Remodeling The Climate Negotiations

- Chandra Bhushan

THIS IS a landmark year. It is the 30th anniversary of the Montreal Protocol and the 25th anniversary of UNFCCC. At this juncture, it is important to assess what these two most important Multilateral Environmental Agreements (meas) have delivered. The learnings are extremely important to reshape the multilateralism for the next 25 years.

On delivery, it is generally believed that the Montreal Protocol has delivered on its objectives of significantly reducing ozone depleting substances, despite few mncs peddling patented intermediary substitutes when environment friendly alternatives were available. The overall picture is that the ozone hole is showing signs of healing. In addition, it is estimated that while eliminating ozone depleting substances like CFCs and HCFCS, Montreal Protocol has led to the reduction of 130-135 billion tonnes of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) emissions. UNFCCC on the other hand has little to show. In fact, the total greenhouse gas (ghg) emission reduction from selling carbon credits under the Clean Development Mechanism totaled just 1.9 billion tonnes CO2e—65 times less than Montreal Protocol.

Seven years before UNFCCC, in 1985, the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone layer was signed. Montreal Protocol was signed in 1987, a full 10 years before the first protocol of UNFCCC—Kyoto Protocol—was signed. Since then, Montreal Protocol has survived. It has gone through multiple amendments to phase-out different kinds of ozone-depleting substances, the last one being in 2016 called the Kigali amendment to phase-down hfcs, a potent ghg. In comparison, Kyoto Protocol is more or less dead. Instead, there has been a Cancun Agreement and then a Paris Agreement to “replace” the Kyoto Protocol.