117Australia which agreed to have CO 2 -eq emissions in 2005 be no more than 8 % larger
than had occurred in 1990. The highest increase allowed was 10 %, for Iceland.
A few more pertinent details of the Kyoto Protocol follow. The Protocol allowed
nations to use reductions in CO 2 attributed to land use change (LUC) to meet their
commitment,^3 provided the decline in emission occurred due to direct human
induced LUC since 1990. Kyoto included three mechanisms to assist nations in
meeting their targets: Joint Implementation,^4 Clean Development,^5 and Emissions
Trading.^6 If a country or the EU15 group failed to achieve their target during the first
commitment period, which ended in 2012, two consequences ensued: a 30 %
penalty of additional emission reductions for the second commitment period, and
suspension of the ability to sell emissions trading credits. Details of the Kyoto
Protocol were continually refined at subsequent meetings of the UNFCCC COP,
held annually towards the end of the calendar year.^7
There has been so much written about the Kyoto Protocol that references hardly
seem necessary. At the time of writing, the Amazon website returns 5011 results for
a search on “Kyoto protocol” in Books. We do, however, suggest The Collapse of
the Kyoto Protocol and the Struggle to Slow Global Warming (Victor 2001 ) as a
concise and accessible account of this agreement and its subsequent amendments,
including thoughtful exposition about positive aspects of the Protocol as well as
suggestions for what could have been done better.
The Kyoto Protocol did not place restrictions on GHG emissions from develop-
ing countries (i.e., all countries not listed in Table 3.1). A sub-group of Annex I
nations, termed Annex II and consisting of Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada,
Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan,
Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden,
Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States, were tasked with
providing financial support for the development of technology to reduce GHG emis-
sions in developing countries.
At some point in time, the Kyoto Protocol had been signed and ratified by all
nations except Afghanistan, Southern Sudan, Taiwan, and the United States.^8
Canada withdrew from Kyoto in 2011, due to perceived pressure on the extraction
of bitumen from Canadian tar sands. The US Congress failed to ratify the Protocol,
(^3) The official language for LUC in the Protocol calls this land use, land-use change and forestry and
uses the abbreviation of LULUCF. Here and throughout, we use the more simple abbreviation
LUC, with recognition of the importance of forestry.
(^4) Joint implementation allowed Annex I countries to implement projects that reduce emissions or
increase natural GHG sinks in other Annex I countries; such projects could be counted towards the
emission reductions of the investing country.
(^5) Clean Development allows Annex I countries to implement projects that reduce emissions or
increase natural GHG sinks in non-Annex I countries; such projects can be counted towards the
emission reductions of the investing country.
(^6) Annex I countries could purchase emission units from other Annex I countries that found it easier
to reduce their own emissions.
(^7) A UNFCCC COP schedule is at http://unfccc.int/meetings/items/6240.php
(^8) Observer nations Andorra and Vatican City are sometimes listed as non-participants, but their
emissions are too small to matter, plus Vatican City answers to a higher authority.
3.1 Introduction