CHAPTER 8

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

Nowadays environmental issues are growing in size and complexity,

threatening the survival of mankind on earth. Environmental degradation is a result of

the dynamic inter play of socio-economic, institutional and technological activities.

Environmental changes may be driven by various factors including economic growth,

population growth, urbanization, intensification of agriculture, rising energy use and

transportation.

The technology that people invent now have as much of an effect on the

environment as the forces of nature themselves. Even if we discount items like smog,

polluted water, depleted or poisoned soil for the time being, we note that the

atmosphere has developed two disturbing trends. One is the warming of the earth’s

lower atmosphere and surface, and the other, the depletion of the ozone layer in the

upper atmosphere.

Environmental degradation has become a threat to mankind. Global warming

has emerged as one of the most important environmental issues ever to confront

humanity with implications for food production, natural ecosystems, fresh water

supply and health. The earth’s climate system has demonstrably changed on both

global and regional scales since the pre-industrial era.

Climate change is the most important global environmental challenge facing

humanity with implications for food production, natural ecosystems, fresh water

supply and health. The earth's climate system has demonstrably changed on both

global and regional scales since the pre-industrial era. The unequivocal warming of

the climate system is now evident from observations of increases in global average air

and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global

average sea level. Transportation, generation of electricity, production of cement,

steel, plastics and other materials and household cooking are some of the causes

where burning of fossil fuels for these activities and deforestation releases carbon

dioxide, which is one of the key gases that cause global warming. Some other gases

that contribute to warming include methane, nitrous oxide, and chloro fluorocarbon,

hydro fluorocarbons, and per fluorocarbons.

Global warming is about the growth of greenhouse gas emissions due to the

burning of fossil fuels, resulting mainly from industrial activities and motor

transportation, hence there is a buildup of the carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere.

The carbon dioxide build up is made worse by the increasing loss of forests, which act

as “carbon sinks” that absorb gases and prevent its release into the atmosphere.

Further, the increase of carbon dioxide and other gases in the atmosphere also

enhances the “Greenhouse Effect”, thus leading to temperatures rising. Based on

data from the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, it is estimated that a

significant rise in temperature can trigger several events, such as melting of the ice

sheets, the death of some significant marine life and other biodiversity, and effects on

agriculture and human health.

It is already too late to avoid major consequences because of the inertia of the

ecosystem even if no more CO2 or other greenhouse gases are emitted by humankind

from tomorrow. The earth will still continue to warm up for some decades, the sea

will continue to rise for some centuries and the ice sheets will continue to adjust for

thousands of years. The world is already facing up to increasing sea intrusions, floods,

storms, droughts, heat waves, disease transmissions and increase in environmental

refugees.

Global warming is currently raising sea-levels by almost 2 cm per decade, and

that rate is expected to increase with rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations, leading

to flooding of low-lying coastal areas. Recent research suggests that global warming

is increasing the intensity of hurricanes and other storms, leading to greater storm

damage and coastal flooding. Increasing atmospheric CO2 is also increasing ocean

acidity, with negative impacts on marine biodiversity, including coral and plankton,

and thus on the fish that rely on them for habitat and food. Agricultural models

suggest that climatic warming will tend to reduce agricultural productivity in the

tropics. There are also some indications of changing oceanic circulation patterns,

notably in the North Atlantic Gulf Stream, which could lead to disruptive climate

change. Thus, climate change is considered to be a critical global challenge and recent

events have demonstrated the world’s growing vulnerability to climate change. The

impacts of climate change range from affecting agriculture to further endangering

food security, to rising sea-levels and the accelerated erosion of coastal zones,

increasing intensity of natural disasters, species extinction and the spread of vector-

borne diseases.

The IPCC, an international body of over 3,000 experts, projects that the global

mean temperature may increase between 1.8 to 4°C by 2100. More importantly, a

warming of about 0.2°C per decade, almost double the annual increase over the last

50 years, is projected for the next two decades. The IPCC predictions have become

increasingly worse over the past 15 years, and their attribution to human influence has

become more certain.

Climatologists of the IPCC have reviewed the results of several experiments

in order to “estimate changes in climate in the course of this century. This ‘warming’

will be greatest over land areas, and at high latitudes. The projected rate of warming

is greater than has .occurred in the last 10,000 years. The frequency of weather

extremes is likely to increase, leading to floods or drought.

Human societies will be seriously affected by extremes of climate such as

droughts and floods. A changing climate would bring about change in the frequency

and or intensity of these extremes. This is also a fundamental concern for human

health. To a large extent, public health depends on safe drinking water, sufficient

food, secure shelter, and good social conditions. All these factors are affected by

climate change. Freshwater supplies may be seriously affected, reducing the

availability of clean water for drinking and washing during drought as well as floods.

Water can be contaminated and sewage systems may be damaged. The risk of spread

of infectious diseases such as diarrhea will increase. Food production will be seriously

reduced in vulnerable regions directly and also indirectly through an increase in pests

and plant or animal diseases. The local reduction in food production would lead to

starvation and malnutrition with long-term health consequences, especially for

children. Food and water shortages may lead to conflicts in vulnerable regions.

