Kyoto protocol 2011 pdf

Browse Subject Areas? Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field. Abstract This study investigates the environmental and economic impacts of the Kyoto Protocol on Annex I parties through an impact assessment by combining the propensity score matching and the difference-in-difference methods. Introduction The intensification of transboundary environmental issues in the past half century has underscored the need to establish effective international instruments [ 1 , 2 ].

Model specifications Two models are proposed to investigate the consequences of the Protocol. Ln GDP is estimated by using the Anne x I dummy and other relevant variables, and then the first equation is estimated by using the fitted value of the second equation, , as well as the Ann ex I dummy and other variables: 5 This procedure provides consistent estimates when the appropriate instruments are used [ 33 ].

Selection of evaluation periods The appropriate selection of the base and target year of the program is a crucial step in setting reliable counterfactual situations [ 26 ]. Data To examine the environmental and economic effectiveness of the Kyoto Protocol, this study uses country-level panel data of countries from — Download: PPT. Table 1. Descriptive statistics for the full sample after matching.

Discussion This study clarifies the impact of mitigating emissions and the economic burden on Annex I parties to the Protocol. References 1. Mitchell RB. International environmental agreements: a survey of their features, formation, and effects. Annu Rev Env Resour. View Article Google Scholar 2. Weiss EB. International environmental law: Contemporary issues and the emergence of a new world order. Georgetown Law.

View Article Google Scholar 3. Caldwell LK. International environmental policy: emergence and dimensions. Carbon dioxide emissions, economic growth and the impact of the Kyoto Protocol. View Article Google Scholar 5. National greenhouse gas inventory data for the period — View Article Google Scholar 6. The Kyoto Protocol: a review and perspectives. Oxford Rev Econ Pol. View Article Google Scholar 7. World economic impacts of the Kyoto Protocol.

In: Welfens PJ, editor. Internationalization of the economy and environmental policy options. Berlin:Springer; Kumazawa R, Callaghan MS. The effect of the Kyoto Protocol on carbon dioxide emissions.

J Econ Finance. View Article Google Scholar 9. Roll the DICE again: the economics of global warming. Yale University Research Paper; Barrett S. Climate treaties and the imperative of enforcement. Oxford Review of Economic Policy. View Article Google Scholar Grubb M. Kyoto and the future of international climate change responses: from here to where. International Review for Environmental Strategies. Kuriyama A, Abe N. Applied Energy. Effectiveness of greenhouse-gas Emission Trading Schemes implementation: a review on legislations.

Journal of cleaner production. De Chazournes LB. Accessed 15 May Almer C, Winkler R. Analyzing the effectiveness of international environmental policies: The case of the Kyoto Protocol. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. Grunewald N, Martinez-Zarzoso I. Did the Kyoto Protocol fail? An evaluation of the effect of the Kyoto Protocol on CO 2 emissions. Environment and Development Economics. Maamoun N. The Kyoto protocol: Empirical evidence of a hidden success.

Eur J Polit Econ. The effectiveness of international environmental regime: the case of convention on long-range transboundary air pollution. Environmental Information Science. Vollenweider J. The effectiveness of international environmental agreements. Int Environ Agreem-P Journal. The Kyoto Protocol and developing countries. Energ Policy. Does the Kyoto Protocol cost too much and create unbreakable barriers for economic growth?

Contemp Econ Policy. Manne A, Richels R. The Kyoto Protocol: a cost-effective strategy for meeting environmental objectives. In: Carraro C, editor. Efficiency and equity of climate change policy.

Netherlands: Springer; Hintermann B, Gronwald, M. Environmental and Resource Economics. Handbook on impact evaluation: quantitative methods and practices. Are the benefits of export support durable? Michalek J. Mu R, Van de Walle D. Rural roads and poor area development in Vietnam. World Bank No. WPS; Environmental and economic consequences of the Kyoto Protocol. Institutional mechanisms and the consequences of international environmental agreements.

Global Environ Polit. Wooldridge JM. Introductory econometrics: a modern approach 4th ed. Boston: Cengage Learning; Verbeek M. A guide to modern econometrics. Helm C, Sprinz D. Measuring the effectiveness of international environmental regimes. J Conflict Resolut. World Bank. Available from: www.

EIA U. Energy Information Administration. Spot prices. Ono S. Oil price shocks and stock markets in BRICs. The European Journal of Comparative Economics. Park J, Ratti RA. Oil price shocks and stock markets in the US and 13 European countries.

Energ Econ. Oil price shocks and their short-and long-term effects on the Chinese economy. Energ Econ, ;S3—S A tale of two collectives: sulphur versus nitrogen oxides emission reduction in Europe. Economic growth and emissions: reconsidering the empirical basis of environmental Kuznets curves.

