Kyoto Protocol and the
Southeast Asian Economic Development
Introduction
The global dimension of economic and environmental problems stresses the need of an internationally linked economic and environmental policy. From the political standpoint, the task seems to be huge and there are many skeptical voices whether the big political bargaining process could ever converge.
In the countries like the Southeast Asia or the developing countries, the ratification and entry-into-force of the Kyoto protocol would have considerably economic effects. However the question on what and how would it affect the economic sphere of the country would largely depend on the domestic policy measures chosen by countries to meet its obligations under the protocol. Its effects hereby are indeterminate during the ratification process.
The issue of Kyoto Protocol is quite controversial in some of its aspects. It had became controversial and trivial when there was differences of principles emerged during the convention in which some of the countries which were invited to participate expressed their sentiments on the way it should be implemented. The issue raised on the query about the participating countries that would be involved for its implementation.
Aside from the noble desire of the Kyoto Protocol to somehow minimize the emissions produced that significantly affect the environment through global warming and greenhouse effect. One of the considerations in which participating countries were thinking was its economic effect. It was this issue which was not resolved between participating countries from developing nations and the rich ones.
Now, the reason why there was reservation on the part of the developing countries to participate was the need of the rich countries to lead the advocacy and should be the participants in this endeavor since the most of past emissions of greenhouse gases that are now accumulated in the atmosphere came from the industrialized countries. Developing countries reasoned out that they should not have to sacrifice their economic development or otherwise pay the economic price, for a problem that the industrialized countries created. Yet, if we look the issue in its global perspective, we can say that it would be impossible to implement and get rid of the environmental trouble without the participation of developing countries since the issue is global and which needs a global attention. Beside, the industrialized countries cannot address climate change without cooperation by developing countries since their emissions are increasingly most rapidly and soon passes those from the rich countries (Frankel, 2004).
It should be remember that some of developing countries like India and China are expected to be part of agents that would contribute for the emissions increase in coming decades.
However, the issue that I would like to resolve is not on who will take an active participation in addressing the problem of greenhouse effect rather the effect of this agreement on the economy of the Southeast Asian countries. There are various studies that contend the beneficial effect of Kyoto to the economic development of the Asian countries once the protocol will be ratified and implemented.
In the work of Frankel, he argued that the developing countries’ participation is crucial because it would permit relatively low-cost reductions in emissions in the South in place of high-cost reductions in the North. Yet, this is a rich country perspective. Representatives of the developing countries contend that what is the main duty of the state are its own citizens, meaning the priority should be uplifting the economic standards of living. Moreover, it would not be practical on the part of the developing countries to implement the agreement for its economic cost, while rich countries can able to implement and manage to activate the agreement since they have enough resources and can afford to make some sacrifices.
In analyzing the effects of climate change in relation to the Kyoto Protocol, there are at least three important elements of difficulties. First, the ultimate treaty still has elements of uncertainties. Second, the available models to analyze the short-term costs and benefits are inherently limited. Third, putting of a single monetary figure on the long-term benefits of mitigation is highly implausible. These stated difficulties contribute to the issue on the economic development of the Southeast Asian countries even though, econometric models are to be employed in understanding its effect is not enough in foreseeing if it will help Southeast Asia’s economic growth and development.
On the other hand, although there are considerable options theories and models which can be used to identify and measure the possibility of Kyoto’s contribution to the economic development of an Asian country, it still implausible to delegate the time frame on the extent of the development, whether it is a long-term or short-tem development.
It cannot be deny the fact that greenhouse effect causes the global warming phenomenon, and the noble act of the Kyoto Protocol would somehow alleviate the ailing environment, yet, to respond in this advocacy is the consequence a Southeast Asian country should take.
Although representative of the developing countries argued of the negative economic effect of the protocol, it does not necessarily reflect the whole of the Southeast Asian countries. Meaning, some developing countries may have such kind of reservation towards participating in the agreement, yet not all of the developing member countries are adhering to such arguments. In fact, there are countries which are actively participating in the programs of the Kyoto protocol. One of them is the Philippines.
The Philippines under the agreement tried to create programs which are in adherence to the law and regulations of the protocol. The creation of bio-fuel gas and other natural gas like electricity is being promoted gradually in the Philippines. This undertaking was made to minimize the emission of carbon dioxide and the amount of greenhouse effect that contributed to the global warming and climate change phenomena.
Moreover, although there are economic effects, the gradual implementation of such agreement in the Philippine context has seen to have no great economic effect unlike to what other developing countries have been claiming.
So now, is Kyoto Protocol would have an adverse economic effect to the Southeast Asian countries?
My answer is both yes and no.
Yes, because it would up to the country implementing the agreement. No, because still it would also be base on the domestic economic structure of a country. The initiatives are on the state’s authorities whether to look for a suitable alternative and solution to the ailing problems aside from taking the agreement or taking the agreement while looking for a suitable alternative that would maintain the stability and economic growth of the country.
The Kyoto protocol cannot inherently give any suggestion or recommendation regarding how to implement its rules without an adverse effect to the economic growth and development. The action will take into place by the authorities themselves.
Whether we are in the developing countries or rich countries, the problem on climate change is a global one, which means a global action should also take into place despite of whatever the status of our country is, so long as we have the creativity and the right mind to look for alternative, we can be able to come into an agreement of taking the Kyoto protocol.
Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment