If the UN conference in Copenhagen succeeds in hammering out tough limits on greenhouse gas emissions around the world, how can they ensure that nations will keep their climate vows in good times and bad, for better or for worse?

The Guardian’s Julian Borger flags up a new report, commissioned by the British government in preparation for the negotiations, that recommends sweeping changes to international institutions so that the policing can begin.

The authors, Alex Evans and David Steven of the Centre on International Cooperation at New York University, say this would include the creation of powerful new UN bodies. They suggest an “International Climate Control Committee” that would do for climate policy what the International Monetary Fund does for fiscal policy, pulling together and auditing data about how well countries are performing. A bit more glamorously, they also envisage a “coercive inspection regime” that – like the International Atomic Energy Agency hunting for nuclear weapons in the works – could show up unannounced to sniff out any illicit emissions.

A spokesman for the report’s commissioners, the UK Department for International Development, told Borger that although the paper does not represent the department’s views, it “highlights many of the issues that will be on the table for discussion at the Copenhagen summit.”

With many Kyoto signatories looking unlikely to achieve the modest emissions cuts they promised, there’s a palpable need for new policies to come with tough enforcement. Perhaps the biggest Kyoto-enforcement debacle has been in Canada, where the government passed legislation on implementing its 6% cut under Kyoto – then failed to meet its own deadlines, was sued by green groups, and was given a pass by the federal court, who said the law was unenforceable.

A more ambitious agreement would seem to require ironclad backing. But this is unlikely to materialize unless climate change is taken as seriously as other global threats. Evans and Steven write that under an effective climate deal,

Carbon default … would become as weighty an issue as sovereign default, or failure to comply with a security council resolution. That this should currently seem inconceivable indicates the extent of the shift in understanding that is still needed.

Anna Barnett

Image: Flickr user Paul Keleher, Creative Commons licensed