Climate change and the tourism sector: the clean development mechanism, a market instrument under the Kyoto Protocol to achieve multiple objectives

The main objective of this research is to demonstrate that the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), an instrument created under a global international treaty, can achieve multiple objectives beyond those for which it has been established. As such, while being already a powerful tool to contribute to the global fight against climate change, the CDM can also be successful if applied to different sectors not contemplated before. In particular, this research aimed at demonstrating that a wider utilization of the CDM in the tourism sector can represent an innovative way to foster sustainable tourism and generate additional benefits. The CDM was created by Article 12 of the Kyoto Protocol of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and represents an innovative tool to reduce greenhouse gases emissions through the implementation of mitigation activities in developing countries which generate certified emission reductions (CERs), each of them equivalent to one ton of CO2 not emitted in the atmosphere. These credits can be used for compliance reasons by industrialized countries in achieving their reduction targets. The logic path of this research begins with an analysis of the scientific evidences of climate change and its impacts on different economic sectors including tourism and it continues with a focus on the linkages between climate and the tourism sector. Then, it analyses the international responses to the issue of climate change and the peculiar activities in the international arena addressing climate change and the tourism sector. The concluding part of the work presents the objectives and achievements of the CDM and its links to the tourism sector by considering case studies of existing projects which demonstrate that the underlying question can be positively answered. New opportunities for the tourism sector are available.

Chinese energy and climate policies after Durban: save the Kyoto Protocol

Nowadays, one of the urgent issues regarding global climate change is to discuss the future of the second period of the Kyoto Protocol. However, the divergence of views and opinions among parties in the last Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, held in Durban in December 2011, is still large. One of the bones of contention is whether the emerging developing countries, like China, should make commitments and legally bind themselves to a Green House Gas (GHG) reduction target in near future. As the largest GHG emitting country, China and its energy and climate policies will play an important role in global climate change and will also significantly influence the other countries? policies and the global climate negotiation. In this paper, we review the current differences among parties in the Durban Conference, and we analyze the recent situation, barriers, and future policies in China. Finally we highlight the impact and potential effect of Clean Development Mechanisms in avoiding China?s barriers regarding climate change. Results show that China is making a great effort to mitigate climate change by establishing and reforming its energy and climate policies in order to achieve a low-carbon development. At the same time, more innovation and international collaboration is needed in China to achieve this goal.

THE KYOTO PROTOCOL AND THE WTO: INSTITUTIONAL EVOLUTION AND ADAPTATION. CEPS Policy Brief No. 28/December

Overview. Questions about the interface between the multilateral climate regime embodied in the Kyoto Protocol and the multilateral trade regime embodied in the World Trade Organisation (WTO) have become especially timely since the fall of 2001. At that time, ministerial-level meetings in Marrakech and Doha agreed to advance the agendas, respectively, for the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol and for negotiations on further agreements at the WTO. There have been concerns that each of these multilateral arrangements could constrain the effectiveness of the other, and these concerns will become more salient with the entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol. There are questions about whether and how the rights and obligations of the members of the WTO and the parties to the Protocol may conflict. Of particular concern is whether provisions in the Protocol, as well as government policies and business activities undertaken in keeping with those provisions, may conflict with the WTO non-discrimination principles of national treatment and most-favoured nation treatment. The WTO agreements that are potentially relevant to climate change issues include many of the individual Uruguay Round agreements and subsequent agreements as well. The principal elements of the Kyoto Protocol that are particularly relevant are its provisions concerning emissions trading, the Clean Development Mechanism, Joint Implementation, enforcement, and parties’ policies and measures. In combination, therefore, there are numerous potential points of intersection between the elements of the Kyoto Protocol and the WTO agreements. Previous studies have clarified many issues, as they have focused on particular aspects of the regimes’ relationships. Yet, some analyses suggest that the two regimes are largely compatible and even mutually reinforcing, while others suggest that there are significant conflicts between them. Those and other studies are referenced in the ‘suggestions for further reading’ section at the end of the paper.1 The present paper seeks to expand on those studies by providing additional breadth and depth to understanding of the issues. The analysis gives special attention to key issues on the agenda – i.e. issues that are particularly problematic because of the likelihood of occurrence of specific conflicts and the significance of their economic and/or political consequences. The paper adopts a modified ‘triage’ approach, which classifies points of intersection as (a) highly problematic and clearly in need of further attention, (b) perhaps problematic but less urgent, and (c) apparently not problematic, at least at this point in time. The principal conclusions are that: · The missions and objectives of the two regimes are largely compatible, and their operations are potentially mutually reinforcing in several respects. · Some provisions of the multilateral agreements that may superficially seem at odds are not likely to become particularly problematic in practice. · ‘Domestic policies and measures’ that governments may undertake in the context of the Protocol could pose difficult issues in the context of WTO dispute cases. · Recent WTO agreements and dispute cases acknowledge the legitimacy of the ‘precautionary principle’ and are thus consistent with the environmental protection objectives of the Protocol. · The relative newness of the climate regime creates opportunities for institutional adaptation, as compared with the constraints of tradition in the trade-investment regime. · The prospect of largely independent evolutionary paths for the two regimes poses a series of issues about future international regime design and management, which may require new institutional arrangements. In sum, the present paper thus finds that although there are some areas of interaction that are problematic, the two regimes may nevertheless co-exist in relative harmony in other respects –more like ‘neighbours’ than either ‘friends’ or ‘foes’, as Krist (2001) has suggested.