though there is intensive farming, transport and chemical industries.
The Dutch system tries to find a social consensus in all political policies.
There is a history of flooding with 50% of country below sea level so climate change is a big fear with sea levels rising.
Centre coalition governments
Rich country with high levels of environmental membership according to Inglehart’s research

An attempt was made to decouple economic growth from some environmental problems but not easily achievable with car use, climate change and fossil fuel usage and farming. A lot of pollution in the Rhine comes from agriculture such as nitrates. The country is also very densely populated. With a big transport industry, it has been difficult to control air pollution.

1970s-80s - site licences were given to pollute for air, water, soil and noise, etc under separate framework laws. Many large suites may be requiring more than once licence where requirements for the licence would be in conflict with each other. There was a move, after seeing the site licence system as not ideal, for self-regulation.

NEPP - this stresses covenants where polluters agree to an action plan that they helped to write. The idea was to male polluters stakeholders in the regulation system. As the NEPP gives polluters more freedom in how they implement the environmental improvements, this saves them costs as they do it inline with their budgets and needs. This creates one site licence rather than many with targets set for improvements. Companies have to show annual progress,

Covenant criticisms:

It’s hard to legally enforce them
It is good for large companies but hard to implement in small ones, as there is not the management structure to do so.
Not enough pressure to progress beyond the targets

Successes and failures:

There has been considerable progress of uncoupling economic growth with worsening environmental trends since 1985.
There has been lack of progress in climate change with little or no reduction in CO 2 but the NEPP may have stopped it rising. The ecosystem has not been restored either.
Overall, not enough has been done. The limiting ecological modernisation to one country is not enough, as it is a drop in the ocean without global cooperation.

Lecture 10 - Beyond Reformist Environmental Politics?

Green Utopian View

Morris, Tolstoy and Kroptkin rather than Marx. There was a sense of looking back in history to an idealised vision of rural community living in order to break down industrialisation. Self-sufficiency allows a community to avoid dependency on big business that creates power inequalities. Through a network of federal layers, this can be used to tackle problems too big for one community. In this way, life is more natural and sustainable. There would be deliberate democracy with all community members participating in the decision making process.

Gorz - there still needs to be some industrial production for basic goods but less work would be done since there is less to do. This reduces the levels of alienation in the workplace, as an adult will do less work in their lifetimes.

Possible green views:

Greened capitalism on a small scale local enterprise.
Production for own consumption. There maybe some state owned industry for essential products that are best left to the benefits of economies of scale.

In the southern hemisphere, the vision is based on existing communal structures.

Advantages:

Environmental degradation can not be exported.
Self-sufficient requires living to local limits and being in tune with the local environment.
Increased democracy creates more environmental responsibility
Pressure can be easily exerted on free riders
Less alienation
A reduced environmental impact

Green ethics - deep ecology

Man is not above nature but a part of it
Naess - nature has an intrinsic value.
We should only violate nature when our vital needs are at stake - tread lightly on the earth.

Biospheric rights

Intuition to look after nature
Interconnectedness - we are part of nature

TERM 2: THE POLITICS OF THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT

Lecture 11 - International Relations Theory and the Tragedy of the Global Commons.

Since the 1970s, environment has become important international political agenda. Climate change, ozone layer depletion, acidification, loss of biodiversity, sustainable development and trade. If one state fails to take the environment seriously, it can impact on other states, with free riding. Growing interdependence amongst states as one state changing is not enough. To ensure that states work together, international law and institutions are used.

UN sponsored Stockholm Intergovernmental Conference on the Environment 1972
20 years later as a follow up, Rio Earth Submit 1992
Johannesburg in 2002
UN activity - UN Environmental Program (UNEP) that brought international agreements on ozone.
More intergovernmental organisations, e.g. IPCC and the one for small island states
IGOS interested in how environment relates to other issues, e.g. World Bank, IMF, WTO
Emergence of various ‘global civil society’ of NGOs

Regime of cooperation - bargained compromises on a set of principles and practices backed by international law. States are sovereign but at the same time, there is world governance. James Rossenau calls it “mechanisms for steering social systems towards their goals”, e.g. UN, NGOs, IGOs, business networks. Environmental problems can overspill into other states across borders thus making states less relevant in global governance. States may have to give up some authority to the EU, UN, etc. For ecological modernisation, we need effective international environmental governance whilst dealing with it at a domestic level. The agenda of a state’s domestic policy can come from the international level from imposed targets.

Realism - states only work together if it suits their interests, perhaps, economic and/or security.
Idealism - better suited for environmental politics,

The issue concerning the relationship between trade, environment and development has hardly been addressed and first considered in the Brundtland Report in 1987.

Problem - too many states free ride with collective action failure.

