Differentiation of developed and developing countries for the Paris Agreement

Abstract The differentiation of developed and developing countries is a critical challenge during operationalization of the Paris Agreement. The Agreement has been prepared and established under the clear guidance of the Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The motivation through constructing a new agreement is to include all countries for combatting climate change. Unlike the UNFCCC, the agreement is not referring to Annex-I, non-Annex or any specific country groups. Therefore, before the Agreement starts implementation in 2020, highlights as developed and developing countries in the agreement require a new definition and criteria. In this paper, we rank countries based on differentiation proposals for classification of developed and developing countries particularly on mitigation of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by using data from the world's top 50 emitters. The findings suggest that classifications based on the Annex system of the UNFCCC do not give a clear reference point to define developed and developing countries.

[1]  Hermann E. Ott,et al.  South-North dialogue on equity in the greenhouse. A proposal for an adequate and equitable global climate agreement , 2004 .

[2]  Jason Lowe,et al.  Analysing countries' contribution to climate change: scientific and policy-related choices , 2005 .

[3]  H. Winkler,et al.  Differentiation of countries’ future commitments in a post-2012 climate regime: An assessment of the “South–North Dialogue” Proposal , 2007 .

[4]  N. Dubash.  Copenhagen: climate of mistrust. , 2009 .

[5]  V. Bellassen,et al.  Compliance of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol in the first commitment period , 2016 .

[6]  Nardo Michela,et al.  Constructing Consistent Composite Indicators: the Issue of Weights , 2005 .

[7]  Daniel Bodansky,et al.  The Copenhagen Climate Change Conference: A Postmortem , 2010, American Journal of International Law.

[8]  J. Fuglestvedt,et al.  Climate agreements based on responsibility for global warming: Periodic updating, policy choices, and regional costs , 2006 .

[9]  Michiel Schaeffer,et al.  The Brazilian Proposal and other Options for International Burden Sharing: an evaluation of methodological and policy aspects using the FAIR model , 1999 .

[10]  Zili Yang,et al.  Balancing contemporary fairness and historical justice: A ‘quasi-equitable’ proposal for GHG mitigations , 2010 .

[11]  O. Edenhofer,et al.  Climate change 2014 : mitigation of climate change , 2014 .

[12]  Madeleine Heyward,et al.  Equity and international climate change negotiations: a matter of perspective , 2007 .

[13]  Aie.  CO2 Emissions from Fuel Combustion 2013 , 2013 .

[14]  J. Fuglestvedt,et al.  Introducing population-adjusted historical contributions to global warming , 2008 .

[15]  N. Höhne,et al.  Differentiating (historic) responsibilities for climate change , 2009 .

[16]  Eric Kemp-Benedict,et al.  The Greenhouse Development Rights framework , 2009 .

[17]  L. H. Pedersen,et al.  Burden-sharing and global climate negotiations: the case of the Kyoto Protocol , 2010 .

[18]  Amartya Sen,et al.  Human Development Index , 2003 .

[19]  Abbas Rajabifard,et al.  Transport sustainability index: Melbourne case study , 2014 .

[20]  Yi-Ming Wei,et al.  Review of proposals for an Agreement on Future Climate Policy: Perspectives from the responsibilities for GHG reduction , 2013 .