In a world divided into different governments and nations, it is easy to forget that we all make up one globe of people with similar needs and wants. This has become even clearer as the actions of various countries are increasingly affecting the conditions across our biosphere, creating disparities in responsibility and perhaps general confusion over what course of action to take to deal with these problems on a global scale. There has yet to be an overall efficient and successful international environmental policy passed and implemented, but one agreement deserves to be praised – the Montreal Protocol. The Montreal Protocol was created under the Ozone Regime when the realization that human activity was deteriorating the Ozone layer became widespread.1 But how did this piece of legislation become the success it is today and why haven’t we seen anything like it since? Well, it’s all in the details…
5The 80’s was a disco—big hair, and wild colors—however, it was also the time of the discovery of a hole in the Ozone Layer. The Ozone Layer is a layer in the stratosphere that shields our planet and its inhabitants from harmful UV rays.2 In the 1970s, chlorine was discovered to have a detrimental effect on the Ozone Layer. However, it wasn’t until the discovery of the ozone hole that a chemical known as Chlorofluorocarbons were proven to react negatively react with the Ozone Layer.3 Chlorofluorocarbons, also known as CFCs, were discovered in the 1930s and were commonly used in refrigerants, air conditioners, and hair spray.4 At the time, it seemed like a perfect substitute for the potentially explosive methyl chloride that was previously used as a coolant, but the discovery of a hole in the Ozone Layer in 1984 brought about the subsequent correlation between CFCs stratospheric damaging effects and the destruction of the Ozone. The hole, located above Antarctica, “is really a reduction in concentrations of ozone high above the earth in the stratosphere.6” With this conclusive scientific evidence that CFCs were in fact the main cause of the destruction of the Ozone Layer, international policy makers, NGOs (Non-Governmental Organizations), business leaders, scientists, and national leaders met to find a way to stop this destruction of an important part of our planet, and so begun the Ozone Regime.
The movement to phase out CFCs in order to save our Ozone layer started in the United States when Congress limited the amount of CFCs in aerosols.7 However, this was a global problem and had to be brought to the international stage. The first step of resolving a global issue is to have a worldwide meeting, and so the Vienna Convention took shape, with many meetings and international action until an agreement was made—it was adopted in 1985 and then enforced on September 22, 1988.8 The Vienna Convention became known as a template convention, as many meetings held subsequently were modeled after it due to its success.
In fact, the Montreal Protocol was born through the Vienna Convention! It is one thing to write a treaty, but it is another to get every country to ratify it and agree upon the stipulations in the policy. The foundation of the success of the policies within the Ozone Regime, some may argue, was the conclusiveness of the science.9 Once a pair of scientists discovered the harmful effects of CFCs on the Ozone in the 1970s, there was only a short time of dispute. Since it was a single compound that was in question, scientists focused on proving the CFCs’ effects as well as finding an efficient substitute. After most sectors of the sciences agreed with the necessity of some sort of legislation to be passed, it was all up to the other players in the international policy making stage to come to an agreement as well. At first, large companies that manufactured CFCs were against a phase out of this chemical. However, since the U.S. already had its own ozone protecting regulations, American companies strongly favored phasing out CFCs in order to create an even playing field.10 With the development of convenient and accessible alternatives and the push of large, influential American groups, most of the world industry agreed to comply with a phasing out of CFCs.
National governments had problems of their own they had to face. There has always been a large “North South debate,” aka the conflict between developed and developing countries. Due to the obvious statement that developed countries and industrially growing developing countries contributed more to the ozone depletion and had more money to spend, poor developing countries sought for different responsibilities to be given to the wealthier nations. Because of the understood seriousness of ozone depletion and continual pressures of the media and public, larger nations decided to create a fund, known as the Multilateral Fund11, that would help smaller, poorer nations comply with the stipulations in the Montreal Protocol. In the end, the Montreal Protocol was signed, but what did that entail?
https://web.archive.org/web/20160404091913if_/http://www.youtube.com/embed/KRcwNEEqp8AThe original Montreal Protocol, “officially the Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer,”12 was agreed upon in September of 1987 and was put into force at the beginning of 1989.13 It was originally signed by 25 nations, but has now been signed by 168. The protocol set limits on the production of CFCs, halons, and other substances that release chlorine/ bromine into the ozone layer. Developed countries were mandated to begin the CFC phase out in 1993.14 Since that time there have been many amendments and meetings to expand the protocol. The big amendments were as follows:
- The London Amendment (1990):15 Changed schedule so that CFCs, halons, and carbon tetrachloride would be phased out by 2000 in developed countries, and 2010 in developing countries.
- The Copenhagen Amendment (1992):16 Again, accelerated the phasing out of the above stated ozone depleting substances, as well as adding a HCFC (Hydrochlorofluorocarbon – another proven ozone depleting substance) as a concern. HCFC phaseout would begin in 2004 for developed countries, while previously stated ozone depleting substances were set to be phased out in 1996 in developed countries. The international Methyl Bromide usage would also be capped.
- Montreal Amendment (1997):17 Developing countries added to the phaseout of HCFCs, beginning in 2004. Methyl bromide phaseout planned to occur in 2005 in developed countries and in 2015 in developing countries.
- Beijing Amendment (1999):18 The production and trade of HCFCs were put under stricter controls. Bromochloromethane was also added to the list of substances that is to be phased out by 2004.
Overall, the Ozone Regime has proven to be one of the most successful and progressive Regimes in the environmental international policy stage. It is easy for people to try and compare less successful policies, like the , to the Montreal Protocol, but the fact of the matter is, there are too many differentiating factors. In my opinion, the Montreal Protocol was a miracle in the policy making world. It was a combination of definite science, real-time alternatives, and the participation of large, influential nations, like the U.S., that made the Montreal Protocol what it is today. Now that it has been created, nations that signed the treaty remain loyal to it and have been pushing forward to possibly add more chemicals to the list, showing that this treaty has and will remain strong throughout the years.
