Statements by Individuals

Compilation of References to theContraction and Convergence Policy Proposal
1995 - 2002

1

1995 ................................................................ 4
April - Indian Environment Minister.............................................................. 41997 ................................................................ 4
Richard Richels (EPRI), Alan Manne (Battelle) .............................................. 4
October - Dr Song Jian, China State Councilor Climate Change ..................... 4
December - Prof Saifuddin Soz, Indian Environment Minister ......................... 4
December - Tom Spencer, Chair Euro-Parliament. Foreign Affairs Com. ........... 41998 ................................................................ 5
October - Tony Blair, Prime Minister United Kingdom ..................................... 5
October - Sir Robert May, UK Government Chief Scientist .............................. 5
November - US Congressman John Porter, Chair GLOBE USA ......................... 5

1999 ................................................................ 5
April - Michael Meacher UK Minister of the Environment ................................ 5
June 9 - David Chaytor MP .......................................................................... 5
June - Klaus Topfer, Director UNEP .............................................................. 62000 ................................................................ 6
February - Ambassador Raul Estrada, Chair Kyoto Negotiations ...................... 6
April - Svend Auken, Danish Environment Minister ....................................... 6
July - Jan Pronk, Chair COP- 6, Environment Minister Netherlands .................. 6
November - Jaques Chirac, President of France - COP6 ................................. 7
May - Sir John Houghton, Chair IPCC WG1 ................................................... 7

2001 ................................................................ 8June 26 - John Oliver, Lord Bishop of Hereford ............................................. 8
August - Nyier Abdou, Al Ahram Newspaper ................................................. 8
August - Julian E Salt, UK Loss Prevention Council ........................................ 8
September - Kjell Larsson, Swedish Environment Minister ............................ 9
October - John Porter, US Parliamentarian Chair GLOBE USA .......................... 9
October - Robert Stavins, Director, Environment Economics Program, JFK
School of Government, Harvard University ................................................ 9
November 22 - Michael Meacher, UK Environment Minister ............................ 9
November - Olivier Delouze, Belgian Environment Minister ........................... 9
October - Michael Meacher, UK Minister of the Environment .......................... 92

2002 ............................................................... 10
January - Adair Turner, former Director of the CBI ...................................... 10
February - Marcel M. Berk, Michel G.J. den Elzen. ....................................... 10
February - Hans H.Kolshus, Cicerone ......................................................... 10
July - John Ritch - Director General World Nuclear Association ..................... 11
June 1 - Rodney R. White - Department of Geography & Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Toronto ..................................................... 11
August 18 - Right Reverend John Oliver - Bishop of Hereford....................... 12

3

1995
April - Indian Environment Minister“We face the actuality of scarce resources and the increasing potential for conflict with eachother over these scarce resources. The social, financial and ecological inter-relationships ofequity should guide the route to global ecological recovery.
Policy Instruments such as “Tradable Emissions Quotas”, “Carbon Taxes” and “Joint Implementation” may well serve to make matters worse unless they are properly referenced totargets and time-tables for equitable emissions reductions overall. This means devising andimplementing a programme for convergence at equitable and sustainable par values for
consumption on a per capita basis globally.”

1997
Richard Richels (EPRI), Alan Manne (Battelle)
At the Symposium on the Economics of Climate Change:“We begin with one widely discussed proposal: a transition to equal per capita emissions
rights (globally) by 2030,” again allowing the expedient of a “prescription” to “solve” what isotherwise insoluble.

October - Dr Song Jian, China State Councilor Climate Change“When we ask the opinions of people from all circles, many people, in particular the scientists
think that the emissions control standard should be formulated on a per capita basis. According to the UN Charter, everybody is born equal, and has inalienable rights to enjoy modern
technological civilization. Today the per capita consumption is just one tenth of that of thedeveloped countries, one eighth of that of medium developed countries. It is estimated 30-40
years would be needed for China to catch up with the level of medium developed countries.”

