Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Future Climate Regime: A Regional Comparison of Proposals

  • Published:
International Environmental Agreements Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper compares and clarifies differences revealed in proposals from different regions on a future multilateral climate regime, after the year 2012. More than 100 articles in English were collected, categorized according to the lead author’s region, and then reviewed to identify the general tendencies of each region. Proposals on emission allocation rules were the most popular in Europe, while rules related to international emissions trading dominated proposals from the United States. Few articles came from other Annex I countries, but these generally provided only the most basic aspects of a future regime. Meanwhile, concerns for equity and the relevance of any new regime in terms of sustainable development were clear in proposals from non-Annex I countries. Differences among regions were considered to be a reflection of current circumstances in each author’s region. The capacity and culture of authors in some regions were considered to be other possible factors in differences. The paper concludes that recognition of regional background that formulate respective preferences and concerns regarding a future climate regime will be important to help reach a multilateral agreement in future official negotiations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

CDM:

Clean Development Mechanism

UNFCCC:

United Nations Frame- Convention on Climate Change

References

  • A. Agarwal (2001) Making the Kyoto Protocol Work Center for Science and Environment New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  • A. Agarwal S. Narain (1998) The Atmospheric Rights of All People on Earth CSE Statement, Centre for Science and Environment New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  • C. Albin (2002) ‘Getting to Fairness Matters: Negotiations over Public Goods’ K. Inge (Eds) Providing Global Public Goods: Managing Globalization. Oxford University Press New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Aldy, J., S. Barrett and R. Stavins (2003a), ‘Thirteen Plus One: A Comparison Of Global Climate Policy Architectures’, Regulatory Policy Program Working Paper RPP-2003-04.

  • J. Aldy R. Baron L. Tubiana (2003b) ‘Addressing Cost: the Political Economy of Climate Change’, a working draft for Pew Center ed., Beyond Kyoto: Advancing the International Effort against Climate Change Pew Center Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Argentine Republic (1998), A proposal at COP4 from Argentine Republic on voluntary participation of non-Annex B countries.

  • J. Ashton X. Wang (2003) ‘Equity and Climate: in Principle and Practice’, a working draft for Pew Center ed., Beyond Kyoto: Advancing the International Effort against Climate Change Pew Center Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • M.A. Aslam (2002) ‘Equal Per Capita Entitlements: A Key to Global Participation on Climate Change?’ K. Baumert O. Blanchard S. Llosa J. Perkaus (Eds) Building a Climate of Trust: The Kyoto Protocol and Beyond World Resources Institute Washington DC 175–202

    Google Scholar 

  • D. Austin J. Goldemberg G. Parker (1998) Contributions to Climate Change: Are Conventional Metrics Misleading the Debate? World Resources Institute Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • C. Azar (1998) ArticleTitle‘The timing of CO2 emissions reduction–the debate revisited’ International Journal of Environmental Pollution 10 508–521

    Google Scholar 

  • C. Azar S.H. Schneider (2002) ArticleTitleAre the costs of stabilising the atmosphere prohibitive? Ecological Economics 42 73–80

    Google Scholar 

  • Babiker, M. J. and R. S. Eckaus (2000), Rethinking the Kyoto Emission Targets, MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Report No. 65.

  • P. Baer J. Harte B. Haya A.V. Herzog N.E. Hultman D.M. Kammen R.B. Norgaard L. Raymond (␣) ArticleTitle‘Equity and Greenhouse Gas Responsibility’ Science 289 2287

    Google Scholar 

  • T. Banuri J. P. Weyant (2001) ‘Setting the Stage: Climate Change and Sustainable Development’ B. Metz O. Davidson R. Swart J. Pan (Eds) Climate Change 2001: Mitigation, Contribution of WG III to the Third Assessment Report of the IPCC Cambridge University Press Cambridge 73–114

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, S. (2001), ‘Towards a Better Climate Treaty’, Opinion Pieces, AEI-Brookings Joint Center.

