Critically analyse global consultations processes on climate change and how successful

were they in mitigating the effects

Major objectives of the Kyoto Protocol

1. The Kyoto protocol implemented the objective of the UNFCC to fight global warming
by reducing GHGs concentration in the atmosphere to a level that would prevent
dangerous anthropogenic interference with Climate system.
2. The KP in based on the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities in this
case it puts the obligation to reduce the current emission on developed countries on
the basis that they are historically responsible for the current levels of GHGs in the
atmosphere.
3. The KP aims to make sure that its member states or state parties reduce green GHGs
emission based on the two broad phenomenon that A) global warming exist and B)
that human made carbon dioxide have caused it. In this case the protocol advocates
for a holistic approach in terms of reducing the rise of atmospheric pressure which is
causing climatic shocks and stresses these gasses include carbon dioxide (CO2),
methane, nitrous oxide, sulphur hexafluoride and two groups of gases,
hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and perfluorocarbons (PFCs).The six GHG are translated
into CO2 equivalents in determining reductions in emissions
4. These targets were based on percentage reduction. Why?, simply because various
countries emit different levels of GHGs depending on their economic activities,
largely industrial activities. A 5,2% reduction of these GHGs was agreed upon
5. In the same vein, these countries or member states were allowed to use emissions
trading to meet their obligations if they maintain or increase their GHGs emissions.
Emissions trading allowed nations that can easily meet their targets to sell credits to
those who cannot.
6. In order for these objectives to be met various mechanisms were put in place
including the compliance system, building of alliances which saw the creation of the
Kyoto adaptation fund, development and deployment of technology to make member
state resilient to climatic inter alia mitigation and adaptation encompassed, capacity
building.
7. Upon evaluation a major issue faced by KP was that it was built on very limited
scientific knowledge and did not take in to consideration the individual needs of each
 nation since it was dominated by hegemonic states, therefore the strategies of the KP
to counter CC remains a matter of highly debatable assumptions
8. It was supposed to be enforced only after 55% of the world carbon emitters for 1990
had ratified the KP

Doha amendment to the Kyoto protocol

1. The major objective of the Doha amendment was to interpret, analyse and evaluate
the KP. Its major amendment was that it added one more GHG Nitrogen trifluoride.
This gas was seen to also adversely causing the rise of atmospheric pressure, thereby
aggravating Climatic shocks.
2. The Doha amendment has a lifespan of eight years, running from 1 January 2013 until
31 December 2020;
3. Parties or member states taking on commitments are required to reduce their
aggregate emissions by 18 per cent below 1990 levels. The commitments of
individual Parties range from a 24 per cent reduction (in the case of Ukraine) to a 0.5
per cent reduction (in the case of Australia). The European Union, as a whole, is
required to reduce its emissions by 20 per cent;
4. It is to be enforced after 144 parties of the KP had ratified the treaty

Paris agreement

1. As in other agreements the underlining objective of the Paris agreement is to lay

strategies of countering CC by making member states focused on the issue. The paris
agreement is to strengthen the global responses to the treat of climate change by
keeping global temperature rise this century well below 2 degrees celcius above pre
industrial levels and to pressure efforts to limit the tempreture even further to 1.5
degrees celcius.
2. The agreement further aim to strengthen the ability of countries to deal with the
impacts.to research these ambitious goals ,appropriate financial flows, a new
technology framework and an enhanced capacity building framework are strategies to
be incorporated, thus supporting action by developing countries and the most
vulnerable countries, in line with their own national objectives
3. The agreement also provides for enhanced transparency of action and support through
a more robust transparency framework
 4. The Paris agreement requires all parties to put forward their best efforts through
national determined contributions NDCs and to strengthen effort in the years ahead
5. In the same vein Paris agreement underlines the requirement that all parties report
regularly on their emissions and their implementation efforts. They will be a global
stocktake every 5 years to assess the collective progress toward achieving the purpose
of the agreement and to inform individual actions by parties.
6. To strengthen its strategies the Paris agreement establish binding commitments
through various mitigation and adaptation strategies such as building of reservoirs,
offering capacity building and creation of adaptation funds