December - Prof Saifuddin Soz, Indian Environment Minister“In any discussion, “Contraction and Convergence”, the central point is entitlements - equitable per capita entitlements. At Kyoto we had stressed that any discussion on emissions trading ought to be framed in terms of per capita entitlements. Any trading can take place only
after the emissions entitlements of the trading partners is defined and legally created - equitably of course. Historical emissions are iniquitous and cannot be the basis of entitlements.
Entitlements will define the sharing of the atmosphere on an equitable basis which also
brings together all the cooperative mechanisms in the Kyoto Protocol in a common framework.”

December - T
om Spencer-Parliament. Foreign Affairs Com.
Tom
Spencer,, Chair Euro
Euro-P-Parliament.
“Many of you know the Contraction and Convergence analysis. It offers a framework for ananswer. It offers an envelope of equity within which we can trade and barter our way tocollective sanity in the coming decades.”

4

1998
October - T
ony Blair
Tony
Blair,, Prime Minister United Kingdom“In the fight against climate change the Contraction and Convergence proposal makes animportant contribution to the debate on how we achieve long-term climate stability, taking
account of the principles of equity and sustainability.”

October - Sir R
obert May
RobertMay,, UK Government Chief Scientist“Thank you for the information on “Contraction and Convergence” policy and the efforts by
GCI and GLOBE to build up global support for it. These matters are clearly of great importance and I would agree that this approach merits full consideration, including at the seniorinternational political level, along with other ideas contributing to the development of aworkable global climate strategy.”

November - US Congressman John P
orter
OBE USA
Porterorter,, Chair GL
GLOBE
GLOBE stands for Global Legislators Organisation for a Balanced Environment. It is an international network of Parliamentarians committed to working in a global non-partisan manner for
legislation to protect the environment.

“Meaningful progress on confronting the challenge of climate change will only occur whencountries from the North and the South are able to collaborate in issues of significant andsustainable development. The GLOBE Equity Protocol - Contraction and Convergence - and its
mechanism for financing sustainable development is the only proposal so far which is global,
equitable and growth-oriented. It is these issues that were endorsed at the GLOBE International General Assembly in Cape Cod, and form the thrust of our paper (Nov 1998), “Solving
Climate Change with Equity and Prosperity.”

1999
April - Michael Meacher UK Minister of the Environment“I do believe that contraction and convergence provides an effective, equitable market-based
framework within which Governments can co-operate to avert climate change, and again
congratulate you on your campaigning to bring this about.”

June 9 - David Chaytor MP“In many analysts’ opinion, a policy of contraction and convergence provides the way out of
the logjam. Under such a policy, each nation would be allocated a quota of emissions basedon population, and set in the context of agreed environmental limits. Over time, industrial
nations would be required gradually to reduce emissions, while developing countries would
be permitted gradually to increase theirs, until a point was reached at which the emissions
quotas of all countries were relatively equal.
That seems to provide the only practical and principled resolution of the conflicting interestsof the developed world and the developing world, based on equal rights for all human beings.
I urge the Government to present the case for contraction and convergence as a realisticmeans of facilitating the ratification of the Kyoto protocol. I commend the research conducted by the Global Commons Institute in developing that model. “5June - Klaus T
opfer
Topferopfer,, Director UNEP
“Convergence - The review system of Kyoto mechanisms can ensure equity. Currently CO2emissions rights are allocated according to existing emissions patterns with a specified reduction percentage for various countries within a certain period of five years (2008-2012). The
redistribution through the Kyoto Protocol could be continued until emissions rights are uniformly distributed on a per capita basis. This will be a critical element to ensure the poor also
get rights to utilise the world’s environment, or in this limited case, the assimilative capacityof the atmosphere, a global commons resource.”

2000
February - Ambassador Raul Estrada, Chair K
yoto Negotiations
Kyoto“Long before the end of the Framework Convention negotiation, the Global Commons Institute has presented a proposal on “Contraction and Convergence”, aimed to reach equality inemissions per capita. We all in this room know the GCI model where contraction is achieved
after all governments, for precautionary reasons, collectively agree to be bound by a targetof global GHG emissions, making it possible to calculate the diminishing amount of greenhouse gases that the world can release each year in the coming century, subject to annual
scientific and political review. The convergence part of the proposal means that each year’s
global emissions budget gets shared out among the nations of the world so that every country converges on the same allocation per inhabitant by an agreed date. Countries unable tomanage within their shares would, be able to buy the unused parts of the allocations of othercountries. The entitlement of rights transferred in this trading is legitimised by the per inhabitant criteria. Level of contraction and timing of convergence should be negotiated on thebasis of the precautionary principle. Suggestions for emission reductions are well known andconvergence should be achieved at medium term to satisfy legitimacy.”

April - Svend Auken, Danish Environment Minister
Auken,“The approach of “Contraction and Convergence” is precisely such an idea. It secures aregime that would allow all nations to join efforts to protect our global commons from being
over-exploited, without the risk that any country would be deprived of its fair long-term shareof the common environmental emission space. And it allows for consistent and efficientmanagement of the global emissions that would enable us to strive for constraining global
interference with the climate below fixed ceilings, such as the max 2 degrees temperaturerise, and the max. 550 ppmv CO2-concentration, recommended by the European council ofministers.”

July - Jan Pronk, Chair COP
COP-- 6, Environment Minister Netherlands“Contraction and Convergence” - most equitable . . . easier & cheaper than alternatives. “. . .The debate about broadening participation of developing countries in the global effort tostabilize greenhouse concentrations in the atmosphere at sustainable levels has the tendency
to focus first on the most advanced developing countries. Suggestions have been made forcommitments for those developing countries in the period after 2012 in terms of increased
energy or greenhouse gas efficiency. In other words: not an absolute cap, but a relative
efficiency improvement in the production structure of developing countries. This strategy
would imply that developing countries gradually start participating, as they achieve a certain
level of economic development. That is a reasonable and realistic option. However, it can beargued that such gradual participation would only lead to a slow decline of global emissions,even if current industrialized countries would drastically decrease their emissions. As a result

6

global average temperature increase would significantly exceed the 2 degrees centigrade limitthat could be seen as the maximum tolerable for our planet. There are alternatives for this
scenario. Some developing countries have argued for an allowance of equal emissions per
capita. This would be the most equitable way to determine the contribution of countries to
the global effort. If we agree to equal per capita emissions allowances for all countries by2030 in such a way that global emissions allow us to stay below the 2 degrees global temperature increase (equivalent to about 450 ppmv CO2), then the assigned amounts for Annex
B countries would be drastically reduced. However, due to the fact that all countries would
have assigned amounts, maximum use of global emissions trading would strongly reduce thecost of compliance. So, in such a scenario, industrialized countries would have to do more,
but it would be cheaper and easier . . . “

November - Jaques Chirac, President of France - COP6
“Since 1992, we have fallen too far behind in the fight against global warming. We cannot
afford any further delay. That is why, I can confirm to you here, Europe is resolved to act andhas mobilized to fight the greenhouse effect. Europe calls upon the other industrializedcountries to join with it in this fight. And Europe proposes to the developing countries to join
it in a partnership for sustainable development. Let us start thinking about the post-Kyoto
period without further ado. Tomorrow, it will be up to us to set forth the rights and duties of
each, and for a long time to come. To move forward while respecting individual differences
and special circumstances, France proposes that we set as our ultimate objective the convergence of per capita emissions. This principle would durably ensure the effectiveness, equity
and solidarity of our efforts.”

