chidiebereol_3327145_PHIL375_Assignment_4_Case_Study_Name_Chidiebere_Emmanuel_Oleh_PHIL_375_(3)
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Athabasca University, Athabasca *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
375
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Dec 6, 2023
Type
docx
Pages
9
Uploaded by oleh1man
Name: Chidiebere Emmanuel
Oleh School: Athabasca
University Tutor: Wolfgang Blaine
Assignment: Three
Course: PHIL 375
Introduction:
This case study is related to the general topic I selected on plastic waste disposal's environmental
impact. I have researched the Kyoto Protocol, which addressed the issue of greenhouse gas emissions and how the government can contribute towards global climate change. The Kyoto Protocol was established in 1997 and had over 160 countries as committee members. It was an arrangement requiring those countries to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions below a stated level. The protocol faced some criticism and some challenges. At first, it was seen as a step to fight climate change and mitigate its effects.
In 2011, Canada withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol because of economic development obstacles. The decision to do so raised the amount of criticism and concerns about Canada’s reputation and commitment to addressing the climate change issue. The withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol occurred because of the change in the new government, which was under the leadership of Prime Minister Steven Harper. The new Conservative party blamed the Liberal Party for not cutting greenhouse emissions. Environment Minister Peter Kent stated that withdrawing would save the government about sixteen million Canadian dollars in penalties. The Conservative Party withdrew
from the protocol because of the conflict between economic development and environmental sustainability.
The Conservative Party's opposition to the protocol and eventual withdrawal reflected an apparent conflict between economic development and environmental sustainability. This became a conflict between the federal government and the Alberta province about the oil sands.
Believes that they will be the only province with more excessively high share cost of gas emission because of their energy-based economy, and large businesses think that they cannot compete with the United States, that have no Kyoto commitments to pay. In the case study, I will discuss the issues, critical moral principles, and my position on the policy issues. This case
study is suitable to expand my knowledge of greenhouse gas emissions, and this aligns with the
general topic of plastic waste disposal.
BODY:
The environmental policy in Canada is a complex issue when it comes to pollution. Both provincial and territorial governments in Canada have a say in environmental policy-making. Canada has a decentralized approach toward an environmental policy where the provincial and territorial governments control their resources. In the case of the Kyoto Protocol, it showed the dilemma between trying to have a sustainable economy and having a less polluted environment. The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement between countries to work together to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Canada. This has been a meaningful conversation from the opposition party. Canadian companies were required to reduce their Greenhouse emission that, requires l
arge industrial emitters to cut back by 55megatonnes as part of an overall
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
240-megatonne target. The policy issue was whether the Canadian government could keep up with its part or obligation under the protocol. The withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol and the increased support for significant emission producers, such as the Alberta oil sands, exhibited an apparent conflict\ between economic development and environmental sustainability. Moreover, the withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol and the need for substantial emissions reduction policies raised concerns about Canada's ability to meet its climate targets.
Canada withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol in 2011, which was meant with criticism from the advocates. Two argued that Canada had abandoned the excellent course to weaken the global effort to attack the climate change issues. The decision to leave the protocol will be a concern about the Canadian stance on climate change and its willingness to take action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Another policy issue is why the centuries that use more carbon are not included or join with the Kyoto Protocol countries like India and China were not committee members. The new government preferred the Kyoto Protocol, and Canada could not deliver the portion of the deal, which would lead to millions the penalty they would have to pay if they were
still, leading to the withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol. The moral commitments, in this case, the exit from the Kyoto Protocol, were about Canada's economic sustainability, environmental, and global views. The question now is whether the decision was the right one or the wrong one. This will depend on what the individual views the most for an environmentalist. They will see this action as Canada not contributing to controlling climate change. The principle in this situation is that the federal government did not believe it was a fair deal because some countries that use more C02 are not by the Kyoto Protocol.
“The Kyoto Protocol failed because it is the wrong type of instrument (a universal intergovernmental treaty), relying too heavily on the wrong agents exercising the wrong power to create a carbon market from the top down. It relies on establishing a
global market by government fiat, which has never been done successfully for any commodity” (Rayner,2004, p.8)
Canada's decision reflected a belief in the importance of economic growth as a moral principle. By doing so, the federal government believes that economic development is better for the healthy beings of Canadians. I will give my view and option on the matter right in the conclusion section. This decision also raised ethical concerns about the inattention to environmental reactions and the negative impact on global climate change efforts
. Canada's withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol raises critical moral questions regarding the balance between economic growth and environmental sustainability, as well as worldwide cooperation and responsibilities.
The position on both sides was that the liberal government saw joining the Kyoto Protocol as the potential to address climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The idea for the Kyoto Protocol was that they believe that if countries come together, they can change their goal of preventing global warming. Kyoto Protocol. For the first time, legally binding targets and commitments were set. Vital economic players such as Japan, the US, and the European Union pledged to cut their emissions by 7%, 8%, and 9%, respectively. Opponents of the Kyoto Protocol had several arguments against its implementation. They argued that the performance of the Kyoto Protocol would result in significant economic costs and hindrances.
Economic growth. This paved the way for significant problems in scope and effectiveness.
Of the Protocol.
“Although in 1997, the US and EU were the world’s largest emitters, by 2006, China surpassed the United States in annual emissions, and India’s emissions are currently almost equal to those of the EU. Even more damningly, by 2012, the year after the first commitment period, global emissions had risen 44% from 1997 levels, driven predominantly by emissions growth in developing nations. The Kyoto Protocol had failed
to stem the flow of global emissions
.” (climate-foresight. eu).
This also showed that the agreement unfairly targeted developed countries, like the United States, Canada, etc., while the developing countries were exempt from emissions reduction targets. The structure of the Protocol believes that Kyoto Protocol would only disadvantage developing countries by providing and benefit in terms of greenhouse gas reduction. "The Kyoto Protocol failed to equate emissions reductions with economic opportunity, and some countries grew to view mitigation as a costly punishment. Following this reasoning, the US Senate refused to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, citing potential damage to the US economy as their motive, setting a precedent for countries such as Canada and Japan to pull out of the deal without
penalty in 2011” (climate foresight. eu).
Another argument against the Kyoto Protocol is its limited ability to bring in countries with significant emission profiles. These were some of the criticisms that the agreement needed to adequately address other countries with more emission profiles, e.g., China and India. Another argument against the Kyoto Protocol is the need for more flexibility because it did not consider countries’ economic circumstances and realities. Furthermore, the lack of flexibility in the Protocol has been deemed problematic as it does not allow for tailored approaches to emissions reductions based on countries' specific needs.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
Discussion
:
In this section, I will state my position on the Kyoto Protocol; it is essential to consider that it was a significant landmark international effort to fight climate change. The protocol could be better, but it served as the channel towards global collaboration on reducing greenhouse gas emissions; it got countries working together to act about climate change and establish techniques
that promote accountability in emissions reduction efforts. From my point of view, criticism against the Kyoto Protocol should not be viewed as a reason to withdraw from the protocol completely, but rather as improving the situation and having to find an improvement with the significant criticism about not including the other developing countries to join the Kyoto protocol. One way to address the concerns regarding the exemption of developing countries from necessary emission reduction targets is by encouraging them to engage in greater participation and engagement from these nations. Offer some financial support to the developing
countries; developed countries can accommodate the developing nations in applying sustainable and low-carbon technologies. This can help level the playing field and ensure all countries work towards the common goal. To be fair in this argument, I do understand why Canada withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol, which in my option, is understandable because the politician was looking.
After the interest of their people put them into power, the federal government needed help to give up some of the economic development and unfair distribution of emissions to the developed countries. My position is to find a different solution before leaving the Kyoto Protocol. Still, if solutions cannot be reached within the committee, then it will be best to go to the committee and revisit it. Because for these to be effective, all parties must be involved to achieve the goal of global clean air. Moreover, it is essential to revisit and strengthen the emission reduction targets set by the Kyoto Protocol.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, the Kyoto Protocol was an innovative idea to bring awareness to global warming issues. The Protocol faced criticism for its constraints and shortcomings; it remains an important international agreement addressing greenhouse gas emissions. It is essential to recognize the need for continuous improvement and adaptation to mitigate climate change effectively. I understand the federal government's position on withdrawing from the Kyoto Protocol. Still, the difference in the federal government played a crucial role in withdrawing from the Kyoto Protocol. Their view on the protocol differed from the previous government, and their decision to start was seen as Canada was putting the economy before the environment.
I can understand their views and why they felt that way, but to mitigate climate change, all industrial countries must be involved to achieve the same objectives; several vital steps can be taken to strengthen the effectiveness of international climate agreements.
Finally, Canada should have stayed and found a solution with other countries in the committee, including other industrial countries like India and China. Then if other countries leave the protocol, it will not be adequate to achieve the goal set out from the beginning. I have learned much from the case to see how the view can change. I believe in having a sustainable economy and taking care of our environment and ecosystem.
Reference
:
S. Rayner, “What Drives Environmental Policy?”, (Editorial) Global Environmental Change, 16
(2006) 4
Success
or
failure? The
Kyoto
Protocol’s
troubled
legacy
-
Foresight
(climate foresight. eu)
CO
₂
and Greenhouse
Gas Emissions
- Our
World in
Data
China
overtakes
US
as
world's
biggest
CO2
emitter
| Environment
| The
Guardian
Kyoto
Protocol
comes
into effect
| CBC News
Canada
Pulls
out
of
Kyoto
Protocol |
CBC
News
Executive
Summary (colorado.edu)
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help