The third Conference of the Parties to the Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) finally agreed at Kyoto on December 11 on a protocol to limit the emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs). The FCCC was drafted and agreed to at the Rio Summit in 1992. Subsequently, two Conferences of the Parties were held in 1995 and 1996 respectively for implementation of the Convention.

At the very first Conference of the Parties (COP-1) at Berlin, it was agreed that by the time of COP-3, a protocol or binding agreement would be worked out for limiting the emissions of GHGs. The threat of climate change is no longer seen as a fear based on mere theory or scientific conjecture.

It is now widely accepted that human actions are interfering with the earth's climate system.

Considerable credit for this should go to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which completed its Second Assessment Report in 1995 and provided substantial scientific evidence on the extent of changes in the world's climate over pre-industrial times and the magnitude of possible changes in the future. The most important of the GHGs is carbon dioxide, which results from increasing use of all fuels, mainly coal and hydrocarbons. Hence, the largest share of cumulative emissions has come from the developed countries, led overwhelmingly by the US.

The FCCC clearly required global action to solve this problem, but defined ``common, but differentiated responsibilities,'' involving actions in the first instance only by the developed countries, who are historically responsible for the problem. The requirements imposed on the developing countries initially are only those of reporting on emissions as a first step. Before Kyoto, however, a powerful campaign was launched in the US by a group called the Global Climate Coalition which persuaded the US Senate to pass a resolution clearly stating its intention not to ratify any treaty which required the US to limit its emissions of GHGs without meaningful participation by the developing countries. This requirement has been echoed subsequently by both President Bill Clinton and Vice President Al Gore.

However, the basis for this position is questionable on ethical as well as procedural grounds.

The US position should be changed to facilitate the efficient use of energy in the developing countries through a programme of technology transfer that does not ignore existing commercial arrangements governing such transfer, but which should create conditions whereby knowledge transfer and capacity building in the developing countries are promoted by the North to facilitate choices of suitable technology. Meaningful participation by the developing countries should not be translated into legal or binding commitments, but the creation of conditions which help the Third World to move in the right direction as quickly as possible.

The road beyond Kyoto would be extremely difficult. Pressures from the developed countries are likely to increase for the developing countries to take action. The G-77 and China generally stood together at Kyoto and were, therefore, able to withstand pressures for voluntary commitments being included in the final version of the protocol. According to press statements, Vice President Al Gore has already made clear that the protocol will not be submitted to the US Senate for ratification till the US is able to persuade the developing countries to accept more meaningful participation. Even though this statement need not be taken literally, pressures on the developing countries would only be intensified in the coming months.

India should learn from Kyoto and developments leading up to it should be learned before it is too late. Far greater intellectual effort in formulating and continuously reviewing India's strategies would be required.

Much greater diplomatic activity and constant networking with several countries is another prerequisite. The European Union (EU), for instance, has generally supported developing countries. We need to work closely with the EU in ensuring no change in its position. Ultimately, the objective of the developing countries should be to convert the present atmosphere of confrontation to one of partnership.

The writer is the director of Tata Energy Research Institute and Vice Chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Copyright © 1997 Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd.