Research On Post-Kyoto International Legal Solution To Global Climate Change

By reducing greenhouse gas emissions in response to global climate change hasbecome a consensus of the international community. The Kyoto Protocol had expiredin the end of2012. Although it was criticized by many defects, it can’t be denied thatmany of its concept and reasonable design are correct. Where the human’s carbonemissions route shall be in Post-Kyoto era and how to design the model assignresponsibility between the developed countries, between developed countries anddeveloping countries, these questions must be answered in the next legal scheme ofinternational climate change. Focusing on the question, developed countries camp anddeveloping countries camp both have put forward proposals. Emission reductionobligations for the large developing countries after2012will be a focus of academicdiscussion and international negotiations.Post-kyoto international legal solution of climate change is related theory ofinternational law and reality of international environment: First, from Rawls justiceview definition, the current, in fact, there is not a global climate justice which isrecognized by the international community; but from a realistic view, it can bedefined as a kind of relative global climate justice that countries make every effort tocut greenhouse gas emissions together on the basis of equality, voluntary andaffordable range of compromise. Second, as the international climate change solutionsis based on the necessary course of law, international negotiations on climate changeis by nature the process of state power in the climate field, specifically thelegalization of greenhouse gas emissions space. Finally, for that national sovereigntyis still the barriers international law can not radically break through, in the legalsystem design and implementation, the work should be on the basis of recognition andbased on the theoretical analysis and system design of national sovereignty.Analysis to existing proposals must be on the premise of reasonable assessmentand evaluation criteria, it shall include the following aspects: insist on the principle ofcommon but differentiated responsibility; the measure of the distribution shouldchoose national emissions rather than per capita emissions; design must conform thethree requirements of effective, efficient and compromise; the questions that were notconfigured reasonably in Kyoto period must be answered. The standard above isbased on the realism viewpoint of international law, this kind of analysis can help to judge and choose between the various design in different suggestion schemes.In view of the greenhouse gas emissions after2012, so far scholars haveproposed a variety of more than forty suggestions of international climate changeframework for the next period. According to the basic properties of these solutions,they can be divided into two types of formality solutions and content solutions. It canbe found most of existing suggestion schemes only focus on the standard ofresponsibility distribution, and very few schemes involve the performance of thesystem arrangement, financial and technical problems, supervision and accountabilityfor problems. To sum up, a post-Kyoto international climate legal solution based onrealism view of international law shall include the following aspects: First, the nextphase of the international climate agreement shall continue to adhere to the principleof common but differentiated responsibilities, pay more attention to the nationalcapacity and conditions apply principle. Negotiations should be under the frameworkof the convention, all countries should participate equally. Second, the emissionreduction obligations should combine with flexible and rigid obligations, conversionof rigid and flexible obligations can refer Swedish "greenhouse development model",which design a double-index evaluation mechanism combining historicalresponsibility and current capability. Third, as for the implementation mechanism,punitive measures supplied by incentive measures is the way more conducive to thefuture implementation of the protocol. Fourth, about funding and technical assistance,the Cancun climate conference set up "green climate fund" should be continued andperfected, this is a more fair and reasonable, low cost method to gather funds anddistribution. The clean development mechanism should be continued and increase thedrawn from profits in proportion to the taxes and fees. Technical assistance can drawlessons from American scheme of multi-track climate treaty system suggestion. Fifth,strengthen the supervision link, and setting up an independent internationalsupervision organization is a advisable suggestion, and punishment measures candraw lessons from Brazil scheme.