The Environment and Development Assistance after the Kyoto Protocol

The borderless nature of regional environmental issues poses complex challenges for cooperation. The international community now commonly requires environmental standards as prerequisites for sustainable economic development. A prime example of this can be found in the Kyoto Protocol which came into force in February 2005.

The Protocol’s guiding principles are economic efficiency, environmental integrity and support for sustainable development. Specific targets and timetables are established for reductions in greenhouse gas emissions to be achieved by the signatories. Its success is far from certain. As the Kyoto process has shown, the global community has had to struggle to reach a common action consensus for issues crossing political geographies.

Based on this understanding, several other ambitious multilateral legal frameworks have been formed since the 1990s. They include the Global Environment Facility (GEF)—upon which many conventions depend for funds—, the International Framework Convention on Global Warming, the Biodiversity Convention and the Convention to Combat Desertification.

All these treaties tend to have common action structures. They identify broad commitments to be fulfilled by the contracting countries. Additional commitments for developed countries are often included. Subsequently, the sources and means for delivery of financial mechanisms are established.

With $3 billion pledged for operations from 2002 through 2006, the GEF remains the prominent financial mechanism. GEF projects focus on six areas of biodiversity, climate change, international waters, land degradation, the ozone layer and persistent organic pollutants. And the parties have agreed on three new funds—the Special Climate Change Fund, the Least Developed Countries Fund and the Clean Development Mechanism Adaptation Fund, to be administered by the GEF.

Debate continues over the wisdom of each convention establishing independent financial mechanisms, and not relying on the GEF. Developing countries are eager to set up independent mechanisms, whilst developed countries stress the merits of continued GEF reliance. The politics surrounding global issues are often reduced to the classic “North versus South” problem.

The South is uncomfortable because the GEF was initiated by the World Bank. Therefore, they fear decisions reflect a north-centric perspective, and promote northern priorities. The North worries about the significant number of conventions being created under UN auspices, where south-centric needs tend to take precedence over the North’s economic agenda.

Given the availability of resources together with the efficiency and coherency of administration and monitoring, a beefed-up GEF is probably merited. Events seem to be headed in this direction. However, bearing in mind the historical disputes between north and south, the GEF is expected to continue strengthening partnerships with regional multilateral development banks, the private sector and NGOs.

Comment(s)

There are [1] comment(s) for this entry. Post a comment.

1. Bala Bhaskaran
   (posted 21 April 2008 / 11:12:39 AM)
   
   The brief paper offers insight into the dynamics of currency apreciation and its impact on the economy. Can it not give references of research papers and case studies on the same subject? That will be a lot more useful to the researcher.