What Have Kyoto Protocols and European Emission Trading Scheme Achieved on Sustainable Development - Assignment Example

Message from Dear client, hello! This is not yet the final paper. i’m still writing the last parts and editing the reference page and in-textcitations. Please, please just give me 3-4 hours more. Kindly ignore the completed status of your order. Thanks! What do the Kyoto protocols and the European Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) illustrate about sustainable development? Unforeseen outcomes such as those concerning the natural environment are not uncommon. Some of the adverse effects of human activities on the environment are not immediately obvious until the problem is severe. As a result, two related concepts have emerged—sustainable development and environmental protection. The concept of sustainable development is created to represent the goal of making sure that future generations will have an intact environment that will ensure their subsistence. However, even though the real meaning of the concept of sustainable development is unambiguous and certain, the literal definition and explanation of sustainable development have roused intense debates. Problems associated with the definition of sustainable development reveal that the concept is complicated, which merges intergenerational justice, equality, and efficiency derived from environmental, social, and economic factors. This essay presents a critical evaluation of the concept of sustainable development. It is worth mentioning that various disciplines have different definitions of sustainable development. Ecologists define the concept as a process that protects biodiversity; sociologists view it as a process that strengthens and sustains communities; and economists define it as a process that ensures that the quality of subsistence of future generations is better than or the same as that of the current generation (Ciegis, Ramanauskiene, & Martinkus, 2009). The concept of sustainability was introduced by the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) in 1980. Several years later, the Brundtland Report released its official definition of sustainable development: “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (Lee, McNeill, & Holland, 2000, p. 42). In exploring the most serious environmental issues today and the ideal solutions to these problems, the Brundtland Report created the foundation within which the clashing principles of economic development and environmental protection could be reconciled. Much of the global community, by the end of 1992, had espoused the UNFCCC to “stabiliz[e]… greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system” (Ravindranath & Sathaye 2002, 5). The paradigm did not institute any obligatory emissions reductions for the parties; it merely obliges them to a set of common rules. The creation of specific emission objectives was left to a later accord: the Kyoto Protocol (Ravindranath & Sathaye 2002). Although the UNFCCC’s somewhat ambitious goal of preventing hazardous climate change was also the decisive goal the Kyoto Protocol, its definite objective was far humbler (Vasser 2008): to diminish the combined carbon emissions from contributing developed countries by roughly 5 percent comparative to 1990. There are two relevant things to emphasize (Vasser 2008): (1) the objective of reducing emissions was confined to developed countries, not the whole world; and (2) while definite percentage drops or goals were set for particular countries, these were not obligatory in an exact way since countries may employ different trading methods to obtain recognition for emission diminutions from other countries. The decisive aim was that cooperatively, emissions among the developed countries would drop to roughly 5 percent. As can be discerned in the facts suggested, it is quite early and quite misleading confusing to proclaim Kyoto a failure. According to some scholars, in all possibility when 2012 turns around, the industrialized countries will have reduced emissions higher than the aimed 5.2 percent (Lo 2007). Even though this will be attributable largely to the collapse of the Soviet Union, the treaty did not incorporate a provision for amendments for economic prospects. And all the same, there is the possibility of finding EU more autonomous of the Soviet Union and successful in reducing emissions by five percent (Vasser 2008). At this point the present economic recession will facilitate. So far from being unsuccessful, Kyoto looks like it will fulfill its quite narrow targets. Nevertheless, Kyoto cannot be considered a tremendous success either. Since 1990 and in spite of the agreement, worldwide emissions from the use of fossil fuel have escalated by nearly 37 percent (The Worldwatch Institute 2009). Two issues certainly have contributed to this: (1) the tremendous escalation in emissions from China; and (2) the United States’ failure to endorse Kyoto (Baumert 2006). First, China’s emissions have escalated by a huge 153 percent since the last two decades, and China is currently the major emitter (Baumert 2006). The failure to come up with obligatory emission goals on developing countries such as China was a basic error in Kyoto and one that should be corrected in subsequent negotiations. Second, contrary to the EU, the United States, the biggest emitter since Kyoto was approved, witnessed a 17 percent boost in its emissions (Dessler & Parson 2010). The treaty was paralyzed by the decision of the U.S. not to endorse. Nevertheless, China is on the point of surpassing the United States in level of emissions and between them will make up the largest portion of hazardous carbon production and emission across the globe. Some would claim that it is useless for other countries to try to reduce their emissions if the biggest perpetrators are not taking part and may certainly even be worsening the problem (Pike, Lee & Hagenbach 2008). Even though the Kyoto Protocol cannot be the last stride in attaining greenhouse gas emissions reduction, it can be regarded as the greatest historic campaign in dealing with problems in carbon reduction. Within the United Kingdom as well as the United States other programs are taking place to vigorously trim down carbon emissions (Shaffner 2007). Kyoto should be perceived as a springboard to more radical initiative. Read More