CLIMATE CHANGE POLICY & MITIGATION - Essay Example

Climate Change Policy and Mitigation Climate change and mitigation The concern on the climate change has been a critical issue for a number of decades now. Historically, there are three fundamental concerns that have defined the concept of common interest. There was a growing concern that industrialized countries were emitting dangerous gases to the atmosphere that was causing greenhouse-effects to the human race. Secondly, it was believed that developed countries should take deliberate actions to mitigate on the increase of the harmful effects of greenhouse-effects.

Lastly, the developed countries should support developing countries in mitigation against atmospheric air pollution (Khare 2013). After the consideration of these critical issues, the concept of common interest was designed. Common interest refers to a monumental step that was taken by countries to undertake collective responsibility in addressing the global warming due to increasing in industrial emissions to the atmosphere. Notably, there has been a number of international fora have tried to bring together nations to address this challenge.

Vasser (2009 states that the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the 1997 Kyoto Protocol came up with international obligations from each member state that would see the greenhouse gases reduce (Khare 2013). They laid down the framework for cooperation in militating against the adverse environmental pollution. Moreover, they admitted that they had different national issues to pursue, but the greenhouse effect was a unifying issue hence the shared but differentiated responsibility (Rabe 2010).

One of the primary agreements was dubbed "Clean Development Mechanism" (CDM) and establishment of Green Climate Fund (GCF). Both were to lay the ground for the promotion of development free of air pollution. Besides, the nations undertook shared responsibility under the policy of CDM to reduce industrial emissions as the number priority of a healthy environment. Besides, GCF was to be channeled to developing countries to help reduce the effects of industrial emissions. Despite aggressive government to adopt legally binding policies to mitigate on the climate change, the developed countries continue to emit harmful gases.

Notably, United Kingdom and recently China continued to emit undesirable levels of industrial gases to the atmosphere (LeoÌ 2008). Sadly, the notion that the developed countries would spearhead climate rehabilitation is quite misleading. The United States and its proponents on climate continue to mislead other nations in the pretext of supporting climate change campaigns while their individual industries are leading in the emissions. The primary reasons as to why the effort will fail are because the countries supposedly spearheading policy mitigation have failed to act on the initial Kyoto Protocol stipulations.

Notably, the initial UNFCCC stipulated that each country was to undertake a deliberate action to reduce global warming by two-degree Celsius. Despite a specific targets, developed countries continue t intelligently dodge the specifics and most recently agreed to set governments to 2015 new legal instrument that would define the policy mitigation of greenhouse-effect and global warming (LeoÌ 2008). It is one of the strategies to keep postponing real issues in order to keep on releasing harmful emissions to a level that would not be possible to eliminate.

Furthermore, lack of commitment has seen the Kyoto Protocol stipulation extended to the year 2020. In unprecedented approach, the developed countries hope to create inter-governmental cooperation and capacity to address the greenhouse-effect as from 2020 (Victor 2001). It is definite that despite the urgency of the matter, many developed countries continue to postpone critical issues that would compromise the sustainability of future generations. Conclusion It is obvious that the countrys leading to mitigate the issue of the atmospheric reduction are the culprits that cause the menace.

In addition, these industrial developments in developed countries are the primary backbone of their economy. The industries would not close to paving the way for climate sustainability (Khare 2013). Besides, these countries would not sacrifice thousands of employment opportunities accrued from industries and massive experts at expense of climate safety. Although climate safety and sustainability remains a mirage, it is a noble discourse worth pursuing.References ListKhare, A. 2013. Mitigating climate change the emerging face of modern cities.

Berlin: Springer.LeoÌn, E. 2008. Global warming looking beyond Kyoto. New Haven, Conn.: Center for the Study of Globalization, Yale University ;.Rabe, B. G. 2010. Greenhouse governance addressing climate change in America. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.Vasser, C. P. 2009. The Kyoto protocol economic assessments, implementation mechanisms, and policy implications. New York: Nova Science Publishers.Victor, D. G. 2001. The collapse of the Kyoto Protocol and the struggle to slow global warming.

Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.