Climate treaty creates atmosphere for reform
Intensive talks preceding the June 1992 Rio Earth Summit allowed participating nations to air their differences before formally sitting down to the negotiating table to hammer out the provisions of the Climate Convention. {open_quotes}The most prominent division...focused on the the question of which nations were most responsible for the greenhouse-gas problem and thus which nations should bear the costs of controlling emissions,{close_quotes} says Peter M. Morrisette, a research consultant on the human dimensions of global environmental change. While developing nations in the South balked at calls for reducing greenhouse-gas emissions, many European nations called for specific reduction targets and timetables. Additional differences were revealed when the United States refused when the United States refused to accept {open_quotes}specific targets and timetables for emission reductions in the final treaty,{close_quotes} Morrisette says. However, with the differences among nations openly discussed, the Climate Convention was able to provide a strong institutional framework for continued negotiations, Morrisette says.
- OSTI ID:
- 457139
- Journal Information:
- Forum for Applied Research and Public Policy, Vol. 11, Issue 2; Other Information: PBD: Sum 1996
- Country of Publication:
- United States
- Language:
- English
Similar Records
Joint implementation: Biodiversity and greenhouse gas offsets
Figuring out the climate for change