1 / 33

Climate Change Negotiations: The Cancun Outcomes

Delve into the mandates and outcomes of climate change negotiations, including long-term goals, mitigation strategies, adaptation actions, and financial support provisions. Understand the agreements from COP meetings leading up to Cancun discussions.

fpearson
Download Presentation

Climate Change Negotiations: The Cancun Outcomes

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Climate Change Negotiations & The Cancun Outcomes UNECA Seventh African Development Forum 10-15 October 2010 UNCC, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Dan Bondi Ogolla Chief Legal Adviser UNFCCC secretariat <unfccc.int>

  2. I. The current negotiation mandates

  3. Kyoto Protocol Convention Overview: Negotiations under the Convention and under the Kyoto Protocol Long-Term Cooperative Action: Dialogue & BAP COP 11 CMP 1 (2005) Montreal COP 13 (2007) Bali COP 15 (2009) Copenhagen COP 16 (2010) Cancun Further commitments for Annex I Parties

  4. 1/CMP.1under the Kyoto Protocol 1/CP.13under the UNFCCC Ad hoc working group on further commitments for Annex I Parties (AWG-KP) Specific mandate to agree targets for CP.2 Ad hoc working group on long-term cooperative action (AWG-LCA) Broad mandate to ensure long-termimplementation of the Convention Mandate

  5. AWG-LCA Mandate • Decision 1/CP.13 • A comprehensive process to enable the full, effective and sustained implementation of the Convention through LCA, now, up to until & beyond 2012

  6. AWG-LCA Mandate • In order to reach an agreed outcome and adopt a decision at COP 15 • By addressing: • A shared vision for co-operative action – including a long-term global goal for emissions reduction;

  7. AWG-LCA Mandate • Enhanced national/international action on mitigation of climate change including: • MRV national mitigation commitments or actions, including QELRCs for all developed countries; • NAMAs by developing countries – supported & enabled by technology, financing, & CB, in a MRV manner. • Enhanced action on adaptation • Enhanced action on technology development and transfer to support mitigation & adaptation actions

  8. AWG-LCA Mandate • Enhanced action on provision of financialresources & investment to support mitigation & adaