IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v13y2011i5p366-377.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Kyoto Protocol and "deforestation": A legal analysis on Turkish environment and forest legislation

Author

Listed:
  • Aydin Coskun, Aynur
  • Gençay, Gökçe

Abstract

Today, one of the most important environmental issues that pose international threats is global warming and, as a result, climate changes. As a result of the researches led by developed nations to detect adverse effects of human-originated greenhouse gas emissions, which have already reached dangerous levels in the atmosphere, on the climate system, the need to take global action about this matter has been revealed. Kyoto Protocol, which is adopted in 1997 and now considered as the most significant international effort ever made to minimize the effects of global warming and climate changes, is of great importance for determining the obligations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and the applicable mechanisms. After a long process, Turkey has become a party to Kyoto Protocol in 2009 and thus undertaken the obligations stipulated for the parties thereto. In the present study, "deforestation" has been picked out of the five driving factors of the said Protocol due to importance of forests as significant carbon sinks, and adequacy of Turkish environment and forest legislation relating to this matter has been analyzed. Purpose of this study is to assess, under the title of "deforestation", Turkish environment and forest legislation with respect to achievement of Kyoto Protocol's goal and to reveal deficiencies of this legislation, and according to the results of such assessment, to make suggestions for Turkey's fulfillment of its obligations mentioned above. As a result of the general assessment made in the light of all data above on Turkish environment and forestry legislation with respect to deforestation, we can say that this legislation is currently cannot be considered as adequate to fulfill the obligations under Kyoto Protocol. However, this does not mean that the norms are wholly negative and inadequate. Having signed Kyoto Protocol short time ago, Turkey has not undertaken any responsibility for the first period of obligations, but will be subject to the next period of obligations. The first step to fulfill the obligations under the Protocol is to revise the existing legal arrangements, to determine their gaps and to begin working to ensure that the legislation will be adequate to fulfill the obligations to be imposed during the second period of obligations.

Suggested Citation

  • Aydin Coskun, Aynur & Gençay, Gökçe, 2011. "Kyoto Protocol and "deforestation": A legal analysis on Turkish environment and forest legislation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(5), pages 366-377, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:13:y:2011:i:5:p:366-377
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934111000323
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Babiker, Mustafa & Reilly, John M. & Jacoby, Henry D., 2000. "The Kyoto Protocol and developing countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(8), pages 525-536, July.
    2. S. Brown & M. Burnham & M. Delaney & M. Powell & R. Vaca & A. Moreno, 2000. "Issues and challenges for forest-based carbon-offset projects: A case study of the Noel Kempff climate action project in Bolivia," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 99-121, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Smith, Joyotee & Scherr, Sara J., 2003. "Capturing the Value of Forest Carbon for Local Livelihoods," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 31(12), pages 2143-2160, December.
    2. Suzi Kerr & Joanna Hendy & Shuguang Liu & Alexander S. P. Pfaff, 2004. "Tropical Forest Protection, Uncertainty, and the Environmental Integrity of Carbon Mitigation Policies," Working Papers 04_03, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    3. Andriamananjara, Soamiely & Dean, Judith & Spinanger, Dean, 2004. "Trading Apparel: Developing Countries in 2005," Conference papers 331281, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    4. Fearnside, Philip M., 2001. "Saving tropical forests as a global warming countermeasure: an issue that divides the environmental movement," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 167-184, November.
    5. Christopher Galik & Brian Murray & Stephen Mitchell & Phil Cottle, 2016. "Alternative approaches for addressing non-permanence in carbon projects: an application to afforestation and reforestation under the Clean Development Mechanism," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 101-118, January.
    6. Kuosmanen, Timo & Vöhringer, Frank & Dellink, Rob B., 2004. "A Proposal for the Attribution of Market Leakage to CDM Projects," HWWA Discussion Papers 262, Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWA).
    7. Virginia Dale & Sandra Brown & Magnolia Calderón & Arizmendis Montoya & Raúl Martínez, 2003. "Estimating baseline carbon emissions for the Eastern Panama Canal watershed," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 8(4), pages 323-348, December.
    8. CHANDER, Parkash & TULKENS, Henry, 2011. "The kyoto Protocol, the Copenhagen Accord, the Cancun Agreements, and beyond: an economic and game theoretical exploration and interpretation," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2011051, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    9. Slyvester Yew Wang Chai & Lock Hei Ngu & Bing Shen How, 2022. "Review of carbon capture absorbents for CO2 utilization," Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 12(3), pages 394-427, June.
    10. Oscar Cacho & Russell Wise & Kenneth MacDicken, 2004. "Carbon Monitoring Costs and their Effect on Incentives to Sequester Carbon through Forestry," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 273-293, July.
    11. Yoomi Kim & Katsuya Tanaka & Shunji Matsuoka, 2020. "Environmental and economic effectiveness of the Kyoto Protocol," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-15, July.
    12. Babiker, Mustafa H., 2005. "Climate change policy, market structure, and carbon leakage," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 421-445, March.
    13. Ciscar, Juan Carlos & Soria, Antonio, 2002. "Prospective analysis of beyond Kyoto climate policy: a sequential game framework," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(15), pages 1327-1335, December.
    14. Nigel Asquith & María Vargas Ríos & Joyotee Smith, 2002. "Can Forest-protection carbon projects improve rural livelihoods? Analysis of the Noel Kempff Mercado climate action project, Bolivia," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 7(4), pages 323-337, December.
    15. Ian Sue Wing, 2000. "Limiting CO2 Emissions in a Federal System: Understanding and Mitigating the Cost of U.S. Climate Policy At the State Level," Regional and Urban Modeling 283600093, EcoMod.
    16. Babiker, Mustafa & Gurgel, Angelo & Paltsev, Sergey & Reilly, John, 2009. "Forward-looking versus recursive-dynamic modeling in climate policy analysis: A comparison," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 1341-1354, November.
    17. Stibniati Atmadja & Louis Verchot, 2012. "A review of the state of research, policies and strategies in addressing leakage from reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+)," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 311-336, March.
    18. Claudia Kemfert, Truong P. Truong, and Thomas Bruckner, 2006. "Economic Impact Assessment of Climate Change - A Multi-gas Investigation with WIAGEM-GTAPEL-ICM," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 441-460.
    19. Kinuthia, Emmanuel K., 2010. "The Effects Of The International Smallgroup And Tree Planting Program On Household Income In Nyeri District, Kenya," Research Theses 117709, Collaborative Masters Program in Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    20. Weber, Christopher L. & Matthews, H. Scott, 2008. "Quantifying the global and distributional aspects of American household carbon footprint," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 379-391, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:13:y:2011:i:5:p:366-377. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.