  • S. Barrett (2003) Environment and Statecraft: The Strategy of Environmental Treaty-making Oxford University Press New York

    Google Scholar 

  • U. Bartsch B. Müller (2000) ‘Detailed analysis of the global compromise regime’, in: Fossil Fuels in a Changing Climate–Impacts of the Kyoto Protocol and Developing Country Participation Oxford University Press Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • K.A. Baumert R. Bhandari N. Kete (1999) ‘What might a developing country climate commitment look like?’ Climate Note World Resources Institute Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • K.A. Baumert J. Perkaus N. Kete (2003) ArticleTitle‘Great Expectations: Can International Emissions Trading Deliver an Equitable Climate regime?’ Climate Policy 3 IssueID2 137–148

    Google Scholar 

  • Benedick, R. (2001), ‘Striking a New Deal on Climate Change’, Issues in Science and Technology On Line, Fall 2001.

  • M.M. Berk M.G.J. den Elzen (1998) ArticleTitle‘The Brazilian Protocol evaluated’ CHANGE 44 19–23

    Google Scholar 

  • M.M. Berk M.G.J. den Elzen (2001) ArticleTitle‘Options for differentiation of future commitments in climate policy: how to realize timely participation to meet stringent climate goals?’ Climate Policy 1 465–480

    Google Scholar 

  • Biermann, F. and R. Brohm (2003), Implementing the Kyoto Protocol Without the United States. Global Governance Working Paper No. 5.

  • O. Blanchard (2002) ‘Scenarios for Differentiating Commitments: A Quantitative Analysis’ A. Baumert O. Blanchard S. Llosa J.F. Perkaus (Eds) Building on the Kyoto Protocol: Options for Protecting the Climate World Resources Institute Washington DC 203–222

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanchard, O., P. Criqui, M. Trommetter and L. Viguier (2001), Equity and efficiency in climate change negotiations: a scenario for world emission entitlements by 2030, Cahier de Recherche no. 26, Institut d’ Economic et de Politique de I’ Energie (IEPE), Grenoble.

  • Bodansky, D. (2002), ‘U.S. Climate Policy After Kyoto: Elements for Success’, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Policy Brief 15, April 2002.

  • D. Bodansky (2003) ‘Climate Commitments: Assessing the Options’, a working draft for Pew Center ed., Beyond Kyoto: Advancing the International Effort against Climate Change Pew Center Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • P. Bohm (2002) ArticleTitle‘Improving Cost-effectiveness and Facilitating Participation of Developing Countries in International Emissions Trading’, International Environmental Agreements: Politics Law and Economics 2 IssueID3 261–273

    Google Scholar 

  • C. Böhringer (1999) ArticleTitle‘Cooling Down Hot Air: A Global CGE Analysis of Post-Kyoto Carbon Abatement Strategies’ Energy Policy 28 779–789

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradford, D. (2001), Succeeding Kyoto: A No Cap But Trade Approach to Greenhouse Gas Control. A paper version 05 prepared for inclusion in the conference “International Climate Policy after COP6” in Hamburg, Germany.

  • Bradford, D. (2002), ‘Improving on Kyoto: Greenhouse Gas Control as the Purchase of a Global Public Good’, Princeton University Working Paper, April 30, 2002 draft.

  • Brazil (1997), Proposed elements of a protocol to the United Nations framework convention on climate change. Presented by Brazil in Response to the Berlin Mandate. FCCC/AGBM/1997/MISC.1/Add.3.

  • Buchner, B. (2001), Climate Policy and Modelling–The Way Forward Presentation at Workshop on “International Climate Policy after COP6” HWWA, Hamburg, September 24 – 26, 2001, a powerpoint handout.

  • J. Byrne Y. Wang H. Lee J. Kim (1998) ArticleTitle‘An equity – and sustainability – based policy response to global climate change’ Energy Policy 26 IssueID4 335–343

    Google Scholar 

  • Center for Clean Air Policy (2002), Summary of Discussion, Meeting of the Dialogue on Future International Climate Change Commitments 8 – 10 October 2002, Brussels, Belgium.

  • Charnovitz (2003) ‘Trade and Climate: Potential Conflicts and Synergies’, a working draft for Pew Center ed., Beyond Kyoto: Advancing the International Effort against Climate Change Pew Center Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y. and J. Pan (2002), Equity Concerns over Climate Change Mitigation, Global Change and Economic Development Program, CASS Working Paper Series.

  • Claussen, E. and L. McNeilly (1998), Equity & Global Climate Change: the Complex Elements of Global Fairness, Pew Center on Global Climate Change.

  • R. Cooper (1998) ArticleTitle‘Toward a Real Treaty on Global Warming’ Foreign Affairs 77 IssueID2 66–79

    Google Scholar 

  • R. Cooper (2000) ArticleTitle‘International Approaches to Global Climate Change’ World Bank Research Observer 15 IssueID2 145–172

    Google Scholar 

  • CSE (1998), Definitions of equal entitlements, CSE-dossier, fact sheet 5, Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), Delhi, India.

  • M. Den Elzen M. Schaeffer (2002) ArticleTitle‘Responsibility for past and future global warming: uncertainties in attributing anthropogenic climate change’ Climatic Change 54 29–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Den Elzen, M., M. Berk, S. Both, A. Faber and R. Oostenrijk (2000), FAIR 1.0 (Framework to Assess International Regimes for differentiation of commitments): An interactive model to explore options for differentiation of future commitments in international climate policy making. User Documentation. RIVM Report No. 728001013, National Institute of Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.

  • J. Depledge (2002) ‘Continuing Kyoto: Extending Absolute Emission Caps to Developing Countries’ K.A. Baumert O. Blanchard S. Llosa J.F. Perkaus (Eds) Building on the Kyoto Protocol: Options for Protecting the Climate World Resources Institute Washington DC 31–60

    Google Scholar 

  • B. de Vries J. Bollen L. Bouwman M. den Elzen M. Janssen E. Kreileman (2000) ArticleTitle‘Greenhouse gas emissions in equity-, environment- and service-oriented world: an IMAGE-based scenario for the 21st century’ Technology Forecasting Societal Change 63 137–174

    Google Scholar 

  • J. Edmonds M. Wise (1999) ‘Exploring a Technology Strategy for stabilising atmospheric CO2 C. Carraro (Eds) International Environment Agreements on Climate Change. Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellerman, A. D. and I. S. Wing (2003) Absolute vs. Intensity Based Emission Caps, MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Report No. 100, July 2003.

  • M. Faure J. Gupta A. Nentjes (2003) ‘Key Instrumental and Institutional Design Issues in Climate Change Policy’ M. Faure J. Gupta A. Nentjes (Eds) Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol – the Role of Institutions and Instruments to Control Global Change Edward Elgar Cheltenham 3–24

    Google Scholar 

  • M.L.G. Filho M. Miguez (1998) Time dependent relationship between emissions of greenhouse gases and climate change Ministry of Science and Technology Brasilia, Brazil

    Google Scholar 

  • Global Commons Institute (2002), The Detailed Ideas and Algorithms Behind Contraction and Convergence. Global Common Institute.

  • H. Groenenberg D. Phylipsen K. Blok (2001) ArticleTitle‘Differentiating Commitments World Wide: Global Differentiation of GHG Emissions Reductions Based on the Triptych Approach – A Preliminary Assessment’ Energy Policy 29 IssueID12 1007–1030

    Google Scholar 

  • Grubb, M., J. C. Hourcade and S. Oberthür (2001), Keeping Kyoto, Climate Strategies Report.

  • M. Grubb C. Hope R. Fourquet (2002) ArticleTitle‘Climatic Implications of the Kyoto Protocol: The contribution of International Spillover’ Climatic Change 54 11–28

    Google Scholar 

  • J. Gupta (2001) Our Simmering Planet: What to do About Global Warming? Zed Publishers London

    Google Scholar 

  • S. Gupta P. M. Bhandari (1999) ArticleTitle‘An Effective Allocation Criterion for CO2 Emissions’ Energy Policy 27 727–736

    Google Scholar 

  • R. Hahn (1998) The Economic and Politics of Climate Change American Enterprise Institute Press Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • T. Heller P.R. Shukla (2003) ‘Development and Climate: Engaging Developing Countries’ a working draft for Pew Center ed., Beyond Kyoto: Advancing the International Effort against Climate Change. Pew Center Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Höhne, N., C. Galleguillos, K. Blok, J. Harnisch and D. Phylipsen (2003), Evolution of commitments under the UNFCCC: Involving newly industrialized economies and developing countries, Environmental Research of the Federal Ministry of the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety, Germany, Research Report 20141255.

  • Hourcade, J. C. and F. Ghersi (2002), The Economics of a Lost Deal, Working Paper, CIRED.

  • J. Ikenberry (2002) ArticleTitle‘America’s Imperial Ambition’ Foreign Affairs 81 IssueID5 44–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, H. D. and A. D. Ellerman (2002), The ‘Safety Valve’ and Climate Policy, MIT Report No. 83, MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change.

  • Jacoby, H. D., R. Schmalensee and I. S. Wing (1999), Towards a workable architecture for climate change negotiations. MIT Report No. 49, MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change.

  • Jansen, J. C., J. J. Bttjes, F. T. Ormel, J. P. M. Sijm, C. H. Volkers, J. R. Ybema, A. Torvanger, L. Ringius and A. Underdal (2001), Sharing the burden of greenhouse gas mitigation, Final report of the joint CICERO-ECN project on the global differentiation of emissions mitigation targets among countries, Center for International Climate and Environmental Research Norway (CICERO) and the Energy Research Center of the Netherlands (ECN), May 2001.

  • Kagan, R. (2002), ‘Power and Weakness: Why the United States and Europe See the World Differently’, Policy Review No. 113, http://www.policyreview.org/JUN02/kagan.html.

  • Kemfert, C., E. Haites and F. Missfeldt (2002), Can Kyoto Protocol Parties Induce the United States to Adopt a More Stringent Greenhouse Gas Emissions Target? A paper presented at Workshop on Global Trading, Kiel Institute for World Economics, September 30th – October 1, 2002.

  • Y. Kim K. Baumert (2002) ‘Reducing Uncertainty Through Dual-Intensity Targets’ K. Baumert O. Blanchard S. Llosa J. Perkaus (Eds) Building a Climate of Trust: The Kyoto Protocol and Beyond World Resources Institute Washington DC 109–134

    Google Scholar 

  • Kopp, R., R. Morgenstern, W. Pizer and M. Toman (1999), ‘A Proposal for Credible Early Action in U.S. Climate Policy’, Weathervane Feature Feb. 1999.

  • M. Lisowski (2002) ArticleTitle‘The Emperor’s New Clothes: Redressing the Kyoto Protocol’ Climate Policy 2 IssueID(2 – 3) 161–177

    Google Scholar 

  • R. Lutter (2000) ArticleTitle‘Developing Countries’ Greenhouse Emissions: Uncertainty and Implications for Participation in the Kyoto Protocol’ The Energy Journal 21 IssueID4 93–120

    Google Scholar 

  • McKibbin, W. J. (2000), ‘Moving beyond Kyoto’. Brookings Policy Brief No. 66, The Brookings Institution.

  • B. Metz (2000) ArticleTitle‘International Equity in Climate Change Policy’ Integrated Assessment 1 111–126

    Google Scholar 

  • B. Metz M. Berk M. den Elzen B. de Vries D. Vuuren Particlevan (2002) ArticleTitle‘Towards an equitable global climate change regime: compatibility with Article 2 of the Climate Change Convention and the link with sustainable development’ Climate Policy 2 211–230

    Google Scholar 

  • A. Meyer (2000) ‘Contraction and Convergence – The Global Solution to Climate Change. Global Commons Institute’, Schumacher Briefing No. 5. Green Books Devon, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Michaelowa, A. (2003), Graduation and Deepening: A Suggestion to Move International Climate Policy Forward, SB 18 Side Event “Developing a post-Kyoto architecture” Bonn July 12, 2003 presentation handout.

  • Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, Japan (2003), Perspectives and Actions to Construct a Future Sustainable Framework on Climate Change, an interim report (draft), Global Environmental Subcommittee Environmental Committee Industrial Structure Council, METI.

  • Ministry of the Environment, Japan (2003), Climate Regime beyond 2012: Basic Considerations Interim Report (draft), Global Environment Committee, Japan’s Central Environment Council, MOE.

  • Müller, B., A. Michaelowa and C. Vrolijk (2001), Rejecting Kyoto: A Study of Proposed Alternatives to the Kyoto Protocol. Climate Strategies Report.

  • Müller, B., J. Drexhage, M. Grubb, A. Michaelowa and A. Sharma (2003) Framing Future Commitments: A Pilot Study on the Evolution of the UNFCCC Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Regime, Oxford Institute for Energy Studies EV 32.

  • A. Najam S. Huq Y. Sokona (2003) ArticleTitle‘Climate negotiations beyond Kyoto: Developing Countries Concerns and Interest’ Climate Policy 3 221–231

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordhaus, W. (2001), After Kyoto: Alternative Mechanisms to Control Global Warming. paper prepared for a joint session of the American Economic Association and the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, Atlanta Georgia.

  • B.C. O’Neill M. Oppenheimer (2002) ArticleTitle‘Dangerous Climate Impacts and the Kyoto Protocol’ Science 296 IssueID5575 1971

    Google Scholar 

  • H. Ott W. Sachs (2000) Ethical Aspects of Emissions Trading Wuppertal Papers Germany

    Google Scholar 

  • J. Pan (2003) ArticleTitle‘Emissions Rights and their Transferability, Equity Concerns over Climate Change Mitigation’ International Environmental Agreements: PoliticsLaw and Economics 3 1–16

    Google Scholar 

  • J. Pershing F. Tudela (2003) ‘A Long-Term Target: Framing the Climate Effort’, a working draft for Pew Center ed., Beyond Kyoto: Advancing the International Effort against Climate Change Pew Center Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • G. J. M. Phylipsen J. W. Bode K. Blok H. Merkus B. Metz (1998) ArticleTitle‘A Triptych Sectoral Approach to Burden Sharing Greenhouse Gas Emissions in European Bubble’ Energy Policy 26 929–943

    Google Scholar 

  • W. Pizer (1999) ‘Choosing Price or Quantity Controls for Greenhouse Gases’, Climate Issues Brief No.17. Resources for the Future Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • W. Pizer (2002) ArticleTitle‘Combining Price and Quantity Controls to Mitigate Global Climate Change’ Journal of Public Economics 85 409–434

    Google Scholar 

  • W. Reid J. Goldemberg (1998) ArticleTitle‘Developing Countries are Combating Climate Change’ Energy Policy 26 IssueID3 233–237

    Google Scholar 

  • L. Ringius A. Torvanger B. Holtsmark (1998) ArticleTitle‘Can Multi-Criteria Rules Fairly Distribute Climate Burdens? OECD results from three burden sharing rules’ Energy Policy 26 IssueID10 777–793

    Google Scholar 

  • L. Ringius A. Torvanger A. Underdal (2000) Burden Differentiation: Fairness Principles and Proposals CICERO Oslo

    Google Scholar 

  • A. Rose B. Stevens J. Edmonds M. Wise (1998) ArticleTitle‘International Equity and Differentiation in Global Warming Policy’ Environmental and Resources Economics 12 25–51

    Google Scholar 

  • A. D. Sagar (2000) ArticleTitle‘Wealth, Responsibility, and Equity: Exploring an Allocation Framework for Global GHG Emissions’ Climatic Change 45 IssueID3 – 4 511–527

    Google Scholar 

  • J. Samaniego C. Figueres (2002) ‘Evolving to a Sector-Based Clean Development Mechanism’ K. Baumert O. Blanchard S. Llosa J. Perkaus (Eds) Building a Climate of Trust:The Kyoto Protocol and Beyond World Resources Institute Washington DC 89–108

    Google Scholar 

  • A. P. Sari (1998) On Equity and Developing Country Participation Energy and Resources Group, University of California, Berkeley Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • T. Schelling (2002) ArticleTitle‘What Makes Greenhouse Sense? Time to Rethink the Kyoto Protocol’ Foreign Affairs 81 IssueID3 2–9

    Google Scholar 

  • R. Schmalensee (1998) ‘Greenhouse Gas Policy Architecture and Institutions’ W.D. Nordhaus (Eds) Economics and Policy Issues in Climate Change Resources for the Future Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, S. and C. Azar (2001), ‘Are Uncertainties in Climate and Energy Systems a Justification for Stronger Near-term Mitigation Policies?’ a paper prepared for the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, October 2001.

  • J. Sijm J. C. Jansen A. Tovanger (2001) ArticleTitle‘Differentiation of mitigation commitments: the multi-sector convergence approach’ Climate Policy 1 IssueID4 481–497

    Google Scholar 

  • R. N. Stavins (2001) ‘Economic Analysis of Global Climate Change Policy: A Primer’ E. Claussen V. A. Cochran D. P. Davis (Eds) Climate ChangeScience, Strategies, and Solutions. Brill Publishing Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • R.Stewart and J. Wiener (2001), ‘Reconstructing Climate Policy: The Paths Ahead’, Opinion Pieces, AEI-Brookings Joint Center.

  • R. Stewart J. Wiener (2003) Reconstructing Climate Policy Beyond Kyoto The AEI Press Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Sokona, Y., A. Najam and S. Huq (2002), ‘Climate Change and Sustainable Development: View from the South’,Opinion: World Summit on Sustainable DevelopmentIIED.

  • Sugiyama, T. (2003), Orchestra of Treaties: Scenario for After 2012, SB 18 Side Event “Developing a post-Kyoto architecture” Bonn July 12, 2003 presentation handout.

  • Swedish Environmental Protection Agency (2002), Kyoto and Beyond: Issues and Options in the Global Response to Climate Change. Stockholm.

  • Tangen, K. and H. Hasselknippe (2003), Linking Treaties to Expand the Market, SB 18 Side Event “Developing a Post-Kyoto architecture” Bonn July 12, 2003 presentation handout.

  • R. Tol (2001) ArticleTitle‘Equitable Cost-Benefit Analysis of Climate Change Policies’ Ecological Economics 36 71–85

    Google Scholar 

  • M. Toman (2000) ‘Moving ahead with Climate Policy’, Climate Change Issues Brief No 26. Resources For the Future Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • A. Torvanger L. Ringius (2002) ArticleTitle‘Criteria for Evaluation of Burden-Sharing Rules in International Climate Policy’ International Environmental Agreements Politics, Law and Economics 2 IssueID3 221–235

    Google Scholar 

  • O. Tynkkynen (2000) Framework for Fair Shares – Equity in Burden Sharing Friends of the Earth Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • D.G. Victor (1999) ‘The Regulation of Greenhouse Gases: Does Fairness Matter?’ F.L. Toth (Eds) Fair Weather? Equity Concerns in Climate Change Earthscan London 193–206

    Google Scholar 

  • D. G. Victor (2001) The Collapse of the Kyoto Protocol and the Struggle to Slow Global Warming Princeton University Press Council on Foreign Relations. Princeton, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • J. Wiener (1999) ArticleTitle‘Global Environmental Regulation: Instrument Choice in a Legal Context’ Yale Law Journal 108 IssueID4 677–800

    Google Scholar 

  • White House 2002 U.S A New Approach, Policy Briefing Book. Washington DC, 14 FebruaryClimate Strategy

  • T. Wigley R. Richels J. Edmonds (1996) ArticleTitleEconomic and Environmental Choices in the Stabilization of Atmospheric CO2Concentrations Nature 379 240–243

    Google Scholar 

  • H. Winkler R. Spalding-Fecher S. Mwakasonda O. Davidson (2002) ‘Sustainable Development Policies and Measures: Starting From Development to Tackle Climate Change’ K Baumert O. Blanchard S. Llosa J. Perkaus (Eds) Building a Climate of Trust The Kyoto Protocol and Beyond World Resources Institute Washington DC 61–87

    Google Scholar 

  • J. R. Ybema J. J. Battjes J. C. Jansen F. T. Ormel (2000) Burden Differentiation: GHG Emissions, Undercurrents and Mitigation Costs CICERO Oslo, ECN-C-00-012. Norway

    Google Scholar 

  • P. Zhou (2001) ArticleTitle‘North-South Dialogue’ Global Warming and the Third World 40/41 1–7

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Institute for Environmental Studies, 16-2 Onogawa, 305-8506, Tsukuba, Japan

    Yasuko Kameyama

Authors
  1. Yasuko Kameyama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yasuko Kameyama.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kameyama, Y. The Future Climate Regime: A Regional Comparison of Proposals. Int Environ Agreements 4, 307–326 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-004-5457-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-004-5457-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation