Protecting the Ozone Layer

1
Protecting the Ozone Layer
2
Stratospheric Ozone Depletion

• Ground-level (tropospheric) ozone harmful
  pollutant
• Stratospheric ozone shields the Earth surface
  from UV rays.

3
Stratospheric Ozone Depletion

• F. Sherwood Rowland and Mario J Molina (1974)
• CFCs break down in the upper atmosphere
• Release chlorine
• Chlorine reacts with ozone,
• Ozone layer depletion
• Paul Crutzen (1970)
• Nitrogen oxides may deplete the ozone layer
• More UV radiation
• skin cancer, cataracts, damage to other
  organisms, materials, crops

4
Global Commons Problem

• Non-excludable free access
• Subtractable more CFCs less ozone layer
• Private costs of limiting CFC production and
  consumption exceed private benefits reducing
  ozone depletion
• No central governing authority
• Scientific uncertainty
• International cooperation required

5

• But No Tragedy of the Commons?
• Why?

6

• Drama of the Commons
• The Ozone Layer Regime

7
Act I Unilateral Action

• U.S. Regulations
• In 1978 US unilaterally banned the use of CFC
  propellants in spray cans
• Canada, Norway, Sweden
• Also restricted the use of CFC aerosols

8
Act IIDeadlock

• 1977-1985 complete deadlock , some symbolic
  actions
• Opponents to further regulation in US
• EC not interested to limit use in aerosols,
  suspects US of using science to advance
  commercial interests.

9
Act IIIThe Breakthrough

• The Vienna Convention on the Protection of the
  Ozone Layer (1985)
• -Encouraged research, cooperation among countries
  and exchange of information.
• -For the first time nations agreed in principle
  to tackle a global environmental problem before
  its effects were felt, or even scientifically
  proven.
• The Montreal Protocol (1987)
• Production and consumption of 5 CFCs to 50 of
  1986 levels by June 30 1998. Freeze 3 Halons.

10
Act IVBroaden Participation

• The 1990 London amendments
• Complete ban on 15 CFCs, 3 halons, carbon
  tetrachloride by 2000, and methyl chloroform by
  2005
• Multilateral Fund
• funds the incremental costs incurred by
  developing countrie in ODS phasing out
• 240 million initial endowment fund to be spent
  over three years
• By 2001, 1.2bn contributed to the fund 3500
  projects in 124 countries.
• No ODS trade with countries, which are not
  parties to the treaty
• Developing countries 10 year grace period for
  compliance.
• China, India and Brazil joined

11
Act IVTight International Regulations

• Amendments adopted at Copenhagen (1992), Vienna
  (1995), Montreal (1997) and Beijing (1999).
• Ninety-six (96) chemicals are presently
  controlled by the Montreal Protocol, including
• Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and Halons.
• Carbon tetrachloride
• Methyl chloroform
• Hydrochlorofluorocarbons
• Methyl bromide

12
Act VTragedy of the Commons Averted?
13
Effect of Ozone Regime?

• 1988 ozone hole

• 2000 ozone hole

14
Tragedy of the Commons Reversed
15
Caveats

• Imperfect compliance in Eastern Europe
• Illegal trade in CFCs
• Supply production still legal in some parts of
  the world imperfect compliance by some former
  communist countries
• Demand older equipment (car AC, etc.).

16
Discussion

• What explains the success of the
• Montreal Protocol?

17
The Role of Science

• Placed the issue on policy agenda
• Consensual science necessary for cooperation
• WMO/NASA Assessment (1986)-authoritative, peer
  reviewed assessment on stratospheric ozone large
  losses if CFCs grow by about 3
• Ozone Trends Panel (1988) ozone hole CFCs the
  main culprits
• Depends on participation, sponsorship,
  procedures, outputs

18
Implications

• Institutions should allow adaptation of rules
• -Even weak treaties can ratchet up
• Early targets important for innovation
  irrespective of stringency
• Feedback b/w regulation, technology, innovation,
  and domestic politics
• Repeated negotiations help ratcheting up
• Authoritative, consensual science essential
• Institutions can alter the cost and benefit
  structure of cooperation