As we come closer to the time when we will need to replace the Kyoto Protocols, the debate circulates about how and what should replace these protocols. The answer could be found in combining multiple view points.
According to David Shore, the protocols should not be replaced with another binding treaty, but with a shaming and peer pressuring system he calls the MRV mechanism, or measurement, reporting, verification. He also successfully argues that this system is more effective for motivating countries to act of climate change.
However, he does also denounce the opinions, such as the ones similar to Gelman’s argument that domestic initiatives are the main answer for seeing successful climate change results. There is merit in believing that Domestic initiatives can help make a dent in climate change, but that is all it can do, help.
In order to see real results there needs to be a collective effort across the board. What is needed is grass roots domestic initiatives that produce local outcomes for producing success against climate change. This needs to be combined with the mobilizing power that international cooperation can yield. Obviously there is two major problems in both spheres. The answer that makes the most sense would be to have MRV mechanisms on the international scale and forceful laws on the domestic scale to produce cooperation on all fronts.