May - Sir John Houghton, Chair IPCC WG1“Three widely accepted principles will govern the international agreements needed to meet
the threat of climate change. (1) The Precautionary Principle, already clearly embedded in
the UNFCCC agreed at the Earth Summit in Rio in 1992. This states that the existence of
uncertainty should not preclude the taking of an appropriate action. The reason for suchaction is simply stated as the stabilisation of the concentrations of greenhouse gases (such asCO2) in the atmosphere in ways that allow for necessary economic development. (2) The
Polluter Pays Principle, which implies measures such as carbon taxes or carbon trading arrangements. (3) The principle of Equity, both intergenerational and international - the mostdifficult to apply. However a proposal of the Global Commons Institute - “Contraction-andConvergence” (C&C)” - that is being widely discussed applies these principles by allowing
eventually for the allocation of carbon emissions to nations on an equal per capita basis while
also allowing for emissions trading.”

7

2001
June 26 - John Oliver
Oliver,, Lord Bishop of Hereford
My Lords . . . . .
. . . We need to take to heart the advice of the Royal Commission published last year to put
in place a programme which takes account of the legitimate needs and aspirations of thedeveloping countries and works on the principle of contraction and convergence of greenhouse gas emissions.

August - Nyier Abdou, Al Ahram Newspaper“This point is stressed by Aubrey Meyer, director of the UK group the Global Commons Institute (GCI) and author of -Contraction and Convergence: the Global Solution to Climate
Change- (Green Books). Without a feasible and binding plan for dealing with global warming,
Meyer predicts climate change will wreak havoc on the developing world. Talking to the
Weekly, Meyer noted that population increases will inevitably increase the number of people
affected by natural — and, indeed, “unnatural” disasters. “If these occur [in places] where
there are already local conflicts over the use of land and other resources — as with storms inOrissa or droughts in the Middle East, for example — these impacts can only aggravate suchconflicts.”........
“The level of greenhouse concentration in the atmosphere at this time is higher than anywhere in data sets going back half a million years,” says GCI’s Meyer. “Historically these levels
have varied but at significantly lower average value than the levels we have achieved since
the industrial revolution began around 200 years ago. It is possible — perhaps probable —that continuing this unrelenting pulse of human emissions will trigger global climatic upheaval.” Referring to the claim that it is not clear that anything has indeed gone “wrong,”
Meyer insists, “The point [Lindzen] makes is simply: if there isn’t a problem, don’t fix it.
However, it is obvious that there is a problem, and that we are all going to be broke if we
don’t fix it.”August - Julian E Salt, UK Loss Prevention Council
Commenting for the UN Observer,on the risk management of climate change, Julian Salt of the
UK Loss Prevention Council and BRE writes,“ . . . . . Contraction & Convergence” would be the driving principle behind the new approach.
Contraction & Convergence targets (upper global cap on emissions and convergence point)
would be adjusted according to the latest scientific findings emenating .from the IPCC. The
upper carbon cap could be adjusted downwards if the latest findings showed that climatechange was increasing at a dangerous rate.
Two new protocols would be created to deal with the issue of sinks (forestry) and new technology (renewables). Carbon credits for enhanced sink capacity and use of renewable energy
would be overseen by a Carbon Credit body.
Emissions trading would still exist but initial allocations of credits would be based on theequity principle (population based).
Ideally, the ultimate end time-frame for completion of the “C&C” process would be 2050 orsooner if possible. Emissions contraction should start immediately to be effective. Time is of
the essence.”8

September - Kjell Larsson, Swedish Environment Minister“On the issue of equity, Sweden strives for a global convergence, meaning that the long term
objective of the international community should be a per capita emissions target equal for all
countries. The work towards sustainability embraces the right for the poorest countries tocontinue their development and requires that the developed world contribute to this. In otherwords the industrialised countries must reduce their emissions in order to enable the least
developed countries to develop.”

October - John P
orterarliamentarian Chair GL
OBE USA
Porterorter,, US P
Parliamentarian
GLOBE“Meaningful progress on confronting the challenge of climate change will only occur whencountries from the North and the South are able to collaborate in issues of significant andsustainable development. The GLOBE Equity Protocol - Contraction and Convergence - and its
mechanism for financing sustainable development is the only proposal so far which is global,
equitable and growth-oriented.
It is precisely these issues that were endorsed at the GLOBE International General Assemblyin Cape Cod, and form the thrust of our recently released (Nov 1998) paper, “Solving Climate
Change with Equity and Prosperity.”

October - Robert Stavins, Director
RobertDirector,, Environment Economics Program, JFK
School of Government, Harvard University“This (Contraction and Convergence) is a long-term standard that is difficult to find fault with,and has much to recommend it on ethical grounds and in terms of parsimony.
I think it’s quite reasonable that the ultimate greenhouse-gas emission standard (i.e. allocation mechanism of targets among countries) toward which the entire community of nations
might work over the long term would be one linked with equal per capita emissions assumingthat cost-effectiveness could still be achieved through simultaneous provision for international trading or some other mechanism that would facilitate the equating of marginal abatement costs.”

November 22 - Michael Meacher
Meacher,, UK Environment Minister
At the UK Environment Council’s climate conference for business in London, Michael Meacher
was the keynote speaker.
In answering questions from the Loss Prevention Council regarding the relationship between
Kyoto Protocol and C&C, Mr Meacher gave a detailed explanation of C&C saying,‘C&C is not ‘Plan B’, it is ‘Plan A-Plus’.
(see announcement at: - http://www.the-environment-council.org.uk/)

November - Olivier Delouze, Belgian Environment Minister“We are conscious that in the end, we will have to inevitably evolve towards a more equitablepartition between the north and south, of the capacity of our common atmosphere to support green house gases, by a gradual convergence of the levels of emissions on a per capita
basis.”

October - Michael Meacher
Meacher,, UK Minister of the Environment“I find it an appealing concept. It is obviously absolutely profound in its implications. It is
normally known under the title of Contraction and Convergence, in other words the developed countries contract their emissions, which is what Kyoto is all about, and we get convergence with the developing countries as they industrialise and increase their emissions....I do
not think it is pie in the sky. It is certainly not just a conceptual philosophy. We are moving
remorselessly in that direction”

9

2002
January - Adair T
urner
Turnerurner,, former Director of the CBI(His) “ . . . . analysis really starts to pack a punch when he turns to the environment. Here,after all, is a case of massive market failure.
Take climate change, which “is likely to impose massive economic costs... The case for being
prepared to spend huge resources to limit it is clear,” he says, arguing that the cost will be
repaid many times over by the avoidance of disaster.
In any case, “the developed world does not have the moral right to increase the risk offlooding in Bangladesh”, and, he adds acidly, “European executives worried about the cost ofaction should perhaps consider it the necessary price for preserving at least some skiing in
the Alps.”
Long term, says Turner, the only sound strategy is that of ‘contraction and convergence’ –cutting greenhouse emissions to the point where they are shared equally, worldwide, on a
per capita basis.”
Article at: http://www.greenfutures.org.uk/features/default.asp?id=905

February - Marcel M. Berk, Michel G.J
G.J.J.. den Elzen.
“Options for differentiation of future commitments in climate policy: how to realise timely
participation to meet stringent climate goals?”“Where climate change limits are stringent, a C&C regime seems to provide more incentives
for a timely participation of developing countries, and better opportunities for an effective
and efficient regime for controlling global GHG emission control than increasing participation.”
Netherlands National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), P.O. Box 1, 3720
BA Bilthoven, The Netherlands
Paper retrievable at: -http://www.gci.org.uk/papers/berkelz.pdf

February - Hans H.Kolshus, Cicerone
H.Kolshus,”While the Kyoto Protocol may represent an important political achievement, its expected
impact on the climate is marginal at best. The agreement is nowhere near sufficient forstabilizing or reducing the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, partly
because developing countries have not committed to reducing their emissions in this round.
Future climate negotiations must therefore contain more ambitious targets as well as theparticipation of developing countries. In an attempt to realize this aim, the Global Commons
Institute has proposed that emissions entitlements be allocated on a per capita basis....
The method, called “contraction and convergence” (C&C), was first developed by Tony
Cooper and Aubrey Meyer in the spring of 1996....
A team from GCI then presented the idea to the second Conference of the Parties (COP 2) in
Geneva, in July 1996. Since then, the idea has garnered support from more and more governments and NGOs.”
Aticle at: http://www.cicero.uio.no/media/549.pdf

10July - John Ritch - Director General W
orld Nuclear Association
World“. . . . . A serious climate regime – if one is to evolve – must go far beyond Kyoto, by encompassing all nations and by employing some variation of the concept known as “contraction
and convergence”:
Contraction means that over the century ahead we must plot a path that will reduce overall
global emissions by at least 50% – even as populations and economies expand. Convergencemeans that, in this process, we must accept the principle that every person on Earth is entitled to an equal per-capita level of emissions.
Stated in this stark manner, the goal of 50% contraction seems draconian, while the principleof equal entitlement to emissions seems utopian. In fact, both concepts are eminently practical.
As to contraction, nothing short of a 50% emissions reduction offers any hope of averting
catastrophic climate change. This cutback – entailing a 75% reduction in today’s advanced
economies – accomplishes no more than stabilizing global greenhouse gases at a level over
twice that which existed just two centuries ago.
As to convergence, nothing other than the principle of equal entitlement offers a basis for the
global consensus on which an effective climate regime must depend. Equal entitlement does
not mean equal emissions; it is, rather, the basis for an allocation of rights on which a fairand rational emissions trading system can be built.
A system based on this principle – and, I venture to say, only a system based on this principle– can be designed to produce the sense of equity, the predictability, and the sound economic
incentives needed for smooth transition into a clean-energy future. These incentives canwork constructively in developed and developing countries alike.
In this schema, the sense of equity and predictability are created at the very outset of theregime. A nation’s population size at an agreed point would be the basis for establishing its
long-term emissions ceiling, toward which it would be committed to move on a steady path.
To facilitate a smooth and economically rational transition toward that goal, emissions trading
would enable countries and companies to chart their own best path – selling permits where
possible, buying them when necessary. The rate of convergence to a common level would bedesigned to ensure that, during the long transition, already-industrialized nations as a whole
would find it advantageous to purchase emissions permits from countries less developed.
This capital flow could serve the common interest in sustainable development by financing
clean-energy infrastructure in the developing world.
Building this regime is not beyond human wit. Indeed, its simplicity and feasibility stand infavourable contrast to the chaos, social dislocation, vast expense and human misery thatunrestrained climate change could bring – and from which no nation would be immune.”June 1 - R
odney R
RodneyR.. White - Department of Geography & Institute for Environmental Studies, University of T
orontoTorontoToday I am going to take the position that an essential part of a successful implementation
phase for the (Kyoto) Protocol is a progressive reduction in emissions, moving towards equal
per capita emissions rights throughout the world.
This position is sometimes called ‘contraction and convergence’. It may seem like the otherend of the traditional ideological spectrum compared with a position that espouses emissions
trading.
Contraction and convergence is based on equity – in the justice sense. It may seem absurdly
optimistic. However, I think it has to be part of the plan, so that we can all share a common
sense of direction.”
http://www.gci.org.uk/papers/SilvLining.pdf

11August 18 - Right R
everend John Oliver - Bishop of Hereford
Reverend“Contraction and Convergence…is a system whereby everybody in the world, every humanbeing, is given as it were a permit to pollute, and a financial value is put on that. Countries
that are polluting more that their fair share at the moment, including in particular the UnitedStates would obviously have to buy permits from the poorer countries. That money would
help the poor countries in their own development while the process of convergence took
place”
http://www.gci.org.uk/Interviews/Hereford.pdf

12