How can we combat climate change? Can practical solutions be provided in Iran?

As it is known, the security concept has been reshaped more comprehensively after the Cold War ended and since the 1990s. Global-scale issues such as the environment, migration, water and food safety, and energy have gained importance during these years. Global climate change is another issue that has gained importance within the framework of the new security understanding. The expansion of the understanding of international security, including climate change, has also been reflected in the United Nations (UN) and its activities. In this context, since 1990, there has been a global struggle under the UN framework to combat global climate change. The UN’s combat against climate change can be examined in four fundamental processes. The first stage includes the Stockholm Conference in 19721, which is one of the first steps in the search for a solution to climate change problems in the international arena. It was the first time that the environment was brought up as a major issue at a global conference, and it is often regarded as the turning point of environmental issues to take place in international law. The second phase covers the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which emerged as a result of the Rio Conference in 1992.2 It was the most important step to address the impact of global warming, which also forms the basis for future international climate conventions. While the Kyoto Protocol, which was signed in 1997 at the 3rd COP (Conference of the Parties)3, constitutes the third stage; The Paris Agreement, which emerged at COP21 and entered into force in 2016, can be stated as the fourth stage of this struggle.4 In a general framework, it can be said that the most concrete development that shows the awareness of the UN on this issue is the Framework Convention on Climate Change, which was carried out under its leadership. In the next period, the UN has shown that it approaches this problem with determination with the COPs, which are held per year and thus have become routine, and it has begun to reap the fruits of these initiatives and efforts relatively with the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Climate Agreement. First World Conference on the Environment: Stockholm Conference Environmental problems that have increased their visibility after the 1970s and climate change that has affected the sustainability of human life have moved the search of states and international organizations for solutions to this problem and have made it necessary to cooperate in this field. The severe climate-related events and their devastating consequences during the 1960s and 1970s demonstrated the fragility of the world food production and trade system linked to the climate structure. In response to these events, the First World Climate Conference was met in Geneva in 1979 by World Meteorological Organization (WMO), UN Environment Programme (UNEP), Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), and World Health Organization (WHO). The conference aimed to explain the effects of climate change and how it will affect people’s lives by presenting climate information. This conference was held following a series of events organized by the UN.5 Additionally, in 1972 The Stockholm Conference6 is considered a turning point in this sense in terms of drawing attention to environmental problems.7 At the end of the conference, 26 non-binding general principles and 109 special recommendations were adopted. These general principles include the protection of all-natural resources, the development of the earth’s capacity to produce renewable energy, the establishment of institutions to manage environmental resources and improve environmental quality, the use of science and technology to avoid environmental risks, and the elimination of nuclear and mass destruction weapons. Although these principles are not binding, they have started to be evaluated in international law over time and to be considered as the basis of international environmental law. For example, Article 21 of the Stockholm Declaration states “Governments have the legal authority to use their natural resources per their environmental policy, in line with the UN Charter and international law. On the other hand, they have the responsibility of not causing damage to the environment of other countries or places beyond the borders of their sovereignty by these activities within their sphere of sovereignty or control” has become a binding law (hard law) over time. In addition, the most effectively applied rule of the Stockholm Declaration is Article 7, which includes: “To prevent the seas from being polluted with substances that may endanger human life, to prevent the pollution of the seas in a way that will harm living life, spoil their beauty, or adversely affect other legal uses of the seas”8. UNEP was another important result of the conference, which is a program to be affiliated with the UN, with the UN General Assembly resolution 29979. It was established in 1972 after the requirement for an inclusive organization liable for the environment came to the fore at the Stockholm Conference. Kenya, Nairobi was chosen as the organization’s