The world must settle for ‘second best policies’

Date: 26/05/05

In the absence of a global agreement on how to tackle climate change from 2013, the world's nations must settle for "second-best policies".

So argues Looking beyond Kyoto, a report published earlier this month (May) by the Danish Environmental Assessment Institute (IMV). The institute was founded in 2002 by the Danish maverick environmentalist Bjørn Lomborg, author of The Skeptical Environmentalist and associate professor in political science at the University of Århus.

IMV studies the avenues open to global talks on combating greenhouse gas emissions and finds that pushing too hard in one direction is more likely to derail negotiations as the policy positions taken by various nations are now firmly entrenched.

The EU has demonstrated its commitment to emission targets and is taking serious action quickly in order to meet long term goals. The US is not considering taking such action or fixing emission targets and the Bush administration is sticking to its guns on finding technological solutions to the problem.

"Negotiations on issues leading to 'closed doors' (e.g. on long-term stabilisation levels and/or aggressive action now) are likely to prove a waste of time and negotiating effort," it says.

As a result, the report recommends, negotiators should move away from Kyoto's 'one-size-fits-all' approach with targets and timetables, and replace it with a 'second-best' approach, entailing flexible solutions that allow countries to fix their own climate regime according to their circumstances.

"Participation of the US is only likely to be ensured if, for instance, research and development in emission reduction technologies or sequestration of carbon can be included as part of future commitments," it says. "Participation by the developing countries is highly unlikely without the participation of the US, which is the largest and most wealthy emitter."

The Danish Environmental Assessment Institute (IMV) in May 2005 published a report entitled 'Looking beyond Kyoto', giving recommendations to the upcoming negotiations on Kyoto's successor and arguing that more flexibility was needed than Kyoto was offering.

• Primary Source

Danish Environmental Assessment Institute: Report: Looking beyond Kyoto, No 2, May 2005 http://www.imv.dk/files/filer/rapporter/klima/looking_beyond_kyoto_net.pdf

---