10.05.2013 Views

Carmen Bunzl - Universidad Pontificia Comillas

Carmen Bunzl - Universidad Pontificia Comillas

Carmen Bunzl - Universidad Pontificia Comillas

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Chapter 5. Conclusions 231<br />

China’s Five Year Plan goal to cut the energy intensity of economic output by 20<br />

percent.<br />

Some kind of top-down approach is certainly needed in order to address the urgency<br />

of the climate change issue; but any bottom-up initiative is welcome, as a complement to<br />

the main climate change architecture.<br />

The international agreements’ architecture – its potential shape and structure<br />

– can basically take three formats: targets and timetables, harmonized domestic<br />

actions, and coordinated and unilateral policies.<br />

The existing international climate policy framework focuses on countries’<br />

efforts through national targets – quantitative country-level emissions goals –<br />

and timetables – over a specified timeframe. Proposals would maintain the<br />

international emissions trading and clean development project institutions that<br />

have received broad support in Europe and developing countries. They attempt<br />

to remedy the primary drawback in the Kyoto Protocol by explicitly addressing<br />

participation by the United States and developing countries.<br />

Some academics and policy makers argue that top-down architectures, such<br />

as those based on multilateral agreements on targets and timetables, may not<br />

provide robust incentives for participation and compliance. Because national<br />

governments maintain their sovereignty, the design of policy architectures<br />

should focus on harmonizing domestic actions across much stronger national<br />

and regional institutions. Some have suggested a limited initial participation of<br />

the few most pivotal countries in climate change; but this would be against the<br />

global commons nature of climate change. Even if negotiations are more<br />

demanding, countries can not be left aside. This approach may certainly<br />

complement the climate change future architecture – similar to what some<br />

reduced groups of countries such as the Asia-Pacific Partnership for Clean<br />

Development and Climate or the G8 are contributing today – but the future<br />

climate regime will probably not be solely based on harmonized domestic<br />

actions.<br />

Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería ICAI <strong>Carmen</strong> <strong>Bunzl</strong> Boulet Junio 2008

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!