center after the disagreement between developed and underdeveloped countries. The choice of Nairobi as the headquarters for UNEP had a symbolic meaning. At first glance, this decision, which can be considered positive because it allows the organization to see the problems of the poor world more closely, may cause criticism because it creates a situation that limits the power of UNEP over time. The organization’s remoteness from institutions and mechanisms, where high-level political and economic decisions are made, international treaties are discussed, and the direction of global environmental policy is determined, has brought many problems. The inability to meet with experts from other international organizations, the trouble effectively contributing to the process of drafting environmental treaties, and the difficulty of finding qualified specialists to work in Nairobi have been among the main ones.10 It was designed as a guiding, coordinating, public opinion, and policymaking organization, and it was not assigned an investment or practical function. In general, UNEP’s mission is to bring environmental issues to the attention of the UN, to continually assess the condition of the environment on a global scale, to bring the international community’s awareness to environmental problems, and to provide the expansion of national and international environmental law and policy. UNEP raises awareness and advocates for effective environmental action, particularly through World Environment Day. UNEP classifies its work into seven broad thematic areas. These can be specified as global climate change, chemicals, junk and resource efficiency, disasters, etc. Also, one of the most significant accomplishments of UNEP is its contribution to international environmental law. It performs this by participating in creating and executing all kinds of international agreements, flexible legal documents, and action plans. For instance, UNEP has undertaken the task of the secretariat of the Vienna Convention and Montreal Protocol (Protection of Ozone Layer)11, CITES and Bonn Conventions (Wildlife Protection)12, Convention on Biological Diversity13, Basel Convention (Hazardous Waste)14, and Rotterdam Convention (Hazardous Chemicals)15. Research and monitoring activities in the field of the environment also occupy an important place in the work of UNEP. “The Global Environmental Outlook – GEO”, the publication of UNEP, which is home to numerous research centers, is recognized as one of the respected environmental outlook reports.16 Today, the UN tries to carry out its environmental activities to a large extent with UNEP. On the one hand, specialized institutions such as UNESCO, WHO, FAO, and auxiliary units such as the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD), and the UN Development Program - UNDP have undertaken important functions related to environmental problems. On the other hand, issues that UNEP is inadequate, and possible reforms are also discussed. These inadequacy criticisms are that although the UN has a unit that will deal with environmental problems on its own, such as UNEP, because of the complex feature of environmental problems, authorities, and duties are dispersed among many institutions. While it is a problem that some tasks fall under the mandate of more than one organization, another problem is that, on the contrary, none of the duties fall within the jurisdiction of any of them. An organization such as UNEP, which is expected to be a center in the field of environmental problems, cannot provide coordination and cooperation between deep-rooted and powerful organizations from time to time. Similarly, UNEP does not have any authority regarding the damage caused to the environment by large multinational companies, which are among those responsible for the ecological crisis. UNEP began to lose power during the 1980s, especially after Development Principle, and the Cooperation Principle20. The principle of differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities is based on the assumption that some countries have a greater responsibility than others since they have emitted more greenhouse gases since the Industrial Revolution. Therefore, each party’s burden varies depending on the degree of their development and historical responsibilities for greenhouse gas emissions Article 5 of the Convention divides countries into three groups with different obligations. In this respect, the Convention divides the parties into three groups annex-I, annex-II, and non-annex- I countries/ or developing countries.21 Parties in Annex-1 list are compulsory to limit their greenhouse gas emissions, develop and protect their greenhouse gas sinks, and inform the measurements they take and the policies they pursue to prevent climate change. The Annex- I group categorizes economies in transition and industrialized countries. So, it consists of two clusters of countries. The first group includes countries that are members of the OECD as of 1992, also the EU is in this group. The Convention allows for “some flexibility” in meeting obligations, considering the economic and political challenges faced by Parties to the Economies in Transition (EIT) after regime change. Some countries have benefited