Resource scarcity and war

Conflicts in Middle East over water - Israel and Jordan over the River Jordan
Limit to growth perspective - economic and population growth will hit natural barriers, oil, water
Oil scarcity - some economists measure scarcity by price and will lead to a search for alternatives.
Resource shortages could lead to interstate or civil wars, e.g. Rwanda - too many people with land shortages.
Realist - “you gain, we lose” in hunt for resources
If one states free ride, other states may give up on resolving a problem.
South states likely to fall first with increased global terrorism and migration and then will cause the north problems that money can not fix easily.

Game theory

Prisoner’s Dilemma - Nations may only act if it benefits them.

	Mexico
America		Cooperation		Non-cooperation
	Cooperation	Bilateral cooperation with greater supply of the public good than that from unilateral cooperation	a) 3,3	Unilateral cooperation by row, problem addressed partially	b) 1,4
	Non-cooperation	Unilateral cooperation by column, problem addressed partially	c) 4,1	Problem not addressed	d) 1,1

Mexico and the US over the polluted waters of the Rio Grande.

Priority	US	Mexico	The options are listed as each country’s priority.
4	c	b
3	a	a
2	d	d
1	c	c

It is best for a state where they can free ride, next is bilateral cooperation but this heads to both states being worse off if nothing gets done to solve the problem!

Common pool resources - shared resources by more than one nation, e.g. fish stocks. The more it is exploited, the less people can benefit from it. Economists see that property rights are not established over fish stocks and that allows the exploitation. Property rights can create exclusions to stop over use.

Lecture 12 - International Regimes.

Lecture 13 - Regimes as Institutional Contexts for Rational Cooperation between States

Kyoto

5/12/1997 - 170 country ministers met to set greenhouse gas emission targets.
The UN’s Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) signed in Rio in 1992. Rich developed countries agreed to try to limit emissions to 1990 levels by 2000. This was not legally binding and some emissions are still growing and especially in the US. Most countries failed to meet their targets. It was concluded that targets should be binding.
Because of the collapse of former Soviet-bloc states and some EU states, emissions of greenhouse gases in the developed world were about 6% lower by the mid 90s than in 1990. The commitment amounted to stabilising these reductions. The results of Kyoto are small but it did bring states together.

Controversies

EU wanted bigger cuts of 15% to all. The US wanted targets for developing countries. Bubbling allowed to get Spain, Portugal and Greece onboard but allows them to increase emission. Cuts only involved countries between 2008-2012.

Sinks - planting forests seen as a way to cut emissions.

Flexibility mechanisms/joint implementation - emission trading - sulphur dioxide (acid rain) - if you cannot cut emissions easily in your own country, then it can in another country that has a ‘surplus’ of emissions on Kyoto targets and thus ‘buying’ the surplus. The US, for example, could help set up a project in another country to counterbalance their emission levels. However, the trading of potential emissions that did not actually happen is not ethical as it is mere ‘hot air’ trading and missing the point of the emission reduction.
The Kyoto negotiations nearly collapsed. The EU accepted the comprehensive approach of flexibility mechanisms and variable targets between states. Kyoto did not come into force until 55 or more countries ratified, including countries that are 55% responsible for emissions.

Post Kyoto

Buenos Aires (COP-4) - details of the protocol worked out here.

Hague (COP-5) - attempts to work out the flexibility mechanisms. US, Australia, Japan wanted to be able to use the maximum sinks and trading. US emissions were 12% higher than 1990 in 2000. EU didn’t want to see the use of sinks as a replacement for reduction. NGOs feared states could cut down forests to plant sink forests. US opposed the EU suggesting emission targets should be met by at least half by cuts rather than by sinks. Other countries opposed penalties for not meeting targets.
Talk was dominated by sinks. US not wanting to make concessions and the EU not wanting to back down despite UK negotiations. Negotiations were suspended. With elections of Bush Jnr, the US pulled out of Kyoto but not the FCCC based on economic concerns. Attempts were made to go ahead without the US. (EU plus Russia and Japan.)

Bonn and Marrakech 2001 meetings

concessions were made on sinks for Japan, Russia, Canada and Australia to join. EU failed to get 50% emission cuts at home. It did block using nuclear to offset against carbon emissions under the clean development mechanism. Key points:

Carbon sinks - strictly limited, countries can use forestry and soil management schemes. They cant use existing forests. Sinks can only count up to half of the target, up to the limit of each country.
Emission trading - emission buying quota set that was desired by EU rejected. Trading should be supplemented to domestic cuts. Overselling was prevented.
Sustainability - contribution to sustainable development
Funding - funds were set up to buy out vetoes, e.g. China. Funds to help developing countries limit emissions to switch to greener technologies.
Compliance - committee set up to monitor compliance. For every tonne of carbon emissions emitted over state limits, it will be required to reduce an additional 1.3 tonnes during the 2 nd protocol commitment period starting in 2012. if no effort is made, emission trading will be banned.

Is Kyoto worth using?

