The results of the analysis, published in the Climate Policy journal, show that significant efforts, made by the EU, Japan and others countries, signed up to the Kyoto Protocol, helped them to collectively surpass their commitments. That might happen even without a rapid emissions drop in Russia, Ukraine and others as they shifted to market economies.
Of course, non-participation of the U.S. and the formal withdrawal of Canada also should be taken into account. Achieving these commitments cost less than 0.1% of GDP for the European Union and an even lower fraction of Japan’s GDP, what is between one quarter and one tenth of what many experts had initially estimated compliance would cost.
The biggest differences between the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement are the global participation in the nationally determined contributions (NDCs) under Paris Agreement, and the emphasis of legal commitments on the processes rather than outcomes, along with global goals. At the same time, similar to Kyoto, countries can offer or negotiate goals, not domestic implementation policies. The Paris Agreement’s commitment to facilitate delivery of NDCs to some extent correlates with the the Kyoto compliance mechanism. Read more at http://www.climatechangenews.com
