150
6
countries in the world. Emission cuts could take place in Europe, although lowincome countries in the Global South might be seen as particularly relevant. Thus,
climate mitigation must be carried out within international cooperation.
The principle of international cost-effectiveness was first used when the government decided to focus on the establishment of international markets for carbon trade. For a company in Norway, this implies that emissions requirements
from the government can be met by buying carbon credits from a factory abroad
that cuts its emissions instead of doing the same cuts itself. The Norwegian
REDD programme from 2007 was based on the principle of international costeffectiveness. Nevertheless, the programme was proposed by two Norwegian conservation organizations, and from the very start, it has been viewed as a programme
not only to mitigate climate change, but also to conserve tropical forests. Thus,
the programme must be seen as having been established through a coalition of the
two interests of conserving forests and ‘conserving’ economic activities with large
climate emissions.
Kasa (2016) shows how the Norwegian climate policy to a large extent was
influenced by lobby activities from companies and labour unions in the petroleum
sector and other large climate emitters. For instance, the former director of the
company Hydro said in 1990:
» Since the most important environmental problems are global, it is now much more
important to find solutions where all countries participate than to adopt increasingly stricter environmental requirements in little Norway, which anyway would
have a small effect totally (Our translation from Norwegian) (Sæther 2017).
Nilsen (2001) presents a detailed record of individuals, research institutions and
networks involved in the establishment of Norwegian climate policy in the early
1990s, with initiatives from the fossil fuel lobby with corporate and union leaders,
and involving politicians and economists. Asdal (2014) shows how economists in
the Ministry of Finance played a central role in changing Norway’s climate policy
to not threaten Norway’s long-term interests of securing continued petroleum revenues. The institute for climate research, CICERO, was established not only to
conduct research, but also to take a central role in helping establish an international network that promoted international cost-effectiveness and carbon trade as
core elements of the international climate regime that developed around the negotiations and follow-up meetings of the UN’s Climate Change Framework
Convention (UNCCFC) (Nilsen 2001).
A successful lobby activity from Norway resulted in a wording in the UNFCCC
before the ‘Rio Earth Summit’ in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, saying that the countries’
commitments could be carried out in cooperation (Nilsen 2001). In 1997, the idea
was brought into the Kyoto Protocol and, in 2015, into the Paris Agreement.
Hence, the Norwegian fossil fuel lobby was successful in their aims of influencing
the establishment of the Norwegian climate policy, and the international climate
regime adopted similar ideas.
The financing of climate cuts in other countries has been the most important
approach subscribed to by the Norwegian government since the early 1990s. This
has made it possible for the government to present Norway internationally as well
Chapter 6 · Climate Mitigation Choices: Reducing Deforestation ...
6
countries in the world. Emission cuts could take place in Europe, although lowincome countries in the Global South might be seen as particularly relevant. Thus,
climate mitigation must be carried out within international cooperation.
The principle of international cost-effectiveness was first used when the government decided to focus on the establishment of international markets for carbon trade. For a company in Norway, this implies that emissions requirements
from the government can be met by buying carbon credits from a factory abroad
that cuts its emissions instead of doing the same cuts itself. The Norwegian
REDD programme from 2007 was based on the principle of international costeffectiveness. Nevertheless, the programme was proposed by two Norwegian conservation organizations, and from the very start, it has been viewed as a programme
not only to mitigate climate change, but also to conserve tropical forests. Thus,
the programme must be seen as having been established through a coalition of the
two interests of conserving forests and ‘conserving’ economic activities with large
climate emissions.
Kasa (2016) shows how the Norwegian climate policy to a large extent was
influenced by lobby activities from companies and labour unions in the petroleum
sector and other large climate emitters. For instance, the former director of the
company Hydro said in 1990:
» Since the most important environmental problems are global, it is now much more
important to find solutions where all countries participate than to adopt increasingly stricter environmental requirements in little Norway, which anyway would
have a small effect totally (Our translation from Norwegian) (Sæther 2017).
Nilsen (2001) presents a detailed record of individuals, research institutions and
networks involved in the establishment of Norwegian climate policy in the early
1990s, with initiatives from the fossil fuel lobby with corporate and union leaders,
and involving politicians and economists. Asdal (2014) shows how economists in
the Ministry of Finance played a central role in changing Norway’s climate policy
to not threaten Norway’s long-term interests of securing continued petroleum revenues. The institute for climate research, CICERO, was established not only to
conduct research, but also to take a central role in helping establish an international network that promoted international cost-effectiveness and carbon trade as
core elements of the international climate regime that developed around the negotiations and follow-up meetings of the UN’s Climate Change Framework
Convention (UNCCFC) (Nilsen 2001).
A successful lobby activity from Norway resulted in a wording in the UNFCCC
before the ‘Rio Earth Summit’ in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, saying that the countries’
commitments could be carried out in cooperation (Nilsen 2001). In 1997, the idea
was brought into the Kyoto Protocol and, in 2015, into the Paris Agreement.
Hence, the Norwegian fossil fuel lobby was successful in their aims of influencing
the establishment of the Norwegian climate policy, and the international climate
regime adopted similar ideas.
The financing of climate cuts in other countries has been the most important
approach subscribed to by the Norwegian government since the early 1990s. This
has made it possible for the government to present Norway internationally as well
Chapter 6 · Climate Mitigation Choices: Reducing Deforestation ...