The Future of the Kyoto Protocol
KATO Saburo / Chairman of the Japan Association of Environment and Society for the 21st Century(JAES 21)
April 23, 2001
US President George Bush announced his opposition to the Kyoto Protocol at the end of March. His lack of interest in the global warming issue had become widely known throughout the presidential election. So his handling of this important issue upon taking office had been closely watched. Nevertheless, his decision to declare his opposition at this junction has been received with amazement in many countries.
The latest announcement is extremely regretful because this year an expert panel of the United Nations, the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), had made successive announcements concerning new findings, pointing out that the severity of global warming and the extent of its influence were much worse than previously thought.
According to the latest science, the average temperature of the earth has remained relatively constant since the Ice Age to the present day, with the change in temperatures staying under 1 degree centigrade in any given century, and even during the twentieth century - the hottest century in the past thousand years - the increase in average temperature was just 0.6 degrees. Now we are told that, over the next hundred years, average temperatures could rise by between 1.4 and 5.8 degrees centigrade, in the worst case inflicting devastating impact on the earth's ecosystem and the human race. Under such circumstances, it is incredible that the president of the United States, which continues to emit a quarter of the world's greenhouse gases, should refuse to meet its commitments citing such facts as the lack of reduction targets for developing countries that have not been a major cause of global warming until recently.
Historically, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change that forms the basis of the Kyoto Protocol was concluded at the Earth Summit nine years ago, and the man who agreed to that convention as the president of the United States was none other than President Bush's father. At the time, the then President George Bush traveled to Rio himself, and gave his support to the principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities" between developing countries and industrialized countries - in other words, that responsibility arises in accordance to the extent of contribution to the pollution. Over the two centuries since the Industrial Revolution, industrialized countries have contributed roughly 80 percent of the gases such as carbon dioxide through emissions accompanying the use of fossil fuel. And that was the reason why industrialized countries, including the United States, had agreed to take the lead in cutting emissions of greenhouse gases.
The Kyoto Protocol is only the first step taken against the serious threat posed by the certainty of global warming in the twenty-first century. The US rejection of the Kyoto Protocol to which it is a signatory is an egoistic decision unworthy of a super power and global leader. It also discredits longstanding contributions and efforts provided by US scientists and Non-Governmental Organizations.
Let us now turn to Japan. Given the future significance of global warming, when it comes to issues concerning the environment Japan shouldn't follow the United States but seek its own path based on long-term vision. Furthermore, the government should make its utmost effort for a speedy ratification of the Kyoto Protocol. Even if the United States remains reluctant to participate, Japan should forge on without the United States towards a speedy enactment of the Kyoto Protocol together with other industrialized countries.
Surely, first-rate US economists and politicians must fully realize that there is nothing to gain from delaying action against global warming. Because they are the ones who understand best that not only will costs be smaller the quicker we respond to global warming, but also that the creation of new technologies and businesses will have a revitalizing effect on society.
The writer is Chairman of the Japan Association of Environment and Society for the 21st Century(JAES 21). He was first Director General of the Global Environment Department of the Environment Agency (current Ministry of the Environment).
The latest announcement is extremely regretful because this year an expert panel of the United Nations, the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), had made successive announcements concerning new findings, pointing out that the severity of global warming and the extent of its influence were much worse than previously thought.
According to the latest science, the average temperature of the earth has remained relatively constant since the Ice Age to the present day, with the change in temperatures staying under 1 degree centigrade in any given century, and even during the twentieth century - the hottest century in the past thousand years - the increase in average temperature was just 0.6 degrees. Now we are told that, over the next hundred years, average temperatures could rise by between 1.4 and 5.8 degrees centigrade, in the worst case inflicting devastating impact on the earth's ecosystem and the human race. Under such circumstances, it is incredible that the president of the United States, which continues to emit a quarter of the world's greenhouse gases, should refuse to meet its commitments citing such facts as the lack of reduction targets for developing countries that have not been a major cause of global warming until recently.
