The Future of the Montreal Protocol: Money and Methyl Bromide
By Lee Anne Duval
INTRODUCTION
The global community has struggled with the issue of ozone depletion for more than two decades. With the signing of the Montreal Protocol, the world recognized the disastrous consequences that could result if use of ozone depleting substances (“ODSs”) were allowed to go unchecked. Although great strides have been made towards reducing and eventually phasing-out ODSs, the Montreal Protocol is on the cusp of either becoming one of the most successful environmental treaties in history or failing to meet its lofty goals. At this stage in the treaty's life, many unanswered questions remain as to the scope of the Montreal Protocol. This Note addresses two of these unanswered questions. First, are countries in non-compliance with the Montreal Protocol if they fail to pay their required contribution to the Multilateral Fund (“Fund”)? More precisely, what options do developing countries have to “force” payment into the Fund? Second, what are the ramifications to Article 5 developing countries if they are unable to comply with the accelerated phase-out schedules of the chemicals? This issue could arise in 2003 when the parties review the timeline for phasing out the use of methyl bromide.
The discussion of these issues begins with background on the development of the scientific inquiry into ozone depletion and the evolution of the international response to this problem. The Note then addresses the specific non-compliance issues in greater detail. After this discussion, the perspectives of both developed and developing countries are examined with regard to their views on the specific problems, as well as the underlying reasons for each group's position. Finally, the discussion concludes with a look at alternative ways to address these issues.
The global community has struggled with the issue of ozone depletion for more than two decades. With the signing of the Montreal Protocol, the world recognized the disastrous consequences that could result if use of ozone depleting substances (“ODSs”) were allowed to go unchecked. Although great strides have been made towards reducing and eventually phasing-out ODSs, the Montreal Protocol is on the cusp of either becoming one of the most successful environmental treaties in history or failing to meet its lofty goals. At this stage in the treaty's life, many unanswered questions remain as to the scope of the Montreal Protocol. This Note addresses two of these unanswered questions. First, are countries in non-compliance with the Montreal Protocol if they fail to pay their required contribution to the Multilateral Fund (“Fund”)? More precisely, what options do developing countries have to “force” payment into the Fund? Second, what are the ramifications to Article 5 developing countries if they are unable to comply with the accelerated phase-out schedules of the chemicals? This issue could arise in 2003 when the parties review the timeline for phasing out the use of methyl bromide.
The discussion of these issues begins with background on the development of the scientific inquiry into ozone depletion and the evolution of the international response to this problem. The Note then addresses the specific non-compliance issues in greater detail. After this discussion, the perspectives of both developed and developing countries are examined with regard to their views on the specific problems, as well as the underlying reasons for each group's position. Finally, the discussion concludes with a look at alternative ways to address these issues.