Climate change related impacts on human health could lead to displacement of a large

number of people, creating environmental refuges and lead to further health issues.

Changes in seasonal rainfall and temperature patterns could have important

effects on agriculture. There could be severe negative impacts in some regions,

particularly production cuts in regions of high present day vulnerability, which would

be the least able to adjust, and natural terrestrial ecosystems likewise could be

adversely affected. Projected changes in temperature and rainfall suggest that climatic

zones could shift several hundred kilometers towards the poles over the next 50 years.

Flora and fauna would lag behind these climatic shifts and could find themselves in a

new climatic regime to which they were physiologically or behaviorally unsuited.

Thus, climate change could make worse the already pressing problem of species

extinction.

Severe storms, floods and droughts since the eighties have served as reminders

that climate change is a global problem. The most dramatic change has been in the

temperature, with measurement records suggesting that the last two decades of the

20th century were the warmest in this period. Many parts of the world and critical

ecosystems and livelihoods are being affected through extreme weather events.

Impacts on high mountain systems, including glacial retreat, could be among the most

directly visible signals of global warming. Other obvious changes include a rise of 10-

25 cm in global sea levels in the past century.

All developing countries facing the problems of population and economic

growth will be put under even greater stress. Such temperature increases have led to

drying in parts of Southern Asia including India. The unprecedented increase in

temperature is expected to have severe impacts on the global hydrological system,

ecosystems, sea level, crop production and related processes. The impact would be

particularly severe in the tropics, which mainly consist of developing countries,

including India.

An increase in rainfall is stimulated over the eastern region of India but the

northwestern deserts may see a small decrease in the absolute amount of rainfall.

Warmer and wetter conditions would increase the potential for a higher incidence of

heat-related and infectious diseases. The incidence and extent of vector-borne

diseases, which are significant causes of mortality and morbidity in tropical Asia, are

likely to spread into new regions on the margins of present endemic areas as a result

of climate change.

India’s vast coastline means flooding from rising sea level could inundate

thickly populated areas. It will also lead to salination of ground water. There is the

threat of shrinkage of grassland, which has serious implication for India, which has

the world’s largest cattle population. Over 25% of our plant and animal species will

face extinction. This is the legacy we will leave for our children unless we do

something about it. It is a collective responsibility that has far-reaching implications.

Unfortunately, India has a decimal record on this front preferring to point fingers at

countries like the US rather than focusing on what it should be doing.

Concern over environment degradation led to the two international

conferences on Environment and Development, one at Stockholm in 1972 and another

at Rio de Janerio in 1992, which influenced environmental policies in most countries,

including India to mitigate climate change. The United Nations Framework

Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was an outcome of the 1992 United

Nations Conference on Environment and Development, the Earth Summit in Rio de

Janeiro.

The Convention on Climate Change sets an overall framework for inter-

governmental efforts to tackle the challenges posed by climate change. It recognizes

that the climate system is a shared resource whose stability can be affected by

industrial and emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

Under the Kyoto Protocol to the UNFCCC, industrialized countries have

assumed binding greenhouse gas (GHG) emission targets and have agreed to cut their

GHG emissions by an agreed percentage below their 1990 levels in the period

between 2008 and 2012. To do so, they have to rely mainly on domestic action.

However, recognizing the importance of institutional flexibility and private sector

involvement, the Kyoto Protocol introduced three mechanisms that may be used to

supplement domestic action.

The Kyoto Protocol defines three flexible mechanisms Joint Implementation

mechanism, Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Emissions Trading, to allow

for achievement of compliance with a country’s emission limits through activities that

are implemented outside its national territory and rely on the transfer of emission

rights. The CDM is the only one of these mechanisms that involves developing

countries in their efforts to limit GHG emissions.

Through the so-called Kyoto or flexible mechanisms, the Kyoto Protocol

foresees the creation of markets for GHG emission reductions through project-based

emission crediting or emission trading. Two of these mechanisms are available only

to countries with qualified targets i.e., Joint Implementation and International

emission trading. In addition, the Kyoto mechanisms also provide CDM, which aims

to enhance cooperation among the industrialized and developing countries to achieve

sustainable development and reduce emissions. The flexible mechanisms in general

and the CDM in particular, are among the most innovative aspects of the emerging

climate change regime. They address the problem of global warming on an

international level and through mechanisms, based on the principle of trading

emission reduction offsets. The CDM provides the parties to the Kyoto Protocol with

an instrument of mutual benefit for industrialized and developing parties, while

supporting project activities that create win-win situation for project participants.

The Kyoto mechanisms build a bridge between industrialized and developing

countries, while establishing a platform for a coordinated approach for public and

private entities to implement the treaty. They provide a framework under which new

collaborative network structures consisting of nation states and nonstate actors can

evolve. Such cross-sectoral partnerships have been described as “global public policy

networks.”

In contrast to the UNFCCC, the Kyoto Protocol provides for specific

quantified emission targets to be met by the countries listed in UNFCCC Annex I

(industrialized countries and economics in transition together or so-called Annex I

countries) over the first commitment period, beginning in 2008 and ending in 2012.

The Kyoto Protocol recognizes that economic and social development and poverty

reduction are the overriding priorities for non-Annex I countries and that their

emissions will, by necessity, grow as per their material welfare improves. At the same

time, many of the effects of global warming are likely to have more damaging effects

on poor countries.

The industrialized nations comprise 15 percent of world population yet, they

account for almost half of emissions of CO2. Under the protocol’s terms, the

industrialized countries have taken binding commitments to cut their emissions by a

certain date and by a certain percentage from their 1990 levels. The targets vary

among the industrialized countries. It was agreed at Kyoto that the developing

countries do not need to commit to cut their emissions because they have low per

capita emission levels compared to developed countries, and therefore, they have the

right to some “space” to increase their emissions as they develop their economies.

But today some developed countries are now pressing for developing countries

(or at least some of them) also to commit to emission reduction in the near

future. Developing countries argue that the industrialized nations have themselves not

yet lived up to their Kyoto commitments, and thus the poor countries should not yet

be asked to make binding commitments. Further, many industrialized countries have

not reduced their emissions in line with their commitments, and in fact, their

emissions have actually increased above their 1990 levels.

Industrialized countries have an obligation to lead developing countries by

shifting to sustainable development paths that would lead to significant reductions in

GHG emissions; promoting aggressive research on environmentally sustainable

technologies; transferring such technologies to developing countries; and making

large investments in climate-friendly technologies in developing countries.

Industrialized countries may have to accept emission reduction targets of 60-80%,

which may require technological advancements, adoption of sustainable lifestyles,

and large-scale adoption of energy-efficient and renewable energy technologies,

particularly in power generation, transportation (automobiles) and buildings.

Four provisions are central to the Kyoto Protocol. First, the Annex I countries

agreed to differentiated, binding targets that would reduce GHG emissions to about 5

percent below 1990 levels sometime between 2008 and 2012. Second, performance in

meeting these targets will be assessed on the basis of “sinks” (e.g., tree planting) as

well as “sources,” and virtually all GHGs, not only carbon dioxide, will be taken into

account. Third, emissions trading among Annex I countries and between Annex I

countries and developing countries will be permitted. Finally, the Protocol reaffirmed

that developing countries will not be subject to binding emissions limitations during

the compliance period of this Protocol.

In the run-up to Kyoto there was serious conflict between the developed and

developing countries, as well as within both groups. The United States wanted an

agreement that required stabilization at 1990 levels between 2008 and 2012. The

European Union pressed for 15 percent reductions by 2010.

The Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), whose very existence is

threatened by sea-level rise, proposed stronger measures that anyone would accept.

India and China were mainly concerned to avoid undertaking new commitments but

some Latin American countries, such as Chile and Argentina, signaled a willingness

to do more.

Hovering in the background are enormous uncertainties about how emissions

can be monitored and how changes in sinks can be measured. But many important

issues were left unresolved even in principle by the last-minute compromise reached

in Kyoto. For example, the Protocol does not specify sanctions for nations that do not

keep their commitments. Nor does it address the extent of emissions trading and

exactly how it will be implemented. Since it is now clear that the United States as

well as some other Annex 1 countries plan to reache their targets primarily by

purchasing credits rather than by reducing emissions, this issue is rapidly moving to

the center of the debate. While some progress has been made on these issues in

subsequent meetings in Buenos Aires in November 1998, and Bonn in November

1999, most major decisions have been deferred.

Differences between the United States and developing countries are grounded

in competing views of global environmental justice In the United States the debate

about reducing GHG emissions centers on self-interest and national interest rather

than on appeals to morality. Studies have been thrown around about how compliance

with the Kyoto Protocol would devastate the economy or put Americans at a competi-

tive disadvantage.

The appeal to efficiency rests on the fact that developed countries generally

produce more GDP per unit of energy than developing countries. Any policy that

restricts energy use on the part of the developed countries will only lead to a more

inefficient global economy, which will be bad not only for people in the industrial

countries but for the world as a whole.

Just as the United States could not remain half slave and half free, so

restricting the emissions of only a small number of countries and leaving the

emissions of most countries uncontrolled cannot possibly be an effective permanent

solution. Two arguments are given for why this is so. First, in the post-Kyoto world,

energy-intensive industries in the developed countries will simply move offshore to

escape emissions limitations. The same GHG emissions will occur, but the developed

countries will no longer benefit from them. The second argument is that by 2020 the

developing countries will be the largest emitters of GHGs, and over the next century

their emissions will swamp those of the Annex I countries.

Another argument against the Kyoto Protocol that is commonly given has a

more distinctively moral tone: “It just not fair to single out a handful of countries for

emissions control when the rest of the world goes unregulated.” If climate change

really is a global problem, then everyone in the world should do their part in solving

it. The Kyoto Protocol violates a principle of equality that requires all countries to be

treated as same, or a principle regarding the fair sharing of burdens.

Anyone who appreciates the seriousness of climate change should recognize

the importance of eventually bringing at least some of the developing countries into

an emissions control regime. The Kyoto loopholes that make this possible involve

counting sinks as well as sources in assessing performance, emissions trading, and

reductions keyed to 1990 emissions levels.