Ecol Econ. Lantz V, Feng Q. Talukdar D, Meisner CM. Does the private sector help or hurt the environment? World Dev. International environmental regimes: legalisation, flexibility and effectiveness.

Aust J Polit Sci. Human rights in a globalizing world: the paradox of empty promises. Am J Sociol. Kucik J, Reinhardt E. Does flexibility promote cooperation? Int Organ. Tol RS. The Protocol allows for the establishment of collective targets other than those already prescribed for the EU, but transparency in the operation of these collectives is required.

Figure 1. Greenhouse gas emission commitments within the Kyoto Protocol. The average commitment for all Annex 1 countries is an emission reduction of 5. Individual targets for signatory countries as a percentage of emissions in the base year of are presented in Figure 1, with the EU given as the agreed collective target.

Nuclear power by definition has zero greenhouse gas emissions, although minor emissions result from transport and construction. Unlike most other developed countries, Australia does not produce any electricity from nuclear power. A high proportion of those countries with more stringent emission targets than Australia use nuclear power in their energy mix see Figure 1.

Furthermore, a number of countries without nuclear power import electricity from nuclear countries. An example of the linkage between nuclear power and carbon dioxide emissions is Sweden, part of the EU bubble. Sweden faces increased electricity prices from the phase out of nuclear power while simultaneously being required to restrict carbon dioxide emissions.

Allowance for emission reductions from land use changes was permitted in the base year in the Kyoto Protocol. Thus, reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from declining rates of land clearing or forestry can be used to meet target commitments. These removals of carbon dioxide, for example the planting of forests, are referred to as 'sinks'. Limitations exist on the use of sinks and agreement is not yet complete on methodologies for rules and calculations of land use impacts on greenhouse gas emissions.

Further resources will need to be directed at this issue, as land use emission calculations are characterised by high levels of uncertainty. The practicality of dealing with cases of non-compliance, that is, dealing with those countries that exceed their emissions targets remains undecided. Approval of the procedures and mechanisms to determine and address cases of non-compliance is to be negotiated at COP4 in Buenos Aires in November The adoption of binding measures for non-compliance requires an amendment to the protocol subject to the checks and balances associated with adopting and ratifying an amendment.

Greenhouse gas emission targets proposed prior to Kyoto varied greatly between the parties involved. Australia's negotiating position prior to Kyoto was for an 18 per cent increase in emissions of all greenhouse gases between and The outcome of the conference was an agreed 8 per cent increase in emissions of six gases by to based on emissions.

Australia's case supported 'full expression to all components of the Berlin Mandate', specifically, individual targets dependent upon what countries were willing to agree to.

Furthermore, Australia wanted the inclusion of increases or reductions in greenhouse gas emissions due to land use changes in the agreement.

This point was agreed to in the final stages of the Kyoto conference. Australia's negotiating position prior to Kyoto was at one end of the spectrum of proposed targets, while the EU's proposals were at the other end. The EU's negotiating position prior to Kyoto was for a 15 per cent emission reduction based on 3 gases. The EU's final agreed target of an 8 per cent reduction based on six gases is equivalent to a 13 per cent reduction based on the 3 gases.

Emissions of greenhouse gases are generally referred to as carbon dioxide equivalents. While the single most important greenhouse gas is carbon dioxide, some other gases are more significant on a molecular basis.

Methane, for example, has Six greenhouse gases are covered in the Kyoto Protocol and shown in Table 1. No emission reduction targets were agreed to for Non-Annex 1 Parties developing countries. A proposal was put forward by the US and Japan for voluntary non-binding targets, but this was vetoed by developing countries. However, the Protocol also offers them an additional means to meet their targets by way of three market-based mechanisms :.

International Emissions Trading. Joint implementation JI. These mechanisms ideally encourage GHG abatement to start where it is most cost-effective, for example, in the developing world. It does not matter where emissions are reduced, as long as they are removed from the atmosphere. This has the parallel benefits of stimulating green investment in developing countries and including the private sector in this endeavour to cut and hold steady GHG emissions at a safe level.

It also makes leap-frogging—that is, the possibility of skipping the use of older, dirtier technology for newer, cleaner infrastructure and systems, with obvious longer-term benefits—more economical.

The Kyoto Protocol also established a rigorous monitoring, review and verification system, as well as a compliance system to ensure transparency and hold Parties to account. Under the Protocol, countries' actual emissions have to be monitored and precise records have to be kept of the trades carried out.

Registry systems track and record transactions by Parties under the mechanisms. The UN Climate Change Secretariat, based in Bonn, Germany, keeps an international transaction log to verify that transactions are consistent with the rules of the Protocol. Reporting is done by Parties by submitting annual emission inventories and national reports under the Protocol at regular intervals.

A compliance system ensures that Parties are meeting their commitments and helps them to meet their commitments if they have problems doing so.