¸ßÇ帣ÀûƬ

Opinion_

The Paris Climate Agreement: What comes next for Australia will be hard

22 April 2016
Signing the Paris Climate Agreement is easy but what comes next will be hard

We know that to make a meaningful contribution to combating climate change, Australia needs a credible pathÌýto net zero emissions by 2050, writes Professor Tim Stephens.Ìý

Tomorrow, world leaders and diplomats willÌýÌýto sign theÌý. It will be theÌý, with representatives fromÌý, including more than 60 heads of state, on hand to sign the historic deal that wasÌý.

Signing is just the first step. Nations then have to follow through byÌý. Only when 55 countries, representing at least 55% of world greenhouse emissions, have signed and ratified the agreement will it become binding under international law.

Such is the eagerness among the international community to sign and ratify the Paris Agreement that it isÌý, rather than in 2020 as was initially expected.

As 2016Ìý, there is a renewed sense of urgency among almost all governments. They now acknowledge that greenhouse emissions must be reduced rapidly if there is any hope of meeting the Paris Agreement’s goal of keeping global warming well below 2℃.

Australia’s government hasÌýÌýthat it will be represented at the ceremony, although it will be Environment Minister Greg Hunt rather than Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull who will join world leaders inÌý.

Australia’s track record

Australia has signed previous climate treaties, but it has a mixed record in following through with its commitments.

°Õ³ó±ðÌý. In the same year, it signed and ratified theÌý. That agreement gave rise to the UN climate regime of which the Paris Agreement is now the most important component.

In 1997, theÌýÌý³Ù³ó±ðÌý, in the process winning major concessions that allowed Australia toÌýÌýrather than reduce them.

Despite this sweetener, John Howard refused to take the logical step and render Kyoto legally binding by ratifying it. The Kyoto Protocol only entered into force in 2005, after Russia ratified the treaty. It was not until 2007, following the election of the Rudd government, that AustraliaÌý.

"The Turnbull government’s active and supportive participation in last year’s Paris climate negotiations signalled that, on the international plane at least, some bipartisanship has returned to Australia’s climate policy," writes Professor Stephens.Ìý

In 2011 the Gillard government introduced an emissions trading scheme (with an initial fixed carbon price) to ensure Australia could meet its Kyoto commitments (and deliver deeper cuts over time, as by itself Kyoto has achieved minimal emissions reductions). But the Abbott government repealed this measure in July 2014 and replaced it with theÌý. This policy remains a work in progress and hasÌýÌýto keep Australia’s goals within reach.

Australia’s actions since 2013 are clearly against the international tide.Ìý, 40 nations and 23 subnational jurisdictions have adopted or are planning to adopt carbon prices.

The Turnbull government’s active and supportive participation in last year’s Paris climate negotiations signalled that, on the international plane at least, some bipartisanship has returned to Australia’s climate policy. The same cannot be said of the domestic front, where the major parties are still at loggerheads on the climate challenge.

Opposition Leader Bill Shorten has pledged that a Labor government wouldÌýÌýif elected this year. But the Coalition government remains implacably opposed to any price on carbon. This is despite the fact that Turnbull himselfÌýÌýand previouslyÌýÌýon emissions trading in 2009. Even HowardÌýÌýin the dying days of his government in 2007.

Tricky times

This is a major problem because without agreement across political lines, Australia could be signing a treaty with which it cannot comply.

Australia is theÌýÌýand the highest per capita emitter in the OECD. Now, because of the abolition of the carbon price, its emissions areÌý.

Australia looks set to overshoot even itsÌýÌýof reducing emissions by 26-28% by 2030 relative to 2005 levels. And as commitments under the Paris Agreement will become stricter over time, with the deal requiring countries toÌýÌýevery five years, Australia will be in an increasingly difficult and embarrassing position of having made promises it cannot keep.

This may set the scene for dithering by the Turnbull government, in much the same way as the Howard government held out against ratifying the Kyoto Protocol for a decade before finally proposing a climate policy when electorally it was already too late.

This year is off to a scorching start. Globally, February was aÌýÌýand MarchÌý. The effects are being felt from the polar regions, where the melting of theÌý, to the tropics and subtropics, where record warm waters haveÌý.

We know that to make a meaningful contribution to combating climate change, Australia needs aÌýÌýto net zero emissions by 2050. To do this the Turnbull government must match its international commitments with effective laws and policies at home.

Legislating Australia’s climate targets, setting a national cap on emissions, and pricing carbon pollution are vital if Australia’s signature on the Paris Agreement is to mean anything at all.

Ìý

is a Professor of International Law with expertise in environmental law. This article was first published inÌý.Ìý

Katie Booth

Assistant Media and PR Adviser

Related articles