Thesis Statement
All states should be involved in addressing the problem of global warming through their involvement in the Kyoto Protocol for the following reasons:
Ø Global Warming is an international phenomenon caused by the aggregate emission of greenhouse gases by the activities of all states.
Ø Environmental damage to the atmosphere and natural resources is an irreversible effect that boils down to the issue of the continued existence of man.
Ø Global warming extends beyond political differences and personal interest because the effects of global warming do not discriminate against culture, race, gender or economic status.
Ø Economic costs of limiting greenhouse gas emissions by all states are less than the cost of not taking responsibility for global warming in the long run.
Working Outline
1.0 What is Global Warming?
2.0 What are the causes of Global Warming?
3.0 What actions of international scale are being made to address Global Warming?
3.1 What is the Kyoto Protocol?
3.2 What are the environmental issues?
3.3 What are the political issues?
3.4 What are the economic issues?
3.5 Why should all states be involved in the Kyoto Protocol?
Research Paper Draft
Global warming is an environmental damage of international proportions caused by greenhouse effect. Greenhouse effect refers to the heat-trapping effect of the rising concentrations of carbon dioxide and other gases emitted by burning fossil fuels, deforestation and other human activity into the atmosphere creating a barrier that traps the sun’s heat inside the earth. (Cline, 1992)
Due to the international effect of the phenomenon, there is the realization that minimizing its effect needs international cooperation. In 1997, the Kyoto Protocol developed during the United Nations Convention on Climate Change. The purpose of the protocol is the promotion of policy change on phasing out incentives, tax exemptions and subsidies to industries attributed with majority of greenhouse gas emissions and giving these incentives to environment friendly industries. (Chambers, 2001) However, the nature of global warming and climate change covered by the Kyoto Protocol exacts only voluntary compliance (Wiener, 1999). The Kyoto Protocol takes effect only after it is ratified by 55 countries including the countries attributed with 55% of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide and states determine the amount of cutback in emissions to be achieved in 2012. It was only in February 2005 that the protocol came into effect. The Kyoto Protocol had weaknesses since it does not impose a ceiling or a minimum level of compliance to be able to achieve significant results (Gardiner, 2004) and it does not expect compliance from developing countries that ratified the protocol (Page, 2002). Nevertheless, it is a necessary solution to global warming.
The primary environmental concern in the issue of global warming is stopping the century-old practice of indiscriminate emissions of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere to prevent its effects. The heat trapped inside the earth affects the agricultural sector and our food supply because of drought and heat stress. The melting of glaciers increase the seawater level causing flooding in areas below sea level. Rapid deforestation limits the ability of nature to absorb the mass of greenhouse gases and rainfall increasing water runoff causing landslides and flooding. (Vitousek, 1994) No state can contest these effects so that involvement by states in the Kyoto Protocol, which is the first international effort to address global warming, is justified by these effects.
The primary political issue raised by non-participating states is the conflict between the protocol’s regulation of fossil fuel trading and the WTO principle of free trade. However, the Kyoto Protocol can exist together with free trade because states are free to define the targeted decrease in their greenhouse gas emissions. (Lisowski, 2002) Thus, this issue is capable of settlement with clarification of the provisions of the agreement. Thus, this political issue is not a sufficient justification for non-participation in the Kyoto Protocol.
The primary economic issue in global warming is weighing the economic cost of global warming and the economic cost of limiting the use of fossil fuels and the emission of greenhouse gases. On one hand, the benefit-cost analysis (Cline, 1999) conducted based on US conditions in the early 1990s showed that the cost of global warming already amounted to trillion annually. The agricultural losses due to drought and heat stress amounted to billion. Melting of glacial ice increasing the seawater level causing floods contributed billion. Warmer weather increases electricity consumption for air-conditioning amounting to billion. Water run-off that curtails water from dropping into water basins contributes billion. Increase in urban pollution due to warmer weather amounts to billion. Deaths due to heat waves amounts to a conservative billion annually calculated through lost earnings. The loss of the long-term value of forests amounted to billion. The melting of mountain snowcaps amounts to a loss of $ 1½ billion to the ski industry.
On the other hand, US refused to ratify the protocol because it contends that it will incur economic loss of 0 billion, affecting 149 million jobs. The US projects that it will experience a decrease in real GDP and consumption by as much as 1.2 percent and 1.0 percent respectively by 2010 with the Kyoto Protocol. The limitation on the trading of fossil fuels will also increase the price of gasoline by as much as 36 cents for a gallon, natural gas by as much as 42 percent, and electricity by as much as 36 percent by 2010. There is also loss due to the limitation in the trading of permits to as much as 4.2 percent of the baseline GDP. (Lasky, 2003) It is in terms of economic issue that participation in the Kyoto Protocol becomes an issue.
Global warming is an environmental damage of international scale that developed due to the aggregate contributions of states. However, no single state takes responsibility for their individual contributions because the atmosphere is deemed an unlimited resource. No state owns it and every state has the right to utilize it. No state can prevent another from exploiting or destroying the atmosphere. This is why the Kyoto Protocol is voluntary. States should voluntary assume the burden of addressing global warming. Environmental and political reasons coupled with the economic cost of global warming justify the voluntary participation of all states in arresting global warming for sustainable development and the future of humankind.
Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment