The paper considers the changes to the base-year GHG-emission inventories of Annex I parties to the Kyoto Protocol (herein referred to, simply, as Annex B parties) made in the course of the review of those inventories by expert review teams. I ask whether, in the reporting practices of these states, any general tendency is observable of states misreporting (at an advantage to themselves) their emissions prior to the expert review. I conclude that the information to date raises many questions but provides few concrete answers; nevertheless, the issue points to an important area of study within the larger field of environmental governance.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 204 | 39 | 3 |
Full Text Views | 18 | 0 | 0 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 35 | 1 | 0 |
The paper considers the changes to the base-year GHG-emission inventories of Annex I parties to the Kyoto Protocol (herein referred to, simply, as Annex B parties) made in the course of the review of those inventories by expert review teams. I ask whether, in the reporting practices of these states, any general tendency is observable of states misreporting (at an advantage to themselves) their emissions prior to the expert review. I conclude that the information to date raises many questions but provides few concrete answers; nevertheless, the issue points to an important area of study within the larger field of environmental governance.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 204 | 39 | 3 |
Full Text Views | 18 | 0 | 0 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 35 | 1 | 0 |