By Lord Prescott, Andrew Hammond
In a diplomatic breakthrough, ministers from more than 190 countries have agreed a new global climate change treaty at Paris. The success, which comes after many years of painstaking negotiations, is a very welcome shot in the arm for attempts to tackle global warming.
For those who have criticised the deal, it needs to be remembered that these were an enormously difficult set of international negotiations that nearly broke down, on multiple occasions, in the past. Whereas the 1997 Kyoto Protocol involved a deal for the EU states and 37 developed countries, Paris also involves developing countries too and a much wider range of issues to contend with.
However, while we now have a crucial post-Kyoto framework in place, honesty is also needed. As the UN itself has concluded, the commitments by states that have now been made, very important as they are, are not yet enough to limit global average temperature rise to 2 degrees Celsius (let alone the 1.5 degrees Celsius much discussed at Paris) above pre-industrial levels, the level scientists say we must not breach if we are to avoid the worst risks of global warming.
So, rather than viewing the Paris agreement as the end of the process, it must be seen as the beginning of a much longer journey that governments and legislators must now make. The roadmap for moving forward is already clear.
Firstly, implementation of the Paris deal will be most effective through national laws. The country ‘commitments' put forward in Paris will be more credible ― and durable beyond the next set of national elections ― if they are backed up by national legislation.
And this must ideally be supported by well informed, cross-party lawmakers from across the political spectrum who can put in place a credible set of policies and measures to ensure effective implementation, and hold governments to account so Paris delivers. To enable this to happen, bodies like the Council of Europe advocate dissemination of best practice across legislatures from Asia-Pacific to the Americas, the building of capacity and promotion of common, effective approaches across countries.
Clearly, there are some countries, including the United States, where passage of legislation will be enormously difficult, if not politically impossible. Even here, however, implementation of this agenda can be secured in other ways, including further executive actions by President Barack Obama and his successor in the White House.
The remarkable diversity of domestic measures that countries have taken in response to climate change is shown in a report published this year by the Grantham Institute at the London School of Economics which covers 98 countries plus the EU states, which together account for 93% of global greenhouse gas emissions. It was revealed that there are more than 800 climate-change laws and policies now in place across the world, rising from 54 in 1997.
Approximately half of those (398) were passed by the legislative branch, and half (408) by the executive branch (e.g. policies, decrees). And 46 new laws and policies were passed in 2014 alone.
Some 45 countries (including the 28 member EU as a bloc) have economy wide targets to reduce their emissions. Together they account for over 75 percent of global emissions.
In addition, 41 states have economy-wide targets up to 2020, and 22 have targets beyond 2020. Moreover, 86 countries have specific targets for renewable energy, energy demand, transportation or land-use, land-use change and forestry. Some 80 percent of countries have renewable targets; the majority of them are executive policies.
It is disheartening that the Paris agreement, despite its significant ambition, is not yet enough to avoid the global average temperature rise to 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels being breached. However, the domestic legal frameworks that are being put in place are nonetheless crucial building blocks to to measure, report, verify and manage greenhouse gas emissions.
Post-Paris, the ambition must be that these national frameworks are replicated in even more countries, and ratcheted up in coming years. There are clear signs of this happening already in numerous states, right across the world, as countries seek to toughen their response to global warming.
What this movement towards a more robust stance on climate change shows is the scale of the transformation in attitudes taking place amongst many governments across the world. Many countries now view tackling global warming as in the national self-interest and see, for instance, that expanding domestic sources of renewable energy not only reduces emissions, but also increases energy security by reducing reliance on imported fossil fuels.
Reducing energy demand through greater efficiency reduces costs and increases competitiveness. Improving resilience to the impacts of global warming also makes economic sense. And domestic laws also give clear signals about direction of policy, reducing uncertainty, particularly for the private sector.
Far from undermining the U.N. talks process, this ‘bottom-up approach' has been a decisive development catalysing the new deal in Paris. Advancing domestic measures on global warming and experiencing the benefits of reducing emissions have been crucial building blocks creating the political ‘window of opportunity' to enable an agreement to now be secured.
And all of this underlines why legislators must be at the centre of international negotiations and policy processes not just on climate change, but also on the full range of sustainable development issues. Along with governments, they can now help co-create, and follow-through to implement, what could be a foundation of global sustainable development in coming decades for billions across the world.
Lord Prescott was formerly U.K. deputy prime minister, Europe's chief negotiator at the Kyoto climate talks, and is now lead U.K. representative in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. Andrew Hammond is an associate at LSE IDEAS (the Centre for International Affairs, Diplomacy and Strategy) at the London School of Economics.