A Criticism of the Kyoto Protocol with an Objective Approach

Year 2024, , 520 - 529, 30.09.2024

Sertaç Atabey , Z. Fuat Toprak

https://doi.org/10.28979/jarnas.1452226

Abstract

The Kyoto Protocol, established to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, one of the human-induced causes of climate change, imposes obligations on developed countries. In this study: 1) what obligations the articles of the Kyoto Protocol impose on the countries that are party to the protocol, 2) whether the articles of the protocol are impartial, equal, and fair in their obligations to the contracting countries and their binding, 3) how the economic support of developed countries to reduce emissions to developing countries can be evaluated in the context of the principle of equality/justice, 4) it has been discussed whether the non-bindingness of the countries those are not party to the protocol. Considering all protocol items, the discussion was made from a critical but constructive point of view. It can be said that the obligations arising from the Kyoto Protocol bring disadvantages for some countries compared to others.

Keywords

Kyoto Protocol, global climate change, greenhouse gas emission, equality, justice

References

• Z. F. Toprak, N. Hamidi, Ş. Toprak, Z. Şen, Climatic identity assessment of the climate change, International Journal of Global Warming 1 (5) (2013) 30–45.
• W. M. Budzianowski, Time delay of global warming, International Journal of Global Warming 3 (3) (2011) 289–306.
• A. Q. Al-Amin, F. Kari, G. M. Alam, Global warming and climate change: Prospects and challenges toward long-term policies in Bangladesh, International Journal of Global Warming 1 (5) (2013) 67–83.
• J. Brunnée, The Kyoto protocol: A testing ground for compliance theories?, Heidelberg Journal of International Law 63 (2003) 255–280.
• S. Vanderheiden, Climate change mitigation, a problem of injustice, World Science Report (2013) 378–380.
• R. Falkner, The unavoidability of justice–and order–in international climate politics: From Kyoto to Paris and beyond, The British Journal of Politics and International Relations 2 (21) (2019) 270–278.
• M. Demirci, Climate change and distributive justice, Eskişehir Osmangazi University Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences 2 (8) (2013) 183–203.
• M. Santos, Global justice and environmental governance: An analysis of the Paris Agreement, Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional 60 (1) (2017) 18 pages.
• Ş. A. Güneş, Ensuring compliance with climate change obligations: Kyoto Protocol compliance mechanism, International Relations Journal 31 (8) (2011) 69–94.
• C. Böhringer, The Kyoto Protocol: A review and perspectives, Oxford Review of Economic Policy 3 (19) (2003) 451–466.
• J. Timmons Roberts, B. C. Parks, Fueling injustice: Globalization, ecologically unequal exchange and climate change, Globalizations 2 (4) (2007) 193–210.
• S. Çınar, M. Yılmazer, T. A. Fazlılar, Trade in polluting industries and the environment: A comparison of developed and developing countries, Journal of Doğuş University 2 (13) (2012) 212–226.
• N. Berberoğlu, Climate change: Post-Kyoto negotiations and Türkiye, International Journal of Economic Issues (33) (2009) 18–26.
• A. M. Rosen, The wrong solution at the right time: The failure of the Kyoto Protocol on climate change, Politics and Policy 1 (43) (2015) 30–58.
• C. Atici, Reconciling the flexibility mechanisms of climate policies towards the inclusiveness of developing countries: Commitments and prospects, Environment, Development and Sustainability 24 (2021) 9048–9067.
• R. G. Akkale, Kyoto Protocol and Turkey, Mecmua 1 (2008) 493–515.
• M. Türkeş, U. M. Sümer, G. Çetiner, Kyoto Protocol flexibility mechanisms, Journal of Plumbing (52) (2000) 84–100.
• Ö. Dolu, Flexibility and institutional capacity development of the Kyoto regime, Master's Thesis Adnan Menderes University (2005) Aydın.
• N. Konak, Global climate change, Kyoto Protocol flexibility mechanisms, voluntary carbon market and Türkiye: A critical approach, Alternative Politics 2 (3) (2011) 154–178.
• B. Engin, Kyoto protocol implementation mechanisms: Flawed or promising concepts?, Journal of Social Sciences (2) (2010) 30–40.
• V. Ş. Ediger, The international relations dimension of global climate change and Turkey's policies, Mülkiye 259 (17) (2008) 133–158.
• C. Hagem, B. Holtsmark, From small to insignificant. Climate impact of the Kyoto Protocol with and without US, Oslo University Center for International Climate and Environmental Research 2001 (1) (2001) 10 pages.
• Turkish Statistical Institute, Statistics in Environment, https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Istatistiklerle-Cevre-2016-27685, Accessed 10 Mar 2024.
• Z. Şen, Climate change and Türkiye, Journal of Environment City and Climate 1 (1) (2022) 1–19.
• K. Van der Geest, K. Warner, Loss and damage from climate change: Emerging perspectives, International Journal of Global Warming 2 (8) (2015) 133–140.
• W. L. Gregory, A. Duran, Scenarios and acceptance of forecasts, In Principles of forecasting, Springer, Boston, 2001, Ch. 16, pp. 519–540.
• R. H. Moss, J. A. Edmonds, K. A. Hibbard, M. R. Manning, S. K. Rose, D. P. Van Vuuren, T. J Wilbanks, The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment, Nature 7282 (463) (2010) 747– 756.
• WCRP Report, IPCC AR5: Lessons learned for climate change research and WCRP, International Space Science Institute, Bern, 2015.