Without the US, who is responsible for 21% of emissions, it isn’t fully effective. There are too many loopholes. It is uncertain if anything will occur after 2012. Even if Kyoto is adhered to, it would not reduce enough emissions to make a big enough difference.

COP-9 - Milan - Dec 2000 - 13 out of 15 EU states will not meet their targets. Jan 2005 - EU emission trading is now allowed. Companies can either meet targets or buy their way out of it. Concerns are made that some states, such ad the UK, are giving businesses a free ride. Costs from businesses may well be passed onto the consumer.
Kyoto is a product of 20 years of diplomacy. Starting again would delay further action. The US insurance industry is lobbying against the carbon industry in fears of big payouts when climate change causes costly damages. This may make the US rejoin Kyoto.

COP-10 - It dealt with after 2012. Very little progress made at the meeting. There was talk of tightening the agreement for bigger cuts., the US are concerned about costs but in this case, there could be a costs safety valve added that if costs became too high, a country wouldn’t be obliged to meet targets. Commitments to reduce emissions in certain industry sectors were proposed.
Suggestions have been made to work with a small group of big polluters so there is a less cluttered agenda with fewer around the table., the US is concerned that Chinese companies will undercut them so will not join Kyoto. China is having pollution issues so may join themselves eventually so western technologies can be transferred to them to sort out Chinese pollution when it becomes low cost.

Lecture 14 - Depletion of the Ozone Layer: A Success?

Late 1960s/early 70s - concern regarding nitrogen oxides from planes in the ozone layer.
1972 - Stockholm Earth Submit - concern about the ozone rose. There is concern that CFCs might be damaging the ozone.
1978 - US Clean Air Act
Late 70s - other countries follow suit of the US
1980 - EC - reduces 30% aerosol use
1980/84 - UNEP become concerned
1985 - Vienna Convention - 21 states and the EC sign. Evidence is found for the ozone hole.

Montreal Protocol

Cuts in CFC use
Trade restrictions in CFCs
1987 - hole bigger than first thought
1988 - Call by US to ban CFCs in the north.
1990 - Fund set up for developing countries to transfer to new technologies.

Concern came for HCFCs and HFCs, seen as a replacement for CFCs. There are issues of illegal production of CFCs in Russia and former soviet-bloc state and then smuggled. There are concerns that the greenhouse effect with increased cloud cover will make ozone depletion worse.

Beijing meeting - 1999

There are concern for HCFCs and CFC substitutes. HCFCs will not be restricted in developing world until 2015. The north are worried that the south are not meeting treaty obligations. Methyl bromide will not be phrased out until 2005 in developed countries and 2015 in developing.
At the same time, new chemicals are always being developed that is adding to the problem.
Ozone is one of the more successful cases with northern use greatly limited with the low economic impact on the reform. However, concerns remain over the south, illegal trade and HCFCs.

Why would the ozone regime be effective?

This case showed solid scientific consensus with them setting the agenda. This undermined realist theory since there was considerable state cooperation.
Experts had a bigger say as there was a low economic impact on product interests.
Small number of producers so easier to monitor
Ozone depletion is a simpler issue to tackle in relation to north/south dimensions, unlike in climate change, sustainable development.
Agenda setting role by the UNEP.
Leadership role of the US
Simple media presentation of issues.

Lecture 15 - Science and uncertainty

Not everyone sees change or action necessary for climate change because of high costs to reduce dependency on fossil fuels and scientific uncertainty of global warming. Greens advocating strong sustainability on an ethical basis, as to the risks to the global ecosystem, have concerns of the runaway greenhouse effect.

Cost benefit analysis of climate change

Identify damage done and the estimates of what is to come.
Put a monetary value on damage and a willingness to pay to avoid harm where valuing is impossible.
Benefits of avoiding the stream of damage through time with a greater weight on current benefits than future ones.
Cost of avoiding a particular level of climate change and the damage based on market costs.

Total damage will increase with rate of warming. It can be helped with trading in carbon permits or taxes.

Criticisms

How can you out a monetary value on a species’ extinction?
Costs usually focused on meeting international obligations, e.g. Kyoto.
Economic predictions vary, as there are different projections of future emission levels, population and economic growth and technological change.
What levels of emission are required to be reduced?
There are doubts over the accuracy of predictions.
Discounting – giving a greater weight to benefits and costs currently can be seen as unethical as ignoring future generation rights to a healthy planet. It is based on the idea that future generations would be better off based on current economic models but limit to growth show that it won’t continue when resource levels become low.
Economics assumes natural capital can be substituted by human capital.
We cannot put a price on the earth, whatever the costs are.

Uncertainly - ignores worst case scenarios and relies too much on estimation.

Social justice - rather unfair to do nothing at the cost of small islands and low-lying lands lost to the sea.

Cost benefit analysis is anthropocentric.