www.treehugger.com
In Bali 2007, the topic of trade and finance in the context of climate change negotiation was brought up. This is also one of the topic that parties need to agree on in Copenhagan 2009. The idea of using trade and finance to reduce green house gases (GHG) is definitely a worthy topic. However, at the current stage of negotiation and research, trade and finance policies may not be settled in Copenhagan.
Trade affects climate change negotiation because cross border trade makes it hard to single out which countries to hold responsible for climate impact of a certain product. Carbon intensive goods such as chemicals, motor vehicles, steel and aluminum are usually produced in one country and consumed in a different country. The current policy under Kyoto Protocol hold the country of production responsible for reducing the emission. However, this is unfair to countries having competitive advantages in those products. Developing countries particularly have advantages in carbon intensive industries. Developed countries, on the other hand, focus more on services. Applying the current rule to developing countries effectively shifts the focus away from the biggest GHG emitters historically, i.e. developed countries.
The dynamics of environmental responsibilities between production and consumption countries can also be seen through the three lenses outlined in Parker’s and Blodgett’s paper titled Global Climate Change: Three Policy Perspectives. If the technological lens is applied, production countries are to blame because their technology is not developed enough to minimize emissions. Using the ecological lens, consumption countries are to be held accountable because of their excessive consumption habits.
In my opinion, whatever countries that benefit from the product should address its environmental implications. In that sense, both production and consumption countries should share the responsibilities. The harder problem would be where the balance is. After the negotiation round in Bali, there is still not enough research and data to suggest that any agreement in the area of trade will be made in 2009. As a result, as important as the issue is, it should be included only after Copenhagen 2009 in order not to delay the whole negotiation process.
Luan Nguyen.
Tags: ecological lens, Luan Nguyen, technological lens, trade