The Australian government plans to take advantage of the first loophole. By

planting trees (many of them plantation pines that will be harvested for timber) in

areas in which native forest was cleared before 1990, Australia may earn enough

credits for increasing its sinks to significantly increase its emissions. The United

States plans to achieve 75 to 85 percent of its emissions reductions by purchasing

credits from other countries, many of them from the former communist countries

(President’s Council of Economic Advisers 1998). The latter’s GHG emissions have

declined precipitously since 1990 as a result of their collapsing economies, leaving

them with many salable permits. However, these permits really reflect what is

sometimes called “hot air” (rather than emissions that would actually occur if they

were not sold). Thus emissions trading not only allows some countries to avoid

reducing their own emissions at home, but also results in GHG emissions that would

otherwise not occur. Paradoxically the Kyoto Protocol has the potential for increasing

GHG emissions rather than reducing them. This enrages environmentalists and many

in the European Union. It also does little to convince the developing world that the

rich countries are serious about climate change.

Both developed and developing countries have a point. The emphasis on

efficiency being promoted by the United States is potentially good for the world as a

whole. But the emphasis on equality on the part of the developing countries seems to

me to be morally unassailable. The main problem with emissions trading as it is

developing is that no serious thought is being given to what might be called the end

game and start game: the total global emissions that we should permit and how

permissions to emit should be allocated

Finally, it should be pointed that the Kyoto Protocol leaves many questions

open, including rules governing three Kyoto mechanisms; without clear rules on

how these mechanisms will be implemented in practice, any estimate will be

tentative. Although the Kyoto Protocol was a historic step forward, more progress is

necessary with respect to participation of key developing countries. It is to be

therefore expected that there would be an effective climate regime post Kyoto

developed in 2015 in Paris.

Apart from the various legal and institutional provisions made by the

government to check the air pollution there is a need for execution of effective plan to

combat global warming. Internationally, a number of environmental and

developmental organizations have played a particularly important role in developing

international environmental law. Numerous international organizations are involved

in climate change adaptation. Each agency, such as the FAO and the WHO, carries

out some form of adaptation programme in relation to its core area of work and

expertise. Each agency thereby brings to the table highly specialized knowledge about

climate change in a specific area (for example, cropping practices and public health),

which together create a multi-faceted response to climate change.

Yet, there is a need for a strong international framework for supporting

countries’ efforts to adapt to the impacts of climate change. Because climate change

affects almost every aspect of social and economic life, and adaptation in particular

cuts across various policy issues, such as sanitation and health care, disaster relief,

food security, poverty eradication and sustainable development, many international

organizations that specifically address these issues have also had to address climate

change adaptation or, in the jargon, to ‘mainstream adaptation’ in their working

agendas and policymaking.

There is also a need for efficient institutional arrangements to support and

build the resilience of mountain populations to cope with the impacts of climate

change. The global community must be more aware of the seriousness of the impacts

of climate change and act now to reduce them.

Climate change is the biggest sustainable development challenge the

international community has had to tackle to date. Measures to address climate change

need to be fully compatible with the international community’s wider ambitions for

economic growth and human advancement. It is a challenge that transcends borders

and requires solutions not only at national levels but at the international level as well.

It remains crucial that all levels of government - national, sub-national and

local - take the bigger and bolder action that is required to keep the world on the right

track to reduce emissions, to deal with existing climate change and to help smooth the

way for an effective new global climate change agreement in 2015.

In India, various laws for the protection of environment, flora and fauna have

been enacted from time to time. The Indian Constitution is perhaps the first among

Constitutions to contain specific provisions for the protection and improvement of

environment. It reflects the human rights approach of ‘protection of environment’

through various constitutional mandates.

The concern for environmental protection has not only been raised to the

status of a fundamental law of the land, but also wedded to human rights approach.

Now, it is believed that the basic human right of every individual is to live in a

pollution-free environment with full human dignity. The Constitution of India

obligates the “State” as well as the “Citizens” to “protect and improve” the

environment.

While the executive and legislative wings of the state are implementing the

directive principles by policy decisions and appropriate legislations, the judicial wing

is also implementing them through judicial activism. The Indian Supreme Court has

interpreted the right to life under Article 21 in a manner that extends beyond mere

survival, to cover conditions that are necessary for higher standards of living. Climate

change, could potentially affect both the survival and standards of living of Indians.

India is a contracting party or signatory to numerous international treaties and

agreements relating to regional and global environmental issues, and is under an

obligation to translate the contents and decisions of international conferences, treaties

and agreements into the stream of national law.

Under the UNFCCC, developing countries such as India do not have binding

GHG mitigation commitments in recognition of their small contribution to the

greenhouse problem as well as low financial and technical capacities. But the

Government of India admits that climate change is a global issue that needs to be

addressed by the international community on a priority basis. Hence the National

Action plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) was released on 30th June, 2008 to state

India’s contribution towards combating climate change.

