Our thinking

The goods: Kyoto

7 February, 2025

On the face of it, a two and half hour play about the intricacies of negotiating an international climate treaty where every clause, sub-clause and comma is up for debate and discussion isn’t the most compelling way to spend an evening.

And with scientists now suggesting that a 2-degree aligned future may be out of reach, you’d be forgiven for feeling that an awful lot of hot air and carbon has been expended on climate negotiations over the past without any real impact or progress, and exhausted by the idea of reliving in detail how we ended up here.

But if you do have time, and can get a ticket, the RSC’s production of Kyoto is more than worth it. Never has an argument about square brackets been as gripping, or linked to such high stakes.

First, a brief refresher. In 1997, COP 3 took place in Kyoto. Ten years of negotiations culminated in a tense set of discussions that went to the wire (and beyond) as 192 countries argued over how to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions and who was responsible for bearing the pain of emissions reductions. It enshrined (not without controversy) the scientific consensus that global warming was occurring and was driven by human activity. It acknowledged that different countries have different capabilities to address climate change owing to their different levels of economic development and it placed the obligation to act on developed nations, reflecting the fact that they bore historical responsibility for the majority of emissions.

And now the story is on stage. The first act tells the story of the path to Kyoto, including the Rio summit in 1992, the establishment of the IPCC and the meetings that preceded the Kyoto summit. The second act brings the negotiations in Kyoto to life. The story is told largely through the perspective of Don Pearlman, the lawyer, campaigner and climate anti-hero, who worked tirelessly to undermine attempts to reach consensus, and the national representatives who participated in the negotiations. As a piece of theatre, it’s exciting, fast paced, funny and knowing. As a memorial to what could have been, and what could still be, it’s intensely moving.

By Claire Jost