Historically, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change that forms the basis of the Kyoto Protocol was concluded at the Earth Summit nine years ago, and the man who agreed to that convention as the president of the United States was none other than President Bush's father. At the time, the then President George Bush traveled to Rio himself, and gave his support to the principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities" between developing countries and industrialized countries - in other words, that responsibility arises in accordance to the extent of contribution to the pollution. Over the two centuries since the Industrial Revolution, industrialized countries have contributed roughly 80 percent of the gases such as carbon dioxide through emissions accompanying the use of fossil fuel. And that was the reason why industrialized countries, including the United States, had agreed to take the lead in cutting emissions of greenhouse gases.
The Kyoto Protocol is only the first step taken against the serious threat posed by the certainty of global warming in the twenty-first century. The US rejection of the Kyoto Protocol to which it is a signatory is an egoistic decision unworthy of a super power and global leader. It also discredits longstanding contributions and efforts provided by US scientists and Non-Governmental Organizations.
Let us now turn to Japan. Given the future significance of global warming, when it comes to issues concerning the environment Japan shouldn't follow the United States but seek its own path based on long-term vision. Furthermore, the government should make its utmost effort for a speedy ratification of the Kyoto Protocol. Even if the United States remains reluctant to participate, Japan should forge on without the United States towards a speedy enactment of the Kyoto Protocol together with other industrialized countries.
Surely, first-rate US economists and politicians must fully realize that there is nothing to gain from delaying action against global warming. Because they are the ones who understand best that not only will costs be smaller the quicker we respond to global warming, but also that the creation of new technologies and businesses will have a revitalizing effect on society.
The writer is Chairman of the Japan Association of Environment and Society for the 21st Century(JAES 21). He was first Director General of the Global Environment Department of the Environment Agency (current Ministry of the Environment).