Location Session Conference

Santiago de Chile, Chile COP 25 Santiago climate change
conference December 2019
Poland COP24 Katowice climate change
conference December 2018
Germany COP23 UN climate change
conference November 2017
Morocco COP22 Marrakech climate change
conference November 2016
France COP21 Paris climate change
conference November 2015
Peru COP20 Lima climate change
conference December 2014
Poland COP19 Warsaw climate change
conference November 2013
Qatar COP 18 Doha climate change
conference November 2012
South Africa COP 17 Durban Climate change
conference November 2011
Japan COP 3 Kyoto Climate change
December 1997
This presentation seeks to assess the role of global consultations on climate change and their
successes as well as failures. This presentation will make reference to UNFCC, Kyoto
Protocol, COP, the Paris agreement and the IPCC. These global consultations implemented
strategies such as the compliance system, building of member states alliance, contacting of
regular meetings. It facilitates the development and deployment of technologies that can help
increase resilience to the impacts of climate change, they review reports and these are
influential in changing the global opinion about climate change, they educate the masses on
adaptation and mitigation strategies to climate change, provides scientific literature on
climate change which is published not only at the global level in international journals in
English ,but also in national journals and in many languages, they have also lay the
foundations of measures that are needed to counteract climate change, they have also made
significant efforts in looking at future effects of climate change. Nevetheless, these global
consultations have not been so successful in their strategies on climate change, as climate
change can be described as a tragedy of the common, -an economic theory propounded by
Hardin-. The global consultations have encountered some challenges, notably their meeting
have been reduced to talk shows, lack of support from hegemonic states due to its bipolar
composition, it has created dependency syndrome among the third world countries, as shall
be discussed in this presentation.

Climate change stood to be the controversial issue in the world where it has been battling
between the uncertainties surrounding its scientific authenticity as well as means and ways to
tackle it, political conflict of the developed and developing countries and the sincerity
tradeoffs between the environment and economic growth activities. These three aspects are at
the centre of climate debate hence climate policies should be grounded in this debate in order
to explicitly demystify the climate fog. Kyoto protocol stands to be one intervention effort
that the world has embarked on to mitigate against the fast changing climate. Global
consultations have gone a long way in influencing the national policies of various states in
many ways such as technology acquisition, however the issue of climate change remains the
“tragedy of the commons” that is if you have a common resource, like land, and everyone
surrounding that resource is unregulated in their ability to use it, people will pursue their
short-term self-interest and take as much of the resource as they can. In the end, the resource
will be destroyed. The originators of this economic theory are, William Forster Lloyd and
Garrett Hardin. This theory applies to the issue of climate change today, It’s in every
country’s self-interest to have a strong economy, industry, and the cheapest energy possible
however this is at the expense of the planet as a whole.

Climate change is a change in the statistical distribution of weather patterns when that change
lasts for an extended period of time (i.e., decades to millions of years). Climate change may
refer to a change in average weather conditions, or in the time variation of weather around
longer-term average conditions (i.e., more or fewer extreme weather events). Climate change
is caused by factors such as biotic processes, variations in solar radiation received by
Earth, plate tectonics, and volcanic eruptions. Certain human activities have also been
identified as significant causes of recent climate change, often referred to as global warming.

To begin with, global consultations through, international agreements have committed

member-states through internationally binding emission targets. For example the Kyoto
Protocol under its mechanism known as the compliance system has managed to keep the
world focused on matters of climate change. Recognizing that developed countries are
principally responsible for the current Green House Gas Emissions (GHG) in the atmosphere
as a result of more than 150 years of industrial activity, the Protocol places a heavier burden
on developed nations under the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities.”
Under the Protocol, countries actual emissions have to be monitored and precise records have
to be kept of the trades carried out. In this case registry systems track and record transactions
by parties under the mechanisms are applied to act as a watch dog. The United Nations
Climate Change Secretariat, based in Bonn, Germany keeps an international transaction log
to verify that transactions are consistent with the rules of the Protocol. Through the
monitoring mechanism member-states must submit annual emission inventories and national
reports under the Protocol at regular intervals. However hegemonic states do not follow these
regulations and some states even deny the existence of climate change so they continue to
emit GHG.

