Namibia - CountryWatch

Environmental Overview International Environmental Agreements and Associa-
The provisions of the Kyoto Protocol stipulate that economically advanced nations must reduce their
combined emissions of greenhouse gases, by approximately five percent from their 1990 levels, before
the 2008-2010 deadline. Countries with the highest carbon dioxide emissions, such as the United
States (U.S.), many of the European Union (EU) countries, and Japan, are to reduce emissions by a
scale of 6 to 8 percent. All economically advanced nations must show "demonstrable progress" by
2005. In contrast, no binding limits or timetable have been set on developing countries. Presumably,
this distinction is due to the fact that most developing countries -- with the obvious exceptions of India
and China -- simply do not emit as many greenhouse gases as do more industrially advanced countries.
Meanwhile, these countries are entrenched in the process of economic development.
Regardless of the aforementioned reasoning, there has been strong opposition against the asymmetrical
treatment assigned to emissions limits among developed and developing countries. Although this
distinction might be regarded as unfair in principle, associations such as the Alliance of Small Island
States have been vocal in expressing how global warming -- a result of greenhouse gas emissions - has
contributed to the rise in sea level, and thus deleteriously affected their very existence as island nation
states. For this reason, some parties have suggested that economically advanced nations, upon returning
to their 1990 levels, should be required to further reduce their greenhouse gas emissions by a deadline
of 2005. In response, interested parties have observed that even if such reductions were
undertaken by economically advanced nations, they would not be enough to completely control global
warming. Indeed, a reduction in the rate of fossil fuel usage by developing nations would also be necessary
to have substantial ameliorative effect on global warming. Indeed, a reduction in the rate of fossil
fuel usage by developing nations would also be necessary to have substantial ameliorative effect on
global warming.
As such, the Protocol established a "Clean Development Mechanism" which permits developed countries
to invest in projects aimed at reducing emissions within developing countries in return for credit
for the reductions. Ostensibly, the objective of this mechanism is to curtail emissions in developing
countries without unduly penalizing them for their economic development. Under this model, the
countries with more potential emissions credits could sell them to other signatories of the Kyoto Protocol,
whose emissions are forecast to significantly rise in the next few years. Should this trading of
emissions credits take place, it is estimated that the Kyoto Protocol's emissions targets could still be
met.
In 1999, the International Energy Outlook projected that Eastern Europe, the former Soviet Union and
Newly Independent States, as well as parts of Asia, are all expected to show a marked decrease in their
level of energy-related carbon emissions in 2010. Nations with the highest emissions, specifically, the
U.S., the EU and Japan, are anticipated to reduce their emissions by up to 8 percent by 2012. By 2000,
however, the emissions targets were not on schedule for achievement. Indeed, the U.S. Department of
Energy estimates forecast that by 2010, there will be a 34 percent increase in carbon emissions from
the 1990 levels, in the absence of major shifts in policy, economic growth, energy prices, and consumer
trends. Despite this assessment in the U.S., international support for the Kyoto Protocol
remained strong, especially among European countries and island states, who view the pact as one step
in the direction away from reliance on fossil fuels and other sources of greenhouse gases.
In 2001, U.S. President, George W. Bush, rejected his country's participation in the Kyoto Protocol,
saying that the costs imposed on the global economic system, and especially, on the US, overshadowed
Namibia Review 2013 212