Search

Border tax adjustment is a second-best solution for improving climate mitigation measures as long as international cooperation does not function to a satisfactory degree. However, the implementation of such measures can legally be problematic under the angle of the legal framework of the World Trade Organization (WTO) which aims at liberalizing international trade and at avoiding trade barriers. In particular, border tax adjustment might come into conflict with the National Treatment principle and the discipline on subsidies. These legal problems can only be overcome if the specific legal justification reasons provided for in WTO law for the promotion of climate sustainability (such as conservation of exhaustible resources and protection of human, animal or plant health) are interpreted in a broad way. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A significant number of countries classified as 'developing' during the negotiation of the UNFCCC in the early 1990s have experienced rapid economic growth and increase of greenhouse gas emissions since then. We assess whether governments of such countries are considering taking up responsibility for emissions mitigation in the context of the UNFCCC's principle of common but differentiated responsibility (CBDR). While an expansion of mitigation responsibility to Non-Annex I countries has been strongly opposed by overarching groups such as the G 77, we find countries such as South Africa and Indonesia that have clearly supported binding commitments. Other countries like China and Singapore oppose binding commitments but increasingly engage in domestic mitigation action. Moreover, China has pledged a significant amount of climate finance. Even in the countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council, which adamantly refuse mitigation commitments, some mitigation action seems to emerge. We thus foresee that countries will increasingly adopt differentiated positions regarding their responsibility for mitigation. This could provide new dynamics in international climate negotiations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author reflects on the need for world leaders to work together on a solid agreement at the United Nations (UN) climate conference to find ways to reduce emissions. Topics discussed include the effort of the leaders to develop an international climate agreement to prevent climate change, the commitment to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, and the development of a pledge-and-view system that force countries to submit their own national commitments to protect the environment.

The authors argue that a decision regarding the use of the Montreal Protocol to reduce hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) emissions is helpful in preventing climate change, noting U.S. President Barack Obama's denial of permission for the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline.

The article discusses the issues to be raised at the 2008 Group of Eight (G8) Summit in Hokkaido, Japan in July 2008. Accordingly, the meeting, which has been expanded to include the Major Economies Meeting on Energy Security and Climate Change, will consider climate change as its main focus, while global food shortage and nuclear nonproliferation are only secondary in the agenda. However, it notes that the increasing oil prices could possibly overshadow talks on climate change. Further details on other problems to be addressed are presented.

Reports that disillusionment and doubt marked the 6th anniversary of the Kyoto Protocol. Status of the international treaty aimed at preventing climate changes through reduction of the emission of greenhouse gases; Concerns expressed during a party held at the Milan Conference Center in Italy; Policies critized and praised by non-governmental organizations.

Reports on the collapse of the Kyoto Protocol, the international treaty on preventing climate change. Planned reduction of emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases; Reasons why Russia is rejecting the treaty; Effects of global warming on living systems; Examples of extreme weather conditions in 2003.