What Must Global Warming Negotiations In South Africa Accomplish (Part 2)?

[This is Part 2 of a three part series of posts on the global warming negotiations in Durban.  Part 1 discussed some emerging good news of action on-the-ground, troubling signs which confirm that we must act now, and how countries must be able to “multitask" in Durban.   Part 3 will discuss the state of play on efforts to implement the Cancun Agreements.]     

The key political issue that will dominate the overall narrative in Durban is around the “fate of the Kyoto Protocol" and “where we are headed".**  These are two issues which were looming large in the lead-in to Copenhagen and Cancun but are set to come to a head in Durban.  Getting greater clarity on these two issues will likely unlock progress on implementing the Cancun Agreements.  While other issues are critical to build a strong international response to global warming (see Part 3) these two intertwined topics are likely to dominate much of the attention of Ministers. 

“FATE OF THE KYOTO PROTOCOL"

At the end of 2012, the first round of internationally legally-binding targets for developed countries will end — developed country targets under the Kyoto Protocol run from 2008-2012.  While major developed and developing countries explicitly committed to individual actions to reduce their global warming pollution, whether or not those targets will be enshrined in another “commitment period" of the Kyoto Protocol (e.g., from 2013-2017) is an open question.***  A number of developed countries have passed domestic laws requiring mandatory emissions reductions beyond 2012, typically through 2020.  For example, the European Union (E.U.) target to reduce emissions 20 percent below 1990 levels in 2020 is enshrined in the E.U.'s “Climate and Energy Package" which continues its mandatory emissions trading system for its largest polluters beyond 2012, mandates emissions reductions for each country in the E.U., and adopts other measures to reduce pollution across all 27 members of the E.U.  Similarly the new Australia law sets out a path for targets beyond 2012.  So for some countries, the “fate of the Kyoto Protocol" isn't fundamentally about whether they'll act at home beyond 2012, rather it is about how those targets are “codified" internationally.   

Developing countries (e.g., BASIC and African Union) have been explicit that their top priority in Durban is securing “a continuation of the Kyoto Protocol".  The exact form of that “continuation" is under intense negotiation between the developing countries and the E.U..  The E.U. has stated that it would be willing to “politically" commit to a “second commitment period" if there was explicit agreement to negotiate a new legally binding commitment for all countries by 2015 (a so-called “mandate" or “roadmap").  Many expect countries like Norway and Switzerland to follow the E.U.  Some countries have said pretty clearly that they won't go forward with further targets under the Kyoto Protocol (e.g., Japan, Russia, and Canada).  Others like New Zealand and Australia haven't said one way or another. Read the full report here.

Source: Jake Schmidt's Blog, Switch Board.