Dealing With Talks And Agreements Among Nations

At COP 1 in 1995, the parties to the UNFCCC decided to accelerate efforts to speed up negotiations for a first partial agreement. They agreed that the new agreement would set binding targets and timetables for reducing emissions from industrialized countries, in line with the CBDRRC principle, but no new commitments for developing countries. (In the non-binding Byrd Hagel resolution, the U.S. Senate rejected this premise and said the agreement should include new greenhouse gas limits for developing countries.) Recognizing this problem, nations adopted the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit. As with many other international treaties, Member States have agreed to hold periodic meetings to develop rules to achieve the objectives set out in the agreement. This is how the Conference of the Parties (COP) was created. The Kyoto Protocol was threatened after the failure of the talks in November 2000 and the withdrawal of the United States in March 2001, with Washington saying that the protocol was not in the country`s “best economic interest. In July 2001, in Bonn, Germany, negotiators secured breakthroughs in green technology, emissions trading agreements and trade-offs on carbon sinks (natural reservoirs that absorb more carbon than they emit). In October, countries agree on the rules to meet the Kyoto Protocol targets, paving the way for it to enter into force. The agreement addresses many of the issues that the heads of state and government have addressed here. However, many participants in the climate talks were unhappy, from the Europeans, who now have the only mandatory CO2 control regime in the world, to delegates from the poorest countries, who opposed the exclusion of critical negotiations. The break-in led to new discussions that cemented the central conditions of the agreement, U.S.

officials said. A threshold of 2C has long been considered the door of dangerous warming. More recently, scientists and policy makers have argued that keeping the temperature rise at 1.5 degrees Celsius is a safer limit for the world.