Apart from the above, global consultations make sure that countries meet regularly.
According to Stone et al regular meetings are a critical tool which enables member states to
stay equipped and alert in issues concerning climate change. Climate change is affecting
every country on every continent and this phenomenon has led member states to meet
annually. For example the Kyoto protocol of 1997 due to various meetings led to the Doha
amendment of 2012 which acted as a life blood to the adjustments of climate related issues
and also led to the genesis of COP 21 Paris agreement of 2015 which will be enforced in
2020. In this case these regular meetings lead to mushrooming of ideas concerning adaptation
and mitigation strategies to make countries more resilient to shocks of climate change. Upon
evaluation the concept of regular meetings has been reduced to nothing but talk shows in the
words of various scholars. Wilson give empirics that the DOHA amendment to the Kyoto
protocol of 2012 was rectified by 77 parties as of 12 April 2017 of which 144 parties should
rectify for it to be in full force, despite these various meetings this agreement has not yet been
enforced yet left with a lifespan of 3 years. This clearly shows that regular meetings are only
social gathering which imbeds theoretical agreements and understandings without a practical
resolution.

In addition, global consultations have been, offering policy advice and capacity building on
adaptation and mitigation mechanisms. Since Africa is the hardest hit of climatic shocks, the
Kyoto protocol encouraged afforestation programmes to deal with GHG because forest act as
carbon sinks. According to Lernie 2012 about 1,5 billion tons of carbon is released in to the
atmosphere owing to deforestation alone, education on afforestation has led governments to
encourage tree planting programmes, Ghana in 2015 registered the planting of 1,5 million
trees country wide as alluded by Conrad et al. Various countries notably Zimbabwe and
South Africa has set aside tree planting day which in turn is helping these countries to adapt
and mitigate against the impact of climate change. Nevertheless this role has not been totally
effective a lot of criticism has been raised, for example many question the effectiveness of
planting forest to reduce greenhouses gases in the atmosphere. Scientist Bashmakov (2001)
argues that planting forests may increase carbon dioxide for the first 10 years owing to new
forest growth patterns and the release of carbon dioxide from soil.

In the same vein, global consultations on climate change have helped by assisting countries in
adapting to the adverse effects of climate change. It facilitates the development and
deployment of technologies that can help increase resilience to the impacts of climate change.
For this reason the Technology Mechanism (TM) was established in COP 18 (Doha), this was
already in motion COP 16 (Cancum) to facilitate enhanced action on technology development
and transfer to support action on mitigation and adaptation. The main components of the TM
are Technology Executive Committee (TEC) and Climate Technology Centre and Network
(CTCN). They are mandated to facilitate the full implementation of the TM (UNFCCC,
2010), so as to develop, demonstrate, transfer and deploy environmentally sound technologies
to developing countries. Discussion on linkage between the TM and the FM (specifically, the
SCF) has already started so as to enhance coherence of their work. For instance, the TEC
agreed in March 2014 to summarise its work that is of relevance for the FM, and to organise
a thematic dialogue on climate technology financing (TEC, 2014). The UNFCCC and the
Kyoto protocol endorses the principle that developed countries have to pay billions of dollars,
and supply technology to other countries for climate-related studies and projects, in the
process fully focusing the world attention on climate change. This has created dependency
syndrome among the developed countries.

