Alternatives to the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change
This paper traces the history of international efforts to address climate change, from the 1988 Toronto Target through the negotiation and ratification of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. It examines why the Protocol largely failed to achieve its emissions reduction goals, focusing on the withdrawal of the United States, the "law of least ambitious program," and the challenges of managing large multilateral coalitions. Drawing on scholarship by Betsill, Haas, and Victor, the paper considers alternative approaches — including smaller coalitions of major emitters, non-binding agreements, and domestic investment in alternative energy and education — and concludes that the decades spent on the Kyoto process may have diverted critical resources from more effective strategies.
- Origins of International Climate Negotiations: Scientific evidence spurs early international emissions conferences
- The Kyoto Protocol: Negotiation and Ratification: U.S. withdrawal and Russia's role in Kyoto ratification
- The Limited Success of the Kyoto Protocol: Scholarly debate over Protocol's limited but real impact
- Structural Barriers to Effective Climate Agreements: Coalition size and flexible mechanisms undermine enforcement
- Conclusions: Kyoto's failure points toward alternative diplomatic strategies
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- It provides a clear chronological narrative, moving from the 1988 Toronto conference through Kyoto ratification, giving readers a coherent policy timeline.
- It balances competing scholarly perspectives — Betsill's measured optimism against Haas's skepticism — before synthesizing them into a nuanced middle position.
- It grounds its argument in specific theoretical frameworks, notably Underdal's "law of least ambitious program," to explain structural causes of the Protocol's failure rather than relying solely on political narrative.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates effective use of multi-source synthesis: rather than summarizing each source in sequence, it weaves Betsill, Haas, and Victor together thematically, deploying each scholar at the point where their argument best supports the paper's analytical thread. This technique elevates the writing from mere summary to genuine academic engagement.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with scientific and historical context, then dedicates a section to the Kyoto Protocol's negotiation and ratification process. The central analytical section critiques the Protocol's outcomes using scholarly debate, while a fourth section introduces structural and theoretical explanations for failure alongside concrete policy alternatives. A brief but direct conclusion ties the stakes back to the urgency of the problem. This five-part structure reflects standard policy-analysis organization: context → policy history → evaluation → alternatives → recommendation.
Origins of International Climate Negotiations
The effort to bring about effective changes in energy policy worldwide began with the emergence of scientific evidence showing that greenhouse gas concentrations and global surface temperatures had both increased over a geologically short period of time, reaching unprecedented levels within the last 20,000 years (Betsill, 107). This evidence fueled a series of conferences during the latter half of the 20th century. Midway through this series, the first target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions was defined in Toronto, Canada, at the 1988 World Conference on the Changing Atmosphere (Betsill, 106). The "Toronto Target" set a goal of reducing worldwide CO2 emissions to 20% below 1988 levels by 2005.
The Toronto conference may have set the first goal for mitigating rising surface temperatures, but getting countries around the world to agree has been extremely difficult. The structure within which global negotiations for reducing greenhouse gas emissions have occurred was defined by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). This structure brought together over 185 countries to ratify the 1992 UNFCCC convention, which established the goals, considerations, and responsibilities for reducing emissions (Betsill, 109). When a subset of the participants expressed the need to set binding timetables and goals, the United States balked, citing the potentially catastrophic consequences this would have on world economies (Betsill, 112). At the time, the United States was the top producer of greenhouse gases in the world, and conference attendees chose to make concessions rather than force the United States to walk away from negotiations.
Works Cited
Betsill, Michele M. "Global Climate Change Policy: Making Progress or Spinning Wheels?" The Global Environment: Institutions, Law, and Policy, 2nd Edition. Eds. Regina S. Axelrod, David L. Downie, and Norman J. Vig. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly Inc., 2005. 103–124. Print.
Haas, Peter M. "Forum: Climate Change Governance after Bali." Global Environmental Politics 8.3 (2008): 1–8. Print.
Victor, David G. "Toward Effective International Cooperation on Climate Change: Numbers, Interests and Institutions." Global Environmental Politics 6.3 (2006): 90–103. Print.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.