The NAPCC consists of several targets on climate change issues and

addresses the urgent and critical concerns of the country through a directional shift in

the development pathway. It outlines measures on climate change related adaptation

and mitigation while simultaneously advancing development. The Missions form the

core of the Plan, representing multi-pronged, long termed and integrated strategies for

achieving goals in the context of climate change.

India is actively engaged in addressing climate change through its domestic

actions as well as engagement at the international negotiations and discussions. The

primary institutions responsible for the formulation and enforcement of

environmental standards and rules include the Ministry of Environment and Forests

(MOEF), the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), State Departments of

Environment, State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs) and Municipal Corporations.

But, India’s best known climate change strategy the NAPCC has come in for sharp

criticism by leading domain experts who say it not just lacks vision but also allows

glaring lack of cohesion between the eight grand mitigation missions launched by the

Government five years back.

Though it might be too early to evaluate these missions the water, green India

and agriculture missions fail to prioritise the issues that India needs to tackle on a long

term basis. “The solar and energy efficiency missions, on the other hand, are sharp,

clear and relatively focused.”

A climate mission can’t solve all the problems of water and emissions that the

country has been facing for a long time, the reviewers feel. The policy is not clear on

emission reduction targets and as such there is no mention of the level of mitigation

expected in describing climate action plans in these missions. Since the missions are

expected to describe development strategies with climate as a co-benefit, it would

have been helpful to clearly identify activities for which a climate benefit is accrued.

One of the main criticisms of India’s climate policy is that there is no specified

goal or target for sustainable development projects. For instance, the solar mission

fails to focus on off-grid solar power, which could be a boon for remote areas.

Pointing out that some other countries actually address climate policies

through independent councils and not ministries like India does, they say that unless

India breaks traditional ministerial boundaries to approach climate change as an

interdisciplinary issue, “our goals and aspirations for ‘climate-proof’ development

will not be attained.”

Even if such actions are taken quickly, the historical commitment to global

warming means that the earth will continue to warm, and adaptation to its impacts

will be essential. Warming drives sea level rise through thermal expansion of

seawater and widespread loss of land ice. Sea-level rise will continue for many

centuries because of the warming of the oceans and temperatures will continue to rise

until 2200.

Global climate change is perhaps the most “international” issue of our time.

Given the potential scale of the problem, the response of the international community

will necessarily need to be innovative. Therefore, it is appropriate to attempt to

ascertain what role the public interest writ large will play in the legal response to

global climate change. In the imperfect world of international law, the role of the

public interest has been increasingly the domain of non-governmental organizations

(NGOs). NGOs have been deeply involved in the development of international

“Environmental protection. In the process their activities have effected “profound

change in the institutions and mechanisms of international co-operation” in assessing

how they may adopt these or other roles with respect to global climate change.

This is particularly true in the emerging area of international environmental

law, where NGOs have become, in large measure, “the guardians of environment”,

and are indispensable to the creation and implementation of international

environmental law.

The specific policy measures available vary from country to country.

Countries will select a portfolio of climate change measures that reflect implicitly or

explicitly their individual objectives and constraints. A country may look for the eco-

nomically optimal portfolio of climate change measures but the impacts of the

portfolio on different economic groups international competitiveness international

equity and intergenerational equity are likely to come into play.

Legislation alone is not sufficient. Local bodies need to be more active in the

entire filed or environmental protection planning, implementation and control. The

practical problems associated with designing and enforcing measures must be

overcome. Clear and understandable data must be developed on the environmental

protection performance of existing and upcoming remedial measures.

Traditionally it is said that there are three options in responding to climate

change: prevention, mitigation, and adaptation. But if the science is at all credible,

then for some time prevention has not been an option. The debate is over mitigation.

Will the world succeed in significantly mitigating climate change, or will we have a

global policy of adaptation?

Mitigation is a preventive action while adaptation is a response to the ills that

global warming would cause. Since global warming cannot be stopped, adaptation to

its impact on natural and anthropogenic (human-made) ecosystems is necessary.

Climate Change mitigation refers to efforts to reduce or prevent emission of

greenhouse gases. Mitigation can mean using new technologies and renewable

energies, making older equipment more energy efficient, or changing management

practices or consumer behavior. It can be as complex as a plan for a new city or as a

simple as improvements to a cook stove design. Efforts underway around the world

range from high-tech subway systems to bicycling paths and walkways. Protecting

natural carbon sinks like forests and oceans, or creating new sinks through silviculture

or green agriculture are also elements of mitigation. UNEP takes a multifaceted

approach towards climate change mitigation in its efforts to help countries move

towards a low-carbon society.

Deforestation and forest degradation through agricultural expansion,

conversion to pasture, infrastructure development, destructive logging, fires etc.,

account for nearly 20 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions - more than the

entire global transport sector and second only to the energy sector. It is now clear that

in order to constrain the impact of climate change within limits that society will

reasonably be able to tolerate, global average temperatures must be stabilized within

two degrees Celsius. This will be practically impossible to achieve without reducing

emissions from the forest sector, in addition to other mitigation actions.

Emerging technologies have the capacity to generate new, ecologically sound

patterns of development for all countries. It will be the emerging technology

protagonists of the ongoing ecological revolution that likely will enable a shift to

lower energy and raw material usage in an economics.

With the increased ambition to help developing countries to improve their

environmental conditions, developed countries should not forget that developing

countries, in their need to get access to scientific and technological advances, want to

retain their freedom to choose their own developmental path.

But such development will not be possible with less than early and active

participation of villagers and local authorities in the developing countries, based on a

respect for their cultural heritage. This will favor a credible dialogue with developing

countries, so that their rich and diversified culture can make its own contribution to

the global response.

Adaptation is specific to each type of natural ecosystem. Mitigation of climate

change refers to measures that reduce emissions through improved efficiency of

energy use, reduced deforestation, a switch to non-fossil-fuels, or capture of

emissions underground and in oceans, vegetation and soils.

The two responses are not necessarily independent of each other. Increased

use of air conditioning in order to adapt to higher temperatures, for example, may

increase GHG emissions to the extent that electricity is generated using fossil fuels.

Planting trees to absorb atmospheric carbon is another mitigation option, but the

measure will not be as effective if the trees are planted in an area where global

warming is likely to raise temperatures and reduce precipitation.

The energy intensity of an economy is one measure of how efficiently energy

is being used by an economy. Since energy use accounts for more than 80 per cent of

carbon dioxide emissions worldwide, it is indeed good news that economic growth

has been achieved while holding down the growth of carbon dioxide emissions

Actions to limit the impacts of climate change may be required for the next

century or longer. Numerous measures are potentially available to address these

impacts. But their effects are uncertain and no single action appears to be clearly

superior to the others.

Suggestions

A long-term solution to the climate change problem will require the normative

and institutional arrangements that secure the active participation of both indus-

trialized and developing countries, that encourage the global development and

diffusion of new energy technologies, and that maintain a focus on long-term climate

stabilization rather than short-term emissions levels. Although existing international

agreements such as the Kyoto Protocol play an important part in a durable solution to

climate change, long-term climate stabilization depends on the development of future

agreements that build on previous accords but exhibit fundamentally different

features.

The long-term challenge of global climate change, and actions aimed at its

mitigation, will require a transition to new energy technologies and to energy sources

that emit less carbon dioxide, because rising atmospheric concentrations of carbon

dioxide from fossil fuel combustion are leading contributors to global warming and

related climatic changes.

Mitigation measures provide future flexibility, technology research can lower

the cost of future action, and climate research can provide better information on the

nature of the actions required. Thus, various measures to be taken by countries

(individually or jointly) to mitigate climate change and its impacts are suggested:

i. An International agreement on deeper, global emissions reductions is needed

for the period after the Kyoto. Though the Kyoto Protocol was an essential

first step towards reducing the greenhouse gas emissions it is a compromise

formula accommodating the interests of the both the developed and the

developing nations. It is a mere beginning and is an agreement without a

future. Major developed countries have not ratified Kyoto which results in the

failure to meet both the standards and objectives established by the

international community under Kyoto Protocol.

ii. A global policy of adaptation is based on the “the polluted pay” principle

rather than the “polluter pays” principle. This is because adaptation policies

are typically national or sub national and require resources and knowledge.

Since the developed countries have resources and knowledge, they will

succeed in adapting to climate change. The developing countries do not have

resources and knowledge. They will suffer the worst effects of climate change.

So various institutions must facilitate financial as well as technology transfer

to them.

iii. Developing country emissions are growing rapidly and threaten to outweigh

any emission reductions achieved by developed countries. This means that

action by developed countries alone will not suffice. So the developing

countries with the exception of the least developed countries - should slow the

rate of growth of their emissions as soon as possible with the aim of keeping

them to 15-30% below business as usual levels in 2020. Developing countries

must work towards reducing their emissions below the business- as-usual path.

But the wealthier nations must first accept targets for 2020 that are more

aggressive than the two target discussed and should also support mitigation

and adaptation efforts in developing countries in a substantial way if they

are serious about reducing the threat of climate change.

iv. To ensure an appropriate and effective contribution by developing countries,

all except the least developed countries should put forward national low

carbon development strategies, including specific actions to reduce emissions

in key sectors. These strategies should set out a credible pathway to limit the

country’s emissions and identify the external financial support required to

implement actions that are too expensive for the country itself. A new

international Facilitative Mechanism for Mitigation Support should assess the

adequacy of the actions planned and match them with appropriate bilateral and

multilateral funding mechanisms.

v. To ensure the CDM’s environmental integrity, the mechanism should be

reformed. In future only those projects that genuinely bring about additional

mission savings and that go beyond the cheapest options should be able to

generate emission credits. In addition, for advanced developing countries and

in highly competitive economic sectors, the project-based CDM should be

phased out and replaced by a crediting mechanism covering whole sectors.

This can also pave the way for the development of cap and trade systems in

the economically more advanced developing countries.

vi. A solution to climate change will only be at hand when developing and

developed countries are full partners in the atmospheric stabilization process.

Achieving full partnership will entail the augmentation of the scientific and

technological capabilities of developing countries by expanding analytical

resources and opportunities for technical education and training at the post

secondary and postgraduate levels. A means must be found to affect the long-

term development of a much broader, geographically distributed, and more

robust global energy R&D capability.

vii. As climate change affects almost every aspect of social and economic life, and

adaptation in particular cuts across various policy issues, such as sanitation

and health care, disaster relief, food security, poverty eradication and

sustainable development, various international organizations that specifically

address these issues must address climate change adaptation in their working

agendas and policymaking.

viii. Capacity building would include efforts to help developing countries gain

greater access to technical education, training, and information and thus to

broaden their indigenous cadre of scientists, engineers, managers, and other

technical professionals. In addition to providing a basis for the scientific and

engineering research needed to mitigate and adapt to local stresses induced by

climate change, capacity building activities may enhance opportunities for the

development of the technology-based industry in developing countries,

facilitate sound policy making, and foster overall quality-of-life

improvements.

ix. Vulnerable communities require significant financial and technical support to

carry out adaptation activities which requires various international

organizations to provide financial support for adaptation activities. There is

also a need for efficient institutional arrangements to support and build the

resilience of mountain populations to cope with the impacts of climate

change. The global community must be more aware of the seriousness of

the impacts of climate change and act now to reduce them.

x. International aviation and maritime transport are large and rapidly growing

sources of GHG emissions which are not covered by the Kyoto Protocol.

Emissions from these sources should now be included in the overall targets set

in the Copenhagen agreement. The UNFCCC should set targets for reducing

the climate impact of these sectors below 2005 levels by 2020, and

significantly below 1990 levels by 2050. Global measures should be taken to

address aviation and shipping emissions given the international nature of these

sectors.

xi. India’s climate policy must be founded on the development needs of the

majority of its population and the needs of India’s future development because

climate policy may profoundly have negative consequences for the poor in

India and the developing world as a whole.

xii. India’s environmental impact assessment (EIA) regulation, which requires

projects to be reviewed for potentially negative impacts on the environment

such as pollution and harm to wildlife, does not currently assess potential

impacts of a project on climate change which needs to be streamlined.

xiii. For achieving the objectives of the eight national missions of NAPCC, long-

term sustained efforts both in terms of time bound completion of identified

activities and ensuring the implementation of identified policies and enactment

of necessary legislation through persuasion at different levels with the State

Governments must been envisaged. There is a need of an appropriate

mechanism for coordinated actions followed by intensive capacity building

and awareness programme up to lower most level of management i.e.,

Panchayat Raj Institutions, urban local bodies, Water User Associations etc.

All sections of the society, particularly youths are planned to be actively

involved in the process.

xiv. Currently, there is little definitive research on what the impacts of climate

change will be on different sectors of the Indian economy and people. A

technically robust analysis is required to understand the feasibility and

opportunities of low and continued high carbon growth paths and the effects of

mitigation mechanisms. A more participatory debate involving political

representatives, civil society actors and the bureaucracy, both at the national

and sub-national level is needed to build a national consensus. The seriousness

of climate change impacts, necessity, and options for adaptation and

mitigation policies need to be discussed with all stakeholders. A better

knowledge base and a more inclusive debate will allow India to take a more

informed view on climate change both domestically and internationally and

build broader support for implementing what are bound to be difficult options.

xv. Preventing forest loss will go a long way to reducing the threat of climate

change. Forests are the largest storehouse of carbon, after coal and oil. When

they are destroyed by logging and clearing for developing massive quantities

of CO2 is released into the atmosphere. Enhancing or expanding greenhouse

gas sinks or reservoirs such as forests. Protecting primary forests is a “first-

best solution” to climate change at the global level. Paying national

constituencies to preserve their local forests could result in safeguarding a

valuable carbon sink at a relatively low-cost compared to paying carbon taxes

on conventional energy systems to accomplish the same abatement level and

could well be seen as a viable global warming mitigation policy that brings the

added benefits of protecting biodiversity and ecosystem services inherent in

these natural systems. Enhancing or expanding greenhouse gas sinks or res-

ervoirs such as forests. Planting trees can help much in reducing global

warming than any other method. Changing climate requires dynamic forest

planning and management strategies. There is a need to incorporate climate

change concern in the long-term forest planning and policy making process.

Thus, it is important to consider and incorporate adaptation practices even in

the afforestation programme.

xvi. Agriculture and related practices also contributes to the global warming to

some extent but there are no measures taken to monitor the emissions of

GHGs as done in case of vehicular pollution. Certain guidelines and policies

must be formulated to reduce GHGs resulting from Agriculture and related

practices.

xvii. Vehicular pollution control in cities deserves top priority. Strategies, which

need to be adopted, include the promotion of public transport and mass rapid

transport systems together with traffic planning and management. In addition,

taxes on fuel quality specifications, promotion of cleaner fuels such as CNG,

replacement of two-stroke engines, and a strengthening of the inspection and

maintenance (I & M) system.

xviii. Measures should be taken to control industrial air pollution including

promotion of cleaner technologies, strengthening of emission standards,

introducing economic incentives, and strengthening of the monitoring and

reporting system. Emphasis should be given to waste minimization and

utilization. Appropriate setting of industries will help to minimize the impacts

of activities on ecosystems and human health.

xix. A comprehensive urban air quality management strategy should be formulated

using information related to urban planning, ambient air quality, an emission

inventory, and air quality dispersion models. Strengthening the monitoring

network and institutional capabilities would facilitate an improvement in the

enforcement mechanism.

xx. The energy sector is the largest contributor of anthropogenic greenhouse gas

emissions; a climate change protocol based on efforts to broaden the range of

technological alternatives to conventional fossil fuel technologies would

significantly improve the prospects for the provision of climate stabilization.

Switching from more to less carbon-intensive fuels or to carbon-free fuels to

reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and adopting clean and renewable

solutions such as wind bio-mass, Geothermal, Solar Power etc.

xxi. Conducting technological research to enhance energy efficiency minimize

emissions of greenhouse gases from fossil fuel use and develop commercial

nonfossil energy sources (In the long run. the cost and timing of availability of

nonfossil energy technologies is one of the major determinants of the cost of

addressing climate change.

xxii. Developing institutional mechanisms such as insurance to share the risks of

damages due to climate change.

xxiii. The business sector can contribute to economic growth. Environmental

protection must be viewed as an investment for the future, with due

consideration of competition and efficiency.

xxiv. New incentives for these elevated environmental ambitions have emerged

during the last few years- one being growing consumer demand for

environmentally friendly products, another being growing worker demand a

high standard in the work environment, and yet nether being upcoming

legislation on product related issues, e.g., producer liability.

xxv. Enhancing green consumerism like promoting changing light bulbs to compact

fluorescents or LEDs, unplug computers, TVs and other electronics when not

in use, washing clothes in cold or warm (not hot) water. Etc., would be a few

positive steps in mitigating global warming. Installing a programmable

thermostat, looking for the Energy Star label when buying new appliances,

choosing renewable power and buying organic and locally grown foods to

avoid carbon foot print are also a few steps.

xxvi. Organizations at the international and regional levels can and do facilitate

more work on adaptation at the local level by providing platforms for the

development of local adaptation policies and strategies.

xxvii. Environmental considerations must be integrated into economic and other

development plans, programmes, and projects, so that the development needs

are taken into account in applying environmental objectives.

xxviii. Implementing existing techniques (and developing new ones) for reducing

methane and nitrous oxide emissions from industrial processes. Landfills,

agriculture, fossil fuel extraction and transportation. Stressing for proper waste

disposal such as garbage buried in landfills which produces methane, a potent

greenhouse gas. By composting kitchen scraps and garden trimmings, and

recycling paper, plastic, metal and glass. Stress for products with minimal or

recyclable packaging.

xxix. Efforts to implement low cost measures such as energy efficiency to reduce

emissions of greenhouse gases must be effectively taken up i.e., switching

from more to less carbon-intensive fuels or to carbon-free fuels to reduce

emissions of greenhouse gases. The efficient use of energy, renewable energy,

hybrid and hydrogen cars, revised taxes and incentives, lifestyle changes such

as more use of public transport, and many other measures must be

emphasized.

xxx. Judicious use of electronic devices. Unnecessary usage of electronic

appliances will not only save fuel i.e. coal by which we get electricity but also

increase the lifetime of your gadgets.

xxxi. Carbon-capture and storage (CCS) is technology that removes and stores the

CO2 during the production of energy from fossil fuels. With further research

and investment. Thus, Carbon sequestration technique which pulls out carbon

dioxide emitted out of the stream of gasses and locks it before it can do much

harm must be facilitated.

xxxii. Imposing carbon taxes which make polluting activities more expensive and

green solutions more affordable, allowing energy-efficient businesses and

households to save money.

xxxiii. Education for broad target audience, especially teachers, municipal

employees, politicians, and decision makers about environment friendly

alternatives to mitigate global warming must be taken up by the Government

of every Nation as their participation in mainstreaming the climate change is

very important. International organizations must facilitate cooperation and

information exchange amongst policymakers, local stakeholders and experts

by hosting workshops and meetings, and establishing information databases.

Developments cannot be stopped, but there is a need to control it rationally. No

government can cope with the problem of environmental repair by itself alone. Thus,

solving the problem of ecological crisis and pollution will require the coordinated

efforts of political and industrial leaders as well as scientists and the general public.

In the last few years several measures relating to environmental issues have

been introduced. They have targeted increasing significantly, the capacity of

renewable energy installations; improving the air quality in major cities and

enhancing afforestation. Other similar measures have been implemented by

committing additional resources and realigning new investments, thus putting

economic development on a climate-friendly path.

Therefore, issues related to environment, development, climate change and

disasters risks have emerged out of the imbalance which are occurring due to

unplanned human interventions. Environment has become more fragile and risks

prone. Thus, the solutions must flow from an integrated framework and it is equally

important that all the stakeholders-national and international must work together in

respect of policy, legislation and programmes on the ground so that the disturbed

equilibrium of the climate is restored or otherwise the consequences would be much

more disastrous.