In addition to the above, global consultations on climate change have led to the building of
alliances. Greek et al posits that climate change is a global phenomenon that requires
international cooperation especially in terms of burden sharing. In order to keep member
states focused on issues of climate change international agreements have underlined the
principle of alliance by contributing financial support to Africa which has the highest record
of being affected by climate change. The UNFCCC and the Kyoto protocol endoses the
principle that developed countries have to pay billions of dollars, to developing countries for
climate-related studies and projects. The Kyoto Protocol in order to make hegemonic powers
to focus on climate change have created multilateral adaptation fund. One such project is The
Adaptation Fund that has been established by the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol of the UN
Framework Convention on Climate Change to finance concrete adaptation projects and
programs in developing countries that are Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (UN 1997).
Nonetheless, it is central to note that the Kyoto Protocol was viewed as more expensive to
observe than not observing, which brings many to the conclusion that it is better not to
observe it and jus adapt to the global warming. Then Australian Prime Minister, John
Howard, refused to ratify the Agreement, arguing that the protocol would cost Australians
jobs (Hourcade et al 2001,538). Kyoto treaty impacted on gasoline prices, testimony from
1999, citing the economic dangers of Kyoto, forecast an increase in gasoline prices by as
much as 53%. In August 1999 the average national price of gasoline was $1.255 per gallon;
in mid-August 2004, the national average was $1.841 per gallon. The big jump was from
2004 to 2005; even before Katrina, prices were up dramatically: mid-August 2005 saw a
national average of $2.61 per gallon (Liverman 2008,217). This 100% increase in gasoline
prices will cripple the economy over a period of 10 years. One Russian economic policy
advisor even compared the Kyoto Protocol to fascism.
Moreover, the global consultations on climate change have laid target that manifest a
landmark impact needed to counteract climate change. It is projected that since 150 years ago
anthropogenic factors are the major causes of climate change as postulated by Jackson
(2000). Under such a scenario the Kyoto Protocol, Doha amendment and the Paris agreement,
emphasized targets on reducing GHGs. The Kyoto Protocol and the Doha amendment
implemented the objective of the UNFCCC which was to fight global warming by reducing
greenhouse gases in the atmosphere to a level where it will not interfere with climate change.
According to the Kyoto Protocol, for each of the different Green Houses Gases caused by
human action there was going to be different level of reduction in the emission. They targeted
four greenhouse gases that is carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and sulphur
hexafluoride and two groups of gases, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and perfluorocarbons
(PFCs). The six GHG are translated into CO2 equivalents in determining reductions in
emissions (Depledge 2000). The DOHA amendment added one more GHG which is nitrogen
trifloride. The Paris Agreement, reached an understanding that they should hold the increase
in the global average temperature to well below 2 degrees. Nevertheless the parties lacked
consensus on GHGs reduction rates. Liverman (2008,279) asserts that, the European Union
wanted to make provisions for its member states that some are allowed to increase their
emissions while others decreased their emissions. Countries that had supported differentiation
of targets had different ideas as to how it should be calculated, and many different indicators
were proposed such as the differences in Gross Domestic Product and the differences in
energy use per unit of economic output

Furthermore, global consultations have been pivotal in providing scientific literature and
reports that are influential to keep the world focused on climate change. For instance,
scientific research from the Conference of parties (COP), Meeting of Parties (MOP) and
IPCC reports suggests that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions will cause
global average temperatures to rise by 1.4 – 5.8°C by the end of the century (UN 2001,3).
This increase in temperature will affect weather patterns, water resources, the cycling of the
seasons, ecosystems and extreme climate events. There is ample evidence to show that
temperatures are rising, for example the melting of mountain glaciers and Arctic and
Antarctic sea-ice; reduced ice cover on lakes and rivers; and changes in the arrival and
departure dates of migratory birds (Watson 2001). Proof of increasing greenhouse gases is
measurable that is the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2) has increased by
31% since 1750. The current rate of increase is unprecedented during at least the past 20,000
years. Each decade since the 1970s has been warmer than the decade before it, and 9 of the
10 warmest years on record have been recorded since 2000. However though these global
consultations provide literature on climate change, some scientists have denied the
underlying science associated with global warming for instance in Russia’s Academy of
Sciences disapproved the Kyoto Protocol arguing that it has no scientific justification hence
making it difficult to fully implement the protocol. Some scientist are skeptical of the
underlying science associated with global warming and say there is no real evidence that
Earth’s surface temperature is rising due to human activity (Rahmstorf 2004,76). For
instance in Russia’s Academy of Sciences called the Russian government's decision to
approve the Kyoto Protocol arguing that it has no scientific justification. This involves denial,
dismissal, or contrarian views which strongly depart from the scientific opinion on climate
change, including the extent that it is caused by humans, its impacts on nature. This small
group of scientists did not present their views on scientist community but rather in public
statements or the media. They continued to air their views for example in the December 1995
article The Heat is On: The warming of the world's climate sparks a blaze of denial, (Watson
2000,55). Thus one can argue that the role of global consultations to curb climate change
remains futile

The global consultations on climate change such as the IPCC assess scientific information
relevant to human induced climate change, the impacts of human induced climate change,
options for adaptation and mitigation and their main goal is to communicate IPCC assessment
findings and methodologies by providing clear and balanced information on climate change
including scientific uncertainties without compromising accuracy. The IPCC reports and
enable policy makers to make sound decisions, helps in preparation of guidelines on
prevention on the emissions of greenhouse effects, partake in awareness on the implication on
climate change, put in place penalties to local industries that emit greenhouse gases, serves as
foundation for international collective efforts to combat climate change and assesses the
vulnerability of socio-economic and natural systems to climate change negative and positive
consequences of climate change and options for adapting to it. However the IPCC
underestimate dangers and understate risks of global warming due to the absence of
specialised team with educated scientific researches. Scientists who participate in the IPCC
assessment process do so without any compensation other than the normal salaries they
receive from their home countries. The process is labour intensive, diverting time and
resources from participating scientist’s research programs concerns have been raised that
large uncompensated time commitment and disruption to their own research may discourage
qualified scientists to participate and this may compromise accuracy of the information they
produce.

In the same vein, assessments on climate change by the IPCC, drawing on the works of
scientists have enabled policymakers to make sound decisions based on reports they produce.
It should be noted that the IPCC prepares comprehensive assessment reports based on
gathered information from scientists and technical knowledge on climate change. These
reports analyse the causes, impacts and potential risks associated with climate change. In so
doing, this international body provides practical guidelines for both responsive strategies and
greenhouse inventions. According to Paulsen (2011) the goal of assessments made by the
IPCC is to inform international policy and negotiations on climate change related issues. For
example, the significantly strengthened second assessment report along with special materials
on the implications of various potential consequences provided key input into the
negotiations that led to the adoption of the Kyoto protocol. The IPCC reports have also been
influential in the outcome of the Berlin Mandate that set out terms for the negotiation process
that produced binding commitments for industrial countries to reduce their carbon-monoxide
emissions. However, the IPCC produces out-dated reports due to the fact that it does not
carry out its own research. It operates on the basis of scientific papers and independently
documented results from other scientific bodies. Its schedule for producing reports requires a
deadline for submissions prior to the reports final release. In principle this means that any
evidence or events that change the understanding of climate science between this deadline
and publication of an IPCC report cannot be included. For instance according to Richardson
(2010) the forth Assessment report was out of date and it omitted recent observations and
factors contributing to global warming such as greenhouse gases from thawing tundra. Thus
the IPCC is not able to attain its goal of producing accurate information on climate change.

In the light of the above, the works of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) have helped shed more light on the various aspects of climate change and its
implications for sustainable development. For example, the international body has provided
for a definition of climate change and made the global public aware of its impacts. In some
sense, the works carried out by the IPCC have brought an understanding on climate change.
According to Richardson (1999; 134) the IPCC was established under the auspices of the
UNEP for the purpose of assessing gathered information by scientists. This knowledge is
disseminated to both governments and people for better understanding. In this regard impacts
of climate change on the environments and the people are revealed and used for the
development of adaptation strategies as well as prevention measures. However, the IPCC is
also not able to attain its goals as the process was instigated by politicians and UN
bureaucrats who misrepresented what they were trying to accomplish. They use science and
scientists to achieve policy and political goals thus scientists are not in charge. Kolstad (200)
propounds that governments and not science academies nominate individual scientists to help
write IPCC reports thus thousands of individuals are nominated hundreds are chosen to be
lead authors and when a big IPCC meeting takes place, it is attended by governments
although some people in the room are scientists the vast majority are bureaucrats, politicians,
foreign affairs specialists such that the meeting will become a talk show. These people would
spend another week re-writing the summary authored by scientists thus they use the IPCC to
further their goals hence hindering the attainment of the IPCC goals.

From the above discussion one may argue that the global consultations effort to curb climate
change have been futile. These global consultations implemented strategies such as the
compliance system, building of member states alliance, contacting of regular meetings. It
facilitates the development and deployment of technologies that can help increase resilience
to the impacts of climate change, they review reports and these are influential in changing
the global opinion about climate change, they educate the masses on adaptation and
mitigation strategies to climate change, provides scientific literature on climate change which
is published not only at the global level in international journals in English ,but also in
national journals and in many languages, they have also lay the foundations of measures that
are needed to counteract climate change, they have also made significant efforts in looking at
future effects of climate change. Nevertheless, these global consultations have not been so
successful in their strategies on climate change, as climate change can be described as a
tragedy of the common, -an economic theory propounded by Hardin-. The global
consultations have encountered some challenges, notably their meeting have been reduced to
talk shows, lack of support from hegemonic states due to its bipolar composition, it has
created dependency syndrome among the third world countries, as shall be discussed in this
presentation.
References

Bashmakov, I. et al.,(2001). "6. Policies, Measures, and Instruments", Executive summary, in

IPCC TAR WG3

Davenport, C (12 December 2015). "Nations Approve Landmark Climate Accord in Paris".
The New York Times.

