Why Kyoto Protocol isn't in effect
By L. K. Verma Op-ed The Pioneer Friday, November 22, 2002
While the Kyoto Protocol-1992 has been going through a rough phase over the last decade, it is a matter of concern as to why such an initiative, which is for the whole world, should undergo such tribulations. First it was the Americans who sounded a contrarian note. Then the Russians, and now, finally, the Indians. The emphasis has changed from tackling the issue of global warming to comprehensive development and emancipation of the poor. Not that these are not important issues but changing the stance on the most important of all the issues - global warming and devaluation of the emphasis - is certainly a matter worth looking into.
This brings us to the bigger question: What are the loose ends in the protocol? To start with, the globe has been divided into 2 blocks. The developed countries and the countries undergoing the process of transition to a market economy on the one hand, and the underdeveloped and developing countries on the other. This division has been made to help the developing countries. Article 3 paragraph 4 gives right to all party countries to 'promote sustainable development'.
It further says, 'policies and measures' should be appropriate for the specific conditions of each party and should be integrated with national development programmes, taking into account that economic development is essential for adopting measures to address climate changes. And thereafter, in paragraph 5 it binds the parties to promote a supportive and open international economic system that would lead to sustainable economic growth and development.
Thus, it is quite clear that the developing countries have to depend heavily on the developed countries - so that they can achieve the target for the reduction in the emission of the greenhouse gases, establish sustainable practices, import technology, and develop their own infrastructure of use of alternate sources of energy. This relationship is best described as a relationship between a donor and a recipient. The objection of the developing countries that they are still far behind and therefore, should not be expected to cut down the emission, is illogical. It is not necessary to go through the steps of industrial development on the lines of the West. As it is not really necessary to re-invent the wheel. One should aspire to invent methods for the use of alternate sources of energy. Energy in different forms is available, the requirement is to do research and bring it to practical use.
Therefore, it is time we realised that developing nations must devise methods suited to their economy, and for the emancipation of the poor. The protocol in its present shape falls far behind the necessity of the developing world, but for different reasons than construed. It would have been much better to lay down a standard of emission of the greenhouse gases, applicable for all. Those above the mark would have been required to bring down their emission, and those below might have been allowed a moratorium with an announced and documented commitment to progress towards achieving application of alternate sources of energy. Even the oil exporting countries should have been encouraged to take steps to build and improve their infrastructure, rather than depending solely on the income generated by sale of oil. After all, the known reserve of oil is likely to last only for another 50 years or so.
Thus, under the circumstances, emphasis should have been on the development of alternate sources of energy in a time bound manner. It is true that sustainable development cannot be attained without emancipation of the poor - but does not the same dictum applies to the relationship between developed and the developing world? And then, will it not be in the interest of the developed world to truly help out the developing world in development as determined by the peculiarities and priorities of that nation, rather than using these countries as an experimental field station, and gutter of waste in form of 'sinks'.
It must not be forgotten that the economy of developed countries is substantially dependent on the economic health of developing countries. Therefore, economic advancement of developing countries will be in the interest of all.
Read the complete news at:
http://www.dailypioneer.com
News Plus
http://www.mantra.com/newsplus
Jai Maharaj
http://www.mantra.com/jai Om Shanti
Panchaang for 17 Kartik 5103, Thursday, November 21, 2002:
Chitrabhanu Nama Samvatsare Dakshinaya Jeevana Ritau Vrischika Mase Krishna Pakshe Guru Vasara Yuktayam Rohini-Mrigashira Nakshatra Siddha Yoga Taitila-Gara Karana Dvitiya Yam Tithau
Hindu Holocaust Museum
http://www.mantra.com/holocaust
Hindu life, principles, spirituality and philosophy
http://www.hindu.org http://www.hindunet.org
The truth about Islam and Muslims
http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate
Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may not have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
