What are the key obstacles to an effective international agreement to limit climate change?

Name: Institution: Course: Date: Key Obstacles to an Effective International Agreement on Climate Change The issue of environmental degradation has been a global debate for decades. Presently, human activities are responsible for the increasing level of environmental degradation. Ineffective international policies have widened the existing problems of mitigating climate change and restricting greenhouse-gas emissions. However, one of the most successful models of the agreement is the Montreal Protocol meant to reduce ozone-depleting emissions. The Paris Agreement of 2015 is the most recent international treaty addressing climate change. Just like its previous agreements, the Paris agreement was characterized by deep political rife and seemingly irresolvable differences between parties. Two years later, the United States under the presidency of Donald Trump withdrew from the Paris Agreement (Zhang, et al. 20), raising questions about the development of an effective international climate change agreement. The paper analyses some of the potential obstacles to a comprehensive climate agreement and possible solutions in the long-term. The United Nations Conference on Environmental and Development (UNCED) of 1992 led to the development of various climate-related agreements including the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) (Helm, 212). UNFCCC was developed to create global awareness and effort in an attempt to solve the issue of climate change. The Kyoto Protocol (2005) issued interstate targets that bound developed countries to reduce the level of greenhouse gases they emitted into the atmosphere (Goulder and William, 10). The Kyoto Protocol was thus the initial and crucial milestone addressing the problem of climate change. It required the industrialized countries to cut down their greenhouse-gas emissions over a limited period gradually. However, the Kyoto Protocol approach had significant weaknesses and escalated the effects of climate change (Helm, 213). For example, the commitment duration given was shorter and unreasonable. The framework failed to set targets for developing countries which presented an increasing percentage of global emissions. Partial involvement of member states raised issues of competitiveness (Goulder and William, 3). Again, there was no clarity or policies that required party members to change their industrial behaviors with countries such as Canada choosing to withdraw from the Protocol to pursue its industrial targets without penalty. In the recent past, there have been mixed results from the UNFCCC framework. Various agreements have been set since then, but none achieved its objectives. The parties decided to keep global warming within or below two Celsius degrees but failed to come up with new binding national commitments. The Kyoto Protocol was thus replaced by the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action in 2011, which included all countries (developing and developed) in achieving emission reduction targets by 2020. The international agreements have attained limited success in reducing global emissions besides the increased scientific explanation and possible negative consequences of climate change. Climate negotiations require broad participation because each country has a significant contribution to the greenhouse-gas emission. When some countries control greenhouse gas emissions, their carbon levels will continue to increase as long as the other countries continue their production and consumption of carbon-rich products (Goulder and William, 6). There was limited agreement about reducing emissions of the Kyoto Protocol, and the United States failed to sign on in part due to concerns over carbon leakage. One of the key aspects of negotiation outcomes is the diverse interests of major parties. The top three global producers of greenhouse gases are the United States, China, and the European Union. If based on fairness, agreements are more likely to be successful. The UNFCCC framework advocates for common but differentiated responsibility but provides limited guidance on how to pursue fairness regarding the role of each party. The growing economies tend to decline binding emission targets provided by international climate agreements. Even with domestic-level emissions being the parameter applicable in the agreements, the debate persists with the United States and Europe asserting that China should cut down their emissions at a higher rate because it is ranked the highest emitter (Helm, 216). International climate agreements are less likely to be effective due to such issues related to fairness and equity. International climate negotiations must consider the potential impact of domestic actors that each party state prefers. The three major players in the negotiations, the United States, European Union, and China, have consistently played their roles but with domestic drivers being key issues of concern. When the European Union pushed for a more concrete agreement and guaranteed serious commitments to cut emissions, with the condition that other adhered to the same, it was pushed out of the negotiations (Schreurs and Yves, 22). At the same time, the role and contribution of the United States have been unpredictable because of its unstable domestic political ideologies. On the other hand, China believes that the burden of emission reduction should be channeled to the West. But in the recent years, China has been clear in its effort to reduce emissions by adopting various domestic policies. Such dynamics have stagnated climate negotiations and thus disrupting efforts and opportunities of developing a comprehensive agreement of mitigating climate change. The key drivers in climate negotiations are the absence of agreements over the individual states that should control their emission and lack of precise emission-cut parameters for each country. Therefore, the climate framework works by providing certain targets for controlling temperatures at the global level and greenhouse emission at the national level. Besides, the global emissions are on the rise and may exceed the set targets. Differentiated targets seem to be a hindrance to successful negotiations. ...