Depledge, J. (2000), United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)

Technical paper: Tracing the Origins of the Kyoto Protocol: An Article-by-Article Textual
History (PDF), UNFCCC.

European Environment Agency (EEA) (15 November 2005), Kyoto burden-sharing targets
for EU-15 countries - EEA, EEA

Figueres, C. (2012), "Environmental issues: Time to abandon blame-games and become

proactive - Economic Times", The Economic Times / Indiatimes.com, Times Internet,

Government of Japan (28 March 2008), Kyoto Protocol Target Achievement Plan
(Provisional Translation) (PDF), Tokyo, Japan: Ministry of the Environment, Government of
Japan, pp. 
Grubb, M. (2004). "Kyoto and the Future of International Climate Change Responses: From
Here to Where?" (PDF). International Review for Environmental Strategies. 5 (1):

Gupta, S.; et al. (2007). "13.3.1 Evaluations of existing climate change agreements. In (book
chapter): Policies, instruments, and co-operative arrangements.

Hourcade, J.-C.; et al. (2001). "Where Flexibility"". In B. Metz; et al. 8. Global, Regional,
and National Costs and Ancillary Benefits of Mitigation. Climate Change 2001: Mitigation.
A Contribution of Working Group III to the Third Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press.

Jacques, P.; Dunlap, R; Freeman R. "The organisation of denial: Conservative think tanks and
environmental scepticism". Environmental Politics.

Karl, T.R.; et al., eds. (2009). "Global climate change". Global Climate Change Impacts in
the United States. 32 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University
Press.

Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change: Annex B".
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. . Retrieved 1 April 2017.

Levin, K.; Bradley, R. (2010), Working Paper: Comparability of Annex I Emission

Reduction Pledges (PDF), Washington DC, USA: World Resources Institute.

Lewandowsky, S; Oberauer, K (2013). NASA Faked the Moon Landing—Therefore,

(Climate) Science Is a Hoax". Psychological Science. Sage Publications. 24 (5).

Liverman, D. M. (2008). Conventions of climate change: constructions of danger and the

dispossession of the atmosphere (PDF). Journal of Historical Geography. 35 (2): 279–296.
doi:10.1016/j.jhg.2008.08.008. Retrieved 1 April 2017.

Meehl, G. A.; et al. (2007). FAQ 10.3 If Emissions of Greenhouse Gases are Reduced, How
Quickly do Their Concentrations in the Atmosphere Decrease?

Metz; et al. (2007). Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to
the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Print
version: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, and New York, N.Y., U.S.A.. This
version: IPCC website. Retrieved 2 April 2017.

Rahmstorf, S., 2004, The climate sceptics: Weather Catastrophes and Climate Change—Is
There Still Hope For Us? Munich: PG Verlag.

Solomon, S.; et al. (2007). Global Climate Projections. Climate Change 2007: The Physical
Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press.

"Status of ratification". UNFCC Homepage. Retrieved 1 April 2017.

The Pentagon & Climate Change: How Deniers Put National Security at Risk". Rolling
Stone. 2015.

Toth, F. L.; et al., (2001). Decision-making Frameworks, 10.4.4. Where Should the
Response Take Place? The Relationship between Domestic Mitigation and the Use of
International Mechanisms, in IPCC TAR WG3 2001

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) (2011), Kyoto

Protocol, UNFCCC

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. (1997) United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change. Retrieved 1 April 2017.

US National Research Council (2001). "Summary". Climate Change Science: An Analysis of

Some Key Questions. Washington, D.C., U.S.A.: National Academy Press.

Watson, Ian R. Noble, Bert Bolin, N. H. Ravindranath, David J. Verardo and David J.
Dokken (editors), (2000), Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Special Report on
Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry, Cambridge University Press, UK

Watson, R.T.; the Core Writing Team. Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report. A
Contribution of Working Groups I, II, and III to the Third Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Cambridge University Press.
World Bank (2008), Development and Climate Change: A Strategic Framework for the
World Bank Group: Technical Report, Washington, DC, USA: The International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank.

The IPCC, 2001. Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report Summary forPolicymakers