Home 
Publications Catalog Online Publications Document
Asian Environment Outlook 2001 : III. Options and Opportunities
Regional and International GovernanceIn addition to strengthening environmental governance at the national and local scales, there are significant opportunities for enhanced international governance within the Asia and Pacific region and globally. Regional political and economic integration has increased the likelihood of direct and indirect transboundary environmental degradation (see Box 3-13). Transboundary environmental impacts on national development policies and projects indicate the need for regional environmental governance mechanisms to represent the interests of all relevant stakeholders (see Box 3-14). One potential model is the Aarhus Convention, which includes a provision allowing affected individuals and organizations to demand information, participation, and redress regardless of their country of citizenship (Petkova and Veit 2000).
Given the size of the regions’ population and share of the world economy, emissions-intensive growth trajectories, and the global significance of its biodiversity, the region is vital as both the subject and object of global environmental governance regimes. As the 1992 Rio Convention highlighted, over the last decade, developing countries have become more assertive regarding the need for such regimes to incorporate their aspirations for economic growth, and international environmental regime-making has become increasingly sensitive to these demands (Hassan 1995). Many countries in Asia have acceded to major environmental agreements, including the 1973 Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species and the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity (De Klemm and others 1995). However, partly because of weak enforcement provisions and the failure of industrialized countries to provide necessary financing, the degree of implementation of these agreements has been patchy. Myanmar, for example, has failed to comply even with basic provisions related to national-level reporting (Brunner and others 1998). In the short-term, economic globalization and the participation of Asian countries in new global economic governance mechanisms will likely have a greater environmental impact than their participation in agreements specifically focused on the environment (see Box 3-15). Yet it is difficult to discern a priori whether the net impact will be positive or negative because for the most part, impacts will be unintentional. Globalization of finance has enabled governments in the Asia and Pacific region access to private capital for development investments free of the conditions of environmental development assistance (Ganzi and others 1998). For example, even though multilateral development banks declined financing the PRC’s Three Gorges Dam Project, the government was able to access alternative financing from international bond markets.
At the same time, new modes of global public policy making will increasingly influence norms of environmental governance at national and international levels. The World Commission on Dams, an independent, multistakeholder effort to determine criteria under which large dams contribute to environmentally and socially sustainable development, offers interesting possibilities. If the commission is successful in its objective of reaching a consensus on such criteria, public interest advocates in the Asia and Pacific region and elsewhere will have a new standard by which to hold governments, corporations, and international organizations accountable for their environmental performance. One important emerging opportunity within the area of international environmental governance is that of carbon trading. Ample opportunities exist in the Asia and Pacific region for carbon sequestration using plantations. Although such enterprises have yet to develop fully in the Asia and Pacific region, there are many examples of the use of forest plantations for carbon sequestration by public utility companies in developed countries under the auspices of the voluntary framework referred to as “activities implemented jointly” established by the United Nations. Private companies have already begun to engage in emissions trading. These private companies are proceeding with trades and initiatives regardless of the risk that some traded emissions may not be credited under currently emerging domestic, bilateral, and multilateral regimes. A large number of cases of carbon emissions trading either are already taking place or are in the process of being contracted (see Box 3-16). For example, Arizona Public Services (APS) and Niagara Mohawk, two US utilities, traded CO2 emissions reductions for sulfur dioxide emissions allowances in December 1996. Niagara Mohawk transferred 2.5 million tons of CO2 reductions achieved through its emissions reduction activities to APS. These tons were “surplus” beyond what was needed to achieve a 1990 emissions level from its operations. In return, APS transferred sulfur dioxide allowances that it held in excess of what was required for compliance under US regulations. The value of the CO2 reductions was estimated at $2.7 per metric ton of carbon based on the market value of sulfur dioxide allowances. APS is also undertaking a project in Mexico to replace inefficient diesel generators with rural electrification based on solar and wind power. In May 1997, APS purchased 1,000 metric tons of carbon (equaling the average annual carbon emissions of 900 US cars) in the form of Certifiable Offsets (CTO) from the Government of Costa Rica. The CTOs are produced by the Protected Areas Project and are being independently certified by Société Générale de Surveillance.
|
| © 2008 Asian Development Bank Privacy | Terms of Use |
 Top of page |
Back