Bali was a success.  The Bali mandate laid the basis for a new global consensus on climate change.  All major emitters of greenhouse gases signed on.  Not everyone was happy. It was not the start the European Union wanted.  The EU wanted reference to long-term and short-term targets and agreement that the new consensus would extend rather than replace Kyoto. Others did not, not just the U.S., but Russia, China, Canada, India and Brazil.

Give the European Commission credit where it is due. The Financial Times (FT) reported recently that Peter Mandelson, European Commissioner for Trade, announced that the Commission had shelved plans to impose carbon trade barriers.  The key reason seemed to be that they would be contrary to World Trade Organization (WTO) rules.

The European Union position on climate change amounts to rejection of its pledges at the Rio Earth Summit in 2002 to ensure that environmental objectives would not override development objectives.  The EU wants to replace the Kyoto Protocol with a tougher version of the Kyoto Protocol which will have stronger binding targets to cut emissions over the long-term and require developing countries ultimately to meet those targets as well.  The overwhelming view among development economists is that this will slow growth in developing countries and impede development objectives, particularly strategies to reduce poverty.

One of the reasons the Kyoto Protocol failed was because it did little to help developing countries use technology to address climate change.  Technology was treated as an incentive to take action or as a reward for signing onto Kyoto; not as a key strategy for reducing emissions.  There are many cutting edge technologies that can reduce greenhouse gas emissions without compromising living standards.  They offer important opportunities to developing countries to reduce emissions.