Comments on: South Korea, a ‘developing’ country, embraces 2020 emissions cap, with important implications for a global deal in Copenhagen http://greenleapforward.com/2009/08/04/south-korea-a-%e2%80%98developing%e2%80%99-country-embraces-2020-emissions-cap-with-important-implications-for-a-global-deal-in-copenhagen/ Tracking the emerging technological, commercial, political and social revolution that is greening China's red-hot economy. Thu, 17 May 2012 09:29:16 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: TheJansme http://greenleapforward.com/2009/08/04/south-korea-a-%e2%80%98developing%e2%80%99-country-embraces-2020-emissions-cap-with-important-implications-for-a-global-deal-in-copenhagen/#comment-18155 TheJansme Fri, 07 Aug 2009 15:30:19 +0000 http://greenleapforward.com/?p=208#comment-18155 I find it interesting this new scheme of differentiated responsabilities even between developing non annex I countries, because it is true that nations like South Korea and Mexico are way over many of the others in terms of industrialization and development. Lets see if countries like Brazil can achieve such a level of compromise and leadership. I find it interesting this new scheme of differentiated responsabilities even between developing non annex I countries, because it is true that nations like South Korea and Mexico are way over many of the others in terms of industrialization and development. Lets see if countries like Brazil can achieve such a level of compromise and leadership.

]]> By: The Green Leap Forward 绿跃进 » China’s softens climate rhetoric—commits to emissions peak (again), shows flexibility on Western reductions http://greenleapforward.com/2009/08/04/south-korea-a-%e2%80%98developing%e2%80%99-country-embraces-2020-emissions-cap-with-important-implications-for-a-global-deal-in-copenhagen/#comment-18109 The Green Leap Forward 绿跃进 » China’s softens climate rhetoric—commits to emissions peak (again), shows flexibility on Western reductions Fri, 07 Aug 2009 00:23:42 +0000 http://greenleapforward.com/?p=208#comment-18109 [...] will offer a substantive plan to cut greenhouse gases for developing countries at Copenhagen (see previous post).  As the first non-Annex I countries endorsing a capping of emissions, South Korea and Mexico [...] [...] will offer a substantive plan to cut greenhouse gases for developing countries at Copenhagen (see previous post).  As the first non-Annex I countries endorsing a capping of emissions, South Korea and Mexico [...]

]]> By: Tao http://greenleapforward.com/2009/08/04/south-korea-a-%e2%80%98developing%e2%80%99-country-embraces-2020-emissions-cap-with-important-implications-for-a-global-deal-in-copenhagen/#comment-17982 Tao Wed, 05 Aug 2009 13:09:12 +0000 http://greenleapforward.com/?p=208#comment-17982 This is not a new idea Julian. Agentina, “with encouragement by the US administration under President Clinton, proposed that it take on a ‘voluntary target’ linked to future GDP growth”, and submit it as a proposal during its host of COP 4 in Buenos Aires in 1998. It was then withdrawn from the table, due to both domestic and international pressures, not only from G77 and China alone. It served as a good case study of flexibile target for non annex-1 country in various researches afterwards. The situation of course has changed since then, but I think some of the lessons learnt are still applicable: “Need for thorough technical assessment, carefully considering country-specific emissions conditions, being conservative in economic projections, leaving room for growth, realistic assessment of technology and emission-related markets, domestic policy relevance and buy-in, long-term view, realistic understanding of international order.” I do not oppose the differentiation among countries or even among developing countries in targets, but I doubt that is an acceptable strategy in developing countries’ view in climate negotiation. For more details of the Argentina case study, see Daniel Bouille and Osvaldo Girardin, ‘Learning from the Argentine Voluntary Commitment’, in Kevin A. Baumert, O. Blanchard, S. Llosa, J. F. Perkaus (eds), Building on the Kyoto Protocol: Options for protecting the climate, (Washington: World Resources Institute, 2002). This is not a new idea Julian. Agentina, “with encouragement by the US administration under President Clinton, proposed that it take on a ‘voluntary target’ linked to future GDP growth”, and submit it as a proposal during its host of COP 4 in Buenos Aires in 1998. It was then withdrawn from the table, due to both domestic and international pressures, not only from G77 and China alone. It served as a good case study of flexibile target for non annex-1 country in various researches afterwards.

The situation of course has changed since then, but I think some of the lessons learnt are still applicable: “Need for thorough technical assessment, carefully considering country-specific emissions conditions, being conservative in economic projections, leaving room for growth, realistic assessment of technology and emission-related markets, domestic policy relevance and buy-in, long-term view, realistic understanding of international order.”

I do not oppose the differentiation among countries or even among developing countries in targets, but I doubt that is an acceptable strategy in developing countries’ view in climate negotiation.

For more details of the Argentina case study, see Daniel Bouille and Osvaldo Girardin, ‘Learning from the Argentine Voluntary Commitment’, in Kevin A. Baumert, O. Blanchard, S. Llosa, J. F. Perkaus (eds), Building on the Kyoto Protocol: Options for protecting the climate, (Washington: World Resources Institute, 2002).

]]>