Dangers
of the Endgame: Engaging Russia and Ukraine during the
Gap
By Anna Korppoo and Olga
Gassan-zade FNI Climate Policy Perspectives 2 November
2011
 In the absence of functional
carbon market opportunities, the approaching gap in the international climate
regime beyond 2012 is likely to alienate the major transition economy emitters
Russia and Ukraine from the potential future climate regime.
The new
carbon market mechanisms currently under negotiation remain too underdeveloped
and uncertain to provide incentives for Russia and Ukraine to remain actively
engaged. Further, experiences with carbon market mechanisms thus far illustrate
many weaknesses in the administrative and political systems of these countries
which discourage their involvement in complex future mechanisms.
In the
absence of post-2012 carbon market options it seems likely that Ukraine will
attempt to preserve its carbon market capacity by establishing a domestic ETS -
however, without external involvement and prospects of demand, this may not be
successful. Given Moscow's negative attitude towards further Kyoto commitments,
it would be easy for Russia to interpret a gap as a broken promise: the surplus
of AAUs and the Kyoto mechanisms are considered as a right that Russia was
promised in Kyoto in 1997.
Given the functionality of Joint
Implementation (JI), its extension seems the most feasible option for engaging
Russia and Ukraine in the international climate regime immediately post-2012.
However, various politically difficult questions remain as to the JISC
recommendation to base ERU issuance on the first commitment period
AAUs.
Regardless of the problems and frustrations experienced with JI
and GIS during the first commitment period, engaging Russia and Ukraine in the
climate regime through the continuation of JI would probably provide the
least-effort option for the future. Allowing domestic carbon-market capacities
to disintegrate during the gap years would probably lead to serious problems
when the support of these countries is sought for the future climate regime,
due not least to Russia's confrontational approach to international climate
diplomacy.
Download report
>
|
| |
|