COP3

COP3
Name	Third Conference of the Parties (1997)
Date	1997-12-01 – 1997-12-11
Location	Kyoto, Japan
Venue	Kyoto International Conference Center
Participants	Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and observer organizations
Organizer	United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Secretariat

COP3

COP3 convened in December 1997 in Kyoto, Japan, as the third session of the Conference of the Parties under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Delegates from United States, European Union, Japan, Canada, Australia, Russia, China, India and many other Parties negotiated binding obligations for greenhouse gas emission reductions, engaging with international organizations such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, World Bank, International Monetary Fund and the United Nations Development Programme.

Background and Context

The meeting followed a series of preparatory sessions including the Conference of the Parties (UNFCCC) plenaries and subsidiary body meetings in Geneva and Bonn, shaped by scientific assessments from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Third Assessment Report process and political momentum after the Rio Earth Summit and the adoption of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Rising scientific consensus from Hadley Centre, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, NOAA and academic centers in Cambridge (UK), Harvard University, MIT intensified pressure on Parties such as Germany, France, United Kingdom, Italy, Spain and Sweden to agree binding targets. Developing-country delegations including Brazil, South Africa, Mexico, Indonesia and Argentina highlighted equity issues referenced in the Marrakesh Accords preparatory debates and previous outcomes from the Bonn Agreements.

Objectives and Negotiations

Primary objectives included establishing quantified emissions targets for 2008–2012, defining flexibility mechanisms, and setting compliance procedures. Negotiators from United States Senate, European Commission, Japanese Ministry of the Environment, Environment Canada and delegations from Russia and Ukraine debated target baselines, drawing on inventories from IPCC guidelines and submissions from Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development members. Key negotiation threads involved mechanisms proposed by proponents such as the World Bank Prototype Carbon Fund, mechanisms advocated by Norway and Netherlands, and opposition positions from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and some OPEC members regarding emissions trading and liability. Technical issues were influenced by experts from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Rocky Mountain Institute, Princeton University and legal advisers from International Institute for Sustainable Development.

Key Outcomes and Agreements

The session produced a protocol containing quantified emission limitation and reduction commitments for Annex I Parties, operationalized through mechanisms including emissions trading, joint implementation, and a clean development mechanism. The protocol text reflected proposals from European Union Council, Umbrella Group, G77 and China, and Alliance of Small Island States, and included accounting methods influenced by IPCC guidance and inventory practices of United Kingdom Department of the Environment. Decisions addressed sinks and land-use change issues raised by Brazil and New Zealand and included reporting and review procedures aligning with the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice recommendations. The resulting agreement outlined timetables and compliance frameworks later elaborated at meetings in Bonn and Marrakesh.

Implementation and Impact

Implementation required ratification steps by national legislatures and executives in United States Congress, Diet of Japan, Bundestag, Duma, and national parliaments in Canada and Australia. Financial and technical support mechanisms were discussed with inputs from the Global Environment Facility and operational partnerships with United Nations Development Programme and United Nations Environment Programme. The agreement spurred creation of national inventories by agencies such as EPA (United States), Environment Agency (Japan), Environment and Climate Change Canada and prompted market responses including carbon trading schemes in European Union Emission Trading System precursor initiatives and private sector involvement from BP, Shell, Enron, and financial institutions like Goldman Sachs and Deutsche Bank.

Participants and Organizational Structure

Participants included representatives of United Nations member states organized into negotiating blocs: Annex I Parties, Non-Annex I Parties, European Union, Umbrella Group, G77 and China, Alliance of Small Island States, and Least Developed Countries Group. The session was chaired by a President from Japan and supported by the UNFCCC Secretariat, technical panels from IPCC, and legal advisers linked to International Court of Justice precedents on treaty interpretation. Observers included Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, World Meteorological Organization, International Energy Agency, NGOs such as Greenpeace, World Wide Fund for Nature, Friends of the Earth, industry groups, and academic delegations from institutions like Stanford University and University of Cambridge.

Controversies and Criticisms

Criticism focused on perceived inequities between Annex I and Non-Annex I obligations, the absence of immediate commitments from major emitters such as China and India, and the political decision-making in national legislatures exemplified by debates in the United States Senate and statements from the White House that affected ratification prospects. Environmental NGOs including Greenpeace and Sierra Club criticized flexibility mechanisms for potential loopholes, while industry groups and some energy-exporting states such as Saudi Arabia and Russia raised concerns about economic impacts and competitiveness, citing analyses from OECD and International Energy Agency. Legal scholars at institutions like Yale Law School and Columbia Law School debated compliance enforcement, arguing that dispute-resolution procedures required strengthening. World Bank and development agencies debated adequacy of financing for adaptation, an issue emphasized by delegations from Bangladesh, Maldives, Philippines and Kenya.

Category:International environmental conferences