from using a different base year, considering recent changes in the economy, leading to a large spontaneous reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. In the second group, there are countries in the process of transition to a market economy. In addition to the obligations they have undertaken in the first group, Annex II countries are obliged to transfer environmentally friendly technologies to developing party countries and to encourage, facilitate, and finance these technologies. So, this category includes developed countries. Non-Annex I, or developing countries, are encouraged to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, cooperate in research and technology transfer, and protect their greenhouse gas sinks, but they are not under any specific obligations. Non-Annex I countries, on the other hand, vary widely from developing countries such as Brazil and Singapore to OECD countries such as Mexico and the Republic of Korea and include 155 countries. Considering the common but different responsibilities in the Convention, all Parties have compulsory to reduce human-induced greenhouse gas emissions, prevent climate change, and reduce its effects. The categorization of countries in this way has also brought about some debates. Some opponents of the UNFCCC argue that it is unfair to distinguish between Annex I and developing countries and believe that both developed 20 UN, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, 1992and developing countries should reduce their emissions.22 Despite its flaws, the International Climate Policy Convention garners necessary support from countries due to its consensus nature. By making concessions in favor of developed or developing countries, binding emission reductions were abandoned, and a soft approach was adopted to persuade countries with different interests. The success and effectiveness of the Convention, which was criticized for not making binding provisions, was seen as dependent on the end of the conflict between the North and the South and the establishment of a fair climate policy. The persistence of poverty and visible injustice in the Global South has never elevated environmental protection to the same level of concern as in the Global North. In other words, because the primary focus in underdeveloped countries is economic development, finding solutions to climate change is often relegated to a lower priority. For this reason, developing countries state that the industrialized countries, which are most responsible for humaninduced greenhouse gas emissions, should assume the main responsibility, and the view that the right to development cannot be taken from them becomes a constantly debated issue. The challenge of combating climate change is made tougher by the fact that the People’s Republic of China (PRC), Brazil, and India are currently the top emitters of greenhouse gases, while developed countries like the United States of America (USA) do not make long-term stable commitments. Furthermore, only a handful of countries have put into effect the decisions made in the convention and have synchronized their national laws with it. Even when certain countries enact legislative changes to safeguard their forests and conserve energy, since these policies are primarily motivated by reasons other than climate change, it wouldn’t be accurate to regard these legal regulations within the scope of climate change. States that do not hesitate to sign an important framework agreement such as the UNFCCC have not acted equally eagerly when it comes to implementation. Therefore, although the UNFCCC is a historical step in the fight against climate change, it is clear that more binding international agreements are needed due to the deficiencies in implementation. Paris Climate Agreement The 21st session of Conferences was met in Paris and gained importance with the signing of the Paris Agreement, which shaped the post-Kyoto Protocol period. The agreement was signed in December 2015 and entered into force in November 2016. Important points of the Paris Agreement can be stated under 4 fundamental headings.49 Firstly, while the emission reduction target was determined in the Kyoto Protocol, the global temperature target was envisaged in the Paris Agreement. Accordingly, countries will try to keep the global temperature increase below 2 Ԩ, if possible, at 1.5 Ԩ until 2100. Secondly, different from the Kyoto Protocol, the Paris Agreement ascribes responsibilities to all parties and countries. The most basic feature that distinguishes the Paris Climate Agreement from the Kyoto Protocol is that it moves away from the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and adopts the principle of equal responsibility for all countries. The Paris Agreement is based on Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDC), which countries will declare voluntarily to reduce emissions. In addition, the concepts of ‘carbon budget’, ‘green climate fund’, and ‘sustainable goal developments’ are also important points that can be addressed within the framework of the Paris Agreement.50 The concept of the Carbon Budget, which is not included in the Kyoto Protocol, is included in the Paris Agreement. The carbon budget, as advocated by the Paris Agreement, is the amount of CO2 that humanity can emit while it has a good chance of keeping global warming within 1.5 degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial levels. Accordingly, two-thirds of the world’s carbon budget has been used, and countries are expected to use the remaining one-third of the budget until 2050 and reduce emissions after reaching peak values.51 In addition, with the Paris Agreement, the creation of a fund to be used in the fight against climate change has become a necessity. In the new climate regime framed by the Paris Agreement, the Green Climate Fund is important as the main pool of financial support to be provided by developed countries to developing countries and the main use mechanism of this resource. It is envisaged that the fund will provide an annual budget of $100 billion from 2020 and be used by adjusting it according to needs from 202552. The agreement is also a critical chance within the framework of the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).53 Among them, the 13th goal, Climate Action, includes compulsory action to fight against climate change and its effects. For sustainable economic growth, the world must transition to a low-carbon economy. calls for pressing activity not as it were to combat climate alter and its impacts but moreover to construct versatility against common disasters and related risks such as the food and water emergency that will happen as a result of climate change. Under the framework of the Paris Agreement, the Carbon Budget, the Green Climate Fund, and the Sustainable Development Goals are important steps in the UN’s fight against global climate change.54 It should be noted that the outlook for the conference was initially rather bleak at first. Only limited progress has been made in the grueling and incessant meetings held at the Durban Platform to prepare the text of the Paris Agreement. While no serious progress has been made in the negotiations, the acceptance of a new climate agreement on 12 December 50 Daniel Bodansky. “The Paris Climate Change Agreement: A New Hope?” The American Journal of International Law, vol. 110, no. 2, 2016, pp. 288–319. 51 Centre for Science and Environment. “Carbon Budget: Unfair Share.” The Numbers Behind Climate Change: The Imperative of Equity for Urgent and Bold Action on Combatting Catastrophic Climate Change, Centre for Science and Environment, 2021, pp. 22–28. 52 SSendi, Lucy, and Neha Rai. “What Is the Green Climate Fund?” Eight Things to Know about Green Climate Fund, International Institute for Environment and Development, 2016, p. 4 53 United Nations set 17 goals in 2015, which are planned to be implemented by 2030. 54 Marquardt, Jens, and Miranda Schreurs. “Governing the Climate Crisis: Three Challenges for SDG 13.” The Environment in Global Sustainability Governance: Perceptions, Actors, Innovations, edited by Lena Partzsch, 1st ed., Bristol University Press, 2024, pp. 21–46. Şeker 21 2015 at the Paris Conference is an important success. The issue blocking the negotiations is the desire of more states to reduce their emissions than envisaged in the Kyoto Protocol. This means that countries take more drastic measures. As a matter of fact, in 2007, the UNFCCC Parties negotiated to further the goals of the Kyoto Protocol, but during these negotiations, serious disagreements arose between the countries, and the Protocol almost escaped the danger of collapse during the Copenhagen Conference in 2009. From time to time, despair dominated the Paris Conference, as the difficulties before the Paris Climate Change Conference reminded all participants of the difficult negotiations held during the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference in 2009. Especially the difference of opinion between the EU and the US showed that a difficult process awaits the delegates. Because, while the EU insists that the Kyoto Protocol should be taken as a basis in the fight against climate change, this proposal for the USA, which is not a party to the Kyoto Protocol, means that the doors will be closed to itself in Paris. At the Paris Climate Change Conference, the demands of the USA, which opposed the use of the Kyoto Protocol, were taken into account more than the demands of the EU. The “Paris Agreement” was signed exactly 18 years after the Kyoto Protocol, when the idea that negotiations, conferences, and meetings held to achieve a new global agreement should be brought to an end. Since the Kyoto Protocol would expire in 2020, the urgent need for a new international climate agreement has facilitated the signing of the Paris Agreement. In this way, a vacuum in the fight against climate change was prevented after the Kyoto Protocol55. The agreement, which will determine the new climate regime for the post2020 period, when the commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol will expire, indicates a period based on the commitments (volunteering) of the countries rather than the rate of jointly developed responsibilities. It is argued that this less binding agreement also does not make a clear distinction between developing and developed countries in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, unlike the previous ones. Within the framework of this voluntary agreement, the PRC has committed to maintain the increase in greenhouse gas emissions until 2030, but then to reduce it clearly, in the “nationally determined intent of contribution” it submitted to the UN on the way to Paris. The EU has committed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40% compared to the 1990 level by 2030, the USA by 28% compared to the 2005 level by 2025, and Turkey by a total of 21% in 2030.56 . Conclusion The possible consequences of climate change are wide-ranging and impactful. They include rising global temperatures, which can lead to more frequent and severe heatwaves, as well as changes in precipitation patterns, potentially causing droughts in some areas and flooding in others. Sea levels are also rising due to the melting of polar ice caps and glaciers, leading to coastal erosion and the inundation of low-lying areas. Climate change may also affect ecosystems and biodiversity, leading to the extinction of certain species and the disruption of food chains. Additionally, extreme weather events such as hurricanes, typhoons, and cyclones may become more intense and frequent, posing a threat to human lives and infrastructure. Finally, climate change can also impact human health, through the spread of vectorborne diseases and the degradation of air and water quality. In the last 30 years, the UN has made significant efforts to combat climate change through various initiatives and agreements. It all began with the Stockholm Conference in 1972, which marked the first major step in addressing environmental issues on a global scale. Subsequently, the UNFCCC emerged from the Rio Conference in 1992, laying the groundwork for future international climate conventions. The adoption of the Kyoto Protocol in 1997 and the Paris Agreement in 2016 further demonstrated the UN’s commitment to addressing global warming and its impacts. These efforts, along with the annual COP meetings, reflect the UN’s determination to tackle climate change and have yielded significant results in the form of international agreements and protocols. While the United Nations (UN) has made significant efforts in combating climate change, there have also been challenges and criticisms. Some critiques of the UN’s approach to fighting climate change include instances where international agreements have been viewed as inadequate or lacking enforceability. Additionally, there have been concerns raised about the slow progress in achieving emissions reduction targets and limitations in coordinating global responses to climate change. Despite these challenges, the UN continues to work towards addressing these issues and improving international collaboration in the fight against climate change. Of course, from the UNFCCC to the Kyoto Protocol and then to the Paris (Climate) Agreement, each of them shows that there is an advanced stage in the fight against climate change and that the international community, especially within the UN, acts responsibly in the fight against this problem However, in dealing with this urgent issue, it’s crucial for the international community to act without succumbing to the “climate paradox.” This is especially pertinent for public opinion in the most polluting countries including the PRC, USA, EU, India, and RF. Furthermore, the Paris Agreement, as a key initiative to tackle climate change, should prioritize those nations that have the most significant environmental impact. The commitment of the USA, RF, and PRC to this agreement will notably impact its success or failure.

INTRODUCTION One of the significant constrain in agrifood systems nowadays is rise of greenhouse gas emissions from different sectors leading to climate change. Rice is prime source of carbs which is staple food to half of world population is cultivated over a wide area with different cultivation methods. Submerged rice cultivation which contributes about 88% of total rice cultivation responsible for methane emission. Submergence creates anaerobic conditions which favour emission of CO2, NO2 and CH4. Methane is second major contributor of greenhouse effect after carbon dioxide with GWP of 28 over a 100-year period. Paddy fields contribute about 12% of global anthropogenic methane emission with 50-60 Tg/year emission rate. Methane production from rice fields Rice fields under prolonged submergence leads creation of anaerobic conditions which are suitable for methane production from organic matter by methanogenic bacteria is known as methanogenesis, main source of organic matter is rice stubbles. Methane emission from different rice ecosystem follow the order: submerged rice > irrigated rice > rainfed rice. Methane production is enhanced under anaerobic conditions where redox potential is low (-150 mV). Organic matter added to the rice field i.e., rice stubbles is converted in to acetate by bacteria (acetogens) this process is known as acetogenesis. Then reduction of CO2 using H2 and transmethylation of acetate leads to synthesis of methane by bacteria (methanogens) is known as methanogenesis. Some amount of methane produced get oxidised to CO2 and H2O by methanotrophs at rhizosphere of rice plants and remaining major portion of methane get emitted to atmosphere through aerenchyma tissue of rice plant, ebullition and diffusion through water surface.Approaches to reduce methane emission from paddy fields As the day-to-day population is rising and production is also going high, which leading to rise of greenhouse gas emissions. Hence to maintain food security and environmental sustainability there is need to follow certain approaches to reduce methane emission from paddy fields simultaneously maintaining food security. 1.Water management Water management practices are the major practices to reduce methane emission from rice fields which include mid-season drainage and alternate wetting and drying (AWD) of paddy field help in enhancing aeration of the soil by supplying O2 leads to increase of redox potential (Eh) of soil, which ultimately causes reduction of methane emission up to 30-70% from the field without affecting the paddy yields. 2.Soil amendments Application of nitrification inhibitors like acetylene and nitrapyrin help in reducing methane emission by inhibiting nitrifiers, methanogens and methane oxidizers. Sulphate fertilizers application creates competition between sulphur oxidisers and methanogens for organic carbon hence reduce methane production. Applying of organic matter increase soil aeration and minimise anaerobic conditions but rice stubble incorporation under water logged conditions will enhance methane emission. Application of nitrogen fertilizers should be controlled. Biochar application can also creation soil aeration and minimise methane emission. 3.Cultivar selection Rice cultivars with special characters to halt methane emission are to be cultivated such as cultivars with undeveloped aerenchyma tissue help in reducing transmission of methane from soil to atmosphere. Varieties having vigour’s root growth habit help in soil aeration and root exudates quantity and quality should be considered while selecting the varieties. 4.Direct seeded rice (DSR) The technique of sowing rice directly into the soil rather than transplanting into puddled soil is known as direct seeded rice. This technique of rice cultivation is gaining high popularity among farmers due to its major benefits like less water requirement, reduce labour cost and early maturity. As there is no water logging conditions it will not create reduced conditions and decrease methane emission by about 47% compared to transplanted rice.CONCLUSION Green house gases which are major causes of global warming has considerable effect on crop production. Reduction of methane emission from rice field help in mitigation of climate change can be obtained by adopting above discussed approaches to an extent. To improve adaptation of these management practices there is need of bringing awareness among the farmers regarding advantages on yield and environmental benefits.To investigate the effects of climate change on the climatic classification of Iran, the De Martonne aridity index has been used. To show the effects of climate change in the past and the future on Iran's climate, data from 120 meteorological stations of Iran, which are distributed in different locations with different climates, were collected and analyzed in the statistical period of 1933-2022. The climatic condition of Iran in the base period was determined according to the De Martonne aridity index. In addition, to investigate the effects of climate change in the coming periods on the climatic classification of Iran, the data related to the output of the CanESM2 model, which is one of the CMIP5 models that is hybridized by the Canadian Center for Climate Modeling and Analysis (CCCMA) by combining CanCM4 and CTEM models, were used. To examine the changes in climatic classes of Iran under different scenarios and conditions, the output of two release scenarios, RCP2.6 and RCP8.5, were utilized. Due to the large-scale output of General Circulation Models (GCM), the output of this model was downscaled using the LARS-WG model. The LARS-WG model, which is considered one of the most famous and widely used models for downscaling weather data, was used to generate precipitation values, minimum and maximum temperatures, as well as daily radiation, under base and future climate conditions. Results and Discussion According to the results, the majority of Iran (90.49%) has an arid and semi-arid climate. The percentage of arid climate is 68.82%, while that of semi-arid climate is 21.97%. Therefore, Iran should be called an arid and semi-arid country in terms of climate. By analysis of the effects of climate change indicates that in future periods, the precipitation and average temperature will increase. This increase will be greater under the RCP8.5 scenario than the RCP2.6 scenario. The study of the climatic classification of Iran in the coming periods indicates that the majority of the country will continue to experience arid and semi-arid climates. The sum of arid and semi-arid climates will reach its lowest level in the period of 2020-2041. This is following the RCP2.6 scenario, after which these climates are expected to expand once more. According to the RCP8.5 scenario, during the periods of 2021-2040, 2041-2060, and 2061-2080, the total area of arid and semi-arid climates will decrease. However, from 2081 to 2100, this trend will