The English-Speaking Union of Japan
京都議定書の行方
加藤 三郎 / 環境文明２１代表
2001年 4月 23日
ブッシュ米国大統領は、三月末に京都議定書に不支持を表明した。選挙戦を通じ、ブッシュ氏が地球温暖化問題に対し消極的であったことは広く知られている。大統領となった後、この重大な問題にどう対応するかは注目されていたが、この時期に不支持を明確にしたことは、多くの国で驚きをもって迎えられている。
今年に入って、国連の専門家パネル（ＩＰＣＣ）が次々と新しい知見を発表し、従前考えられていた以上の地球温暖化の深刻化と影響の甚大さを指摘していただけに、今回の表明は、きわめて遺憾である。
最近の科学によれば、氷河期から今日までの過去一万年間、地球の平均気温は比較的安定であって、どの百年間をとっても変化は一度以下、特に過去千年間で最も暖かい世紀となった二十世紀においても、平均気温は〇・六度の上昇であった。それが、今後百年で一・四～五・八度の上昇、最悪の状況下では、地球の生態系と人類社会に壊滅的な影響を与えるという。そのようななかで、世界の温暖化ガスの四分の一を排出し続けている米国の大統領が、これまで地球温暖化の主要な原因となっていない途上国に削減義務がかかっていないことなどを理由に拒否するのは驚くべきことだ。
そもそも京都議定書の基となる気候変動枠組み条約は、今から九年前の地球サミットにおいて成立したが、それに合意した米国大統領は、他ならぬブッシュ大統領の父君である。当時ブッシュ大統領は自らリオに乗り込み、途上国と先進国との間に「共通であるが差異のある責任」、つまり、汚染の寄与に応じて責任が生じるという原則に合意した。産業革命以来約二世紀に及ぶ先進国での化石燃料使用に伴う炭酸ガスなどの寄与割合は八割程度に及ぶ。だからまず先進国は、温室効果ガスを削減することに米国政府も含めて合意したのである。
二十一世紀に確実にやってくる温暖化の重大な脅威に対しては、京都議定書は第一歩に過ぎない。米国が前政権時代に署名した京都議定書に背を向けるのは、超大国のリーダーにふさわしくないエゴイスティックな決定と言わざるを得ない。これは、米国の科学者やＮＧＯの長年に亘る貢献や努力にも泥を塗ることになる。
では、日本はどうか。地球温暖化の将来の重大さを考えれば、こと環境問題に関する限り、日本は米国に追随せず、長期的視野をもった独自の道を探ってほしい。加えて政府自身も京都議定書の速やかな批准に向けて最大限の努力をすべきである。どうしても米国が乗ってこない時には米国抜きでも、他の先進諸国と京都議定書の速やかな発効の道を突き進むべきである。
米国の第一級の経済人や政治家は、温暖化対応を遅らせることが、何の利益にもならないことを充分に理解している筈である。何故なら、彼等こそ温暖化対応を早く取ればとるほどコストも小さくすむだけでなく、新技術や新ビジネスを産み出し、社会に活力をもたらすことを、よく知っているからである。
（筆者は環境文明２１代表。環境庁初代地球環境部長。）
今年に入って、国連の専門家パネル（ＩＰＣＣ）が次々と新しい知見を発表し、従前考えられていた以上の地球温暖化の深刻化と影響の甚大さを指摘していただけに、今回の表明は、きわめて遺憾である。
最近の科学によれば、氷河期から今日までの過去一万年間、地球の平均気温は比較的安定であって、どの百年間をとっても変化は一度以下、特に過去千年間で最も暖かい世紀となった二十世紀においても、平均気温は〇・六度の上昇であった。それが、今後百年で一・四～五・八度の上昇、最悪の状況下では、地球の生態系と人類社会に壊滅的な影響を与えるという。そのようななかで、世界の温暖化ガスの四分の一を排出し続けている米国の大統領が、これまで地球温暖化の主要な原因となっていない途上国に削減義務がかかっていないことなどを理由に拒否するのは驚くべきことだ。
そもそも京都議定書の基となる気候変動枠組み条約は、今から九年前の地球サミットにおいて成立したが、それに合意した米国大統領は、他ならぬブッシュ大統領の父君である。当時ブッシュ大統領は自らリオに乗り込み、途上国と先進国との間に「共通であるが差異のある責任」、つまり、汚染の寄与に応じて責任が生じるという原則に合意した。産業革命以来約二世紀に及ぶ先進国での化石燃料使用に伴う炭酸ガスなどの寄与割合は八割程度に及ぶ。だからまず先進国は、温室効果ガスを削減することに米国政府も含めて合意したのである。
二十一世紀に確実にやってくる温暖化の重大な脅威に対しては、京都議定書は第一歩に過ぎない。米国が前政権時代に署名した京都議定書に背を向けるのは、超大国のリーダーにふさわしくないエゴイスティックな決定と言わざるを得ない。これは、米国の科学者やＮＧＯの長年に亘る貢献や努力にも泥を塗ることになる。
では、日本はどうか。地球温暖化の将来の重大さを考えれば、こと環境問題に関する限り、日本は米国に追随せず、長期的視野をもった独自の道を探ってほしい。加えて政府自身も京都議定書の速やかな批准に向けて最大限の努力をすべきである。どうしても米国が乗ってこない時には米国抜きでも、他の先進諸国と京都議定書の速やかな発効の道を突き進むべきである。
米国の第一級の経済人や政治家は、温暖化対応を遅らせることが、何の利益にもならないことを充分に理解している筈である。何故なら、彼等こそ温暖化対応を早く取ればとるほどコストも小さくすむだけでなく、新技術や新ビジネスを産み出し、社会に活力をもたらすことを、よく知っているからである。
（筆者は環境文明２１代表。環境庁初代地球環境部長。）
一般社団法人 日本英語交流連盟