Whythe Montreal Protocol is successful than the Kyoto Accord.
The1987Montreal Protocol is an international treaty that seeks to reduce theconsumption, global production and emission of ozone depletingsubstances. The ozone depleting substances (ODSs) are green housegases that enhance global warming and climate change. The 1992 Kyotoprotocol urges the member states to reduce green house emissionsbecause they enhance global warming (Casswell 2).The MontrealProtocol plays a key role in curbing the use and production of ODS,on the other hand, the Kyoto accord has stimulated insignificantefforts in containing greenhouse gas emissions. The Montreal Protocolis a success because it is fair and offers detailed provisionsregarding its implementation.
Theprevalence of the Montreal protocol was driven by the United States,which approved it because it reduced the monetized costs. Similarly,the United States believes it has more to lose from ozone depletionthat the climate changes (Sunsteain 6) On the other hand the UnitedStates did not approve the Kyoto protocol because it will spend moremoney while making little profits in its efforts to control climatechange. The United States and other major nations preferred theMontreal Protocol to the Kyoto Accord because they could gain fromthe agreement.
TheKyoto protocol did not provide regulations for the developingnations this compelled the developed nations to shun away from theaccord terming it as unfair and harmful to their economy (Peloso320). The Kyoto protocol failed to describe efficient enforcementmechanisms by not describing the penalties to be incurred if nationsfailed to meet emission targets. It is not easy to calculate the costbenefit compliance if the consequences of failing to meet emissiontargets are described (Peloso 321). The Kyoto protocol fails todetail compliance mechanisms. The accord states that developingnation parties will receive financial resources to aid in reducinggreen house emissions. However, the protocol does not describe thetotal amount to be sent, donor nations, the beneficiary nations andmechanism of disbursing the money.
TheMontreal protocol addresses the shortcomings of the Kyoto Accord. Inthe Montreal protocol, developing nations are given a delay period often years to implement the accord’s requirements. The MontrealProtocol defines the technical and financial assistance mechanisms todeveloping counties to aid in compliance of the regulations. Theaccord has designed an increasing regulation and delayed compliancescale to developing nations to decrease monetary load on developednations (Peloso 322). The Montreal Protocol describes penalties fornon- participation and non- compliance of members who will not beallowed to export or import products containing CFCs (Casswell 10).Parties are not allowed to grant non-parties with financial ortechnological aid for projects that use or produce CFCs. The MontrealProtocol provides a technological platform for transferring financialor technological assistance, hence coordinating efforts while curbingduplication (Peloso 133). The Montreal Protocol provides provisionson CFC limit modification y convening a panel of experts to assessthe efficiency of control measures.
Inconclusion, the Montreal Protocol is successful than the Kyoto Accordbecause it unifies both the developed and developing nations underdescried regulations in fighting a universal environments problem
Sunstein,Cass. “Of Montreal and Kyoto: A tale of Two Protocols”. HarvardEnvironmental Law Review.31 (2007): 1-66. Web. 8 May 2015
PelosoChris. “Craftingan International Climate ChangeProtocol:Applying the Lessons Learned fromtheSuccess of the Montreal Protocol and the ozone Depletion Problem.”Journalof Land Use25.2 (2010): 305-329. Web.8 May 2015
Casswell,Oscar. InternationalEnvironmental Agreements: Does Montreal Have Lessons for Kyoto?IPSWorking Paper. 2008. Web.8 May 2015