Tilak K. Doshi, For The Straits Times 5 Oct 09;
IN ABOUT 60 days, representatives from over 190 countries will meet in the Danish capital of Copenhagen to hammer out a wider global pact on tackling climate change to succeed the Kyoto Protocol.
But there is increasing scepticism about whether a successful agreement will emerge from the negotiations to replace Kyoto. The key players have adopted widely divergent positions and a host of basic issues remain unresolved.
The major developing countries with large greenhouse gas emissions will play a critical role. Heavyweights China, India and Brazil seek steep and binding emission cuts from developed countries as well as strong technical and financial support to help developing nations adapt to global warming. The industrialised West accounts for most of the stock of man-made carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, so it seems only natural to insist that they launch serious efforts to reduce their own emissions before calling on developing countries to do so.
Yet the rapid rise of carbon emissions from China and India makes it imperative that they and other large developing countries do their part, at least in the medium to long term. Despite low levels of per capita emissions, developing countries will account for over half of global carbon dioxide emissions by 2020, if not before. China overtook the United States as the world's largest carbon emitter in 2006.
The governments of developed countries will find it hard to channel significant resources to cutting greenhouse gases without clear commitments from large developing countries. After the US House of Representatives passed its version of a climate change Bill - a veritable dog's breakfast of exemptions, exceptions and pay-offs to special interests - Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid suggested that the passing of the Bill be delayed until 2010. This adds further uncertainty as to whether the US will have a comprehensive position on climate change in time for Copenhagen. Canada and Australia, both large energy producers, are also not expected to impose aggressive targets for emission cuts.
South Korea and Mexico, which are not obliged by the Kyoto Protocol to cut emissions but are among the world's top dozen carbon emitters, recently announced substantial reduction targets to be achieved by 2020. Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama pledged last month to slash Japan's greenhouse gas emissions by 25 per cent from 1990 levels by 2020, a substantially more aggressive target than that of the previous administration. This exceeds the target pledged by the European Union - a 20 per cent cut - and will probably be significantly more than the targets the US is likely to set.
Also among the nations jockeying for advantage at Copenhagen will be the smaller 'newly industrialising countries' or NICs. They were reclassified from their previous 'developing country' status to 'more advanced developing countries' by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in 1995, and to 'industrial countries' by the International Monetary Fund in 1997. Singapore, Kuwait and Israel are in this group, as is Hong Kong, which, though not a country, reports statistics as a Special Administrative Region of China. As affluent countries with relatively high per capita emissions, the NICs may come under pressure to do more to emit less.
Concerns over both equity and efficiency have led some policy analysts to propose 'graduation and deepening' scenarios to integrate developing countries into a post-Kyoto climate regime. This could be done by, for instance, requiring countries to achieve emission targets once they reach the wealth comparable to that of developed countries that already have binding commitments under the Kyoto Protocol. Various 'graduation indices' have been proposed, based on some combination of per capita income and emission thresholds, fulfilling both the ability to pay and the 'polluter pays' principles.
Asian countries such as Brunei, Singapore and South Korea and Middle Eastern states such as Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Bahrain would be among those 'graduating' to greater responsibility in curbing greenhouse gas emissions in this scenario.
Singapore has to be aware of how proposed cuts in carbon emissions will affect its key energy-intensive industries such as power generation, oil refining, petrochemicals, aviation and marine bunkering. Global climate policies targeted at aviation or marine bunkering, for example, could have far-reaching consequences for Singapore's role as an oil trading and transportation hub.
But in negotiating a post-Kyoto climate regime, the NICs may well choose to make a virtue out of necessity. Many of them are dynamic centres of finance, tourism and high-tech industry and serve as regional transportation and trading hubs. So going 'green' may be a chance to improve their image further. Abu Dhabi, for instance, has attracted global attention with its construction of a city - Masdar - that will emit zero carbon.
For its part, Singapore is already well known as a garden city. Innovative approaches by the public and private sectors to conserve energy while developing new sources will make this city-state a compelling story in a carbon-conscious 21st century.
The writer is a visiting principal fellow at the Energy Studies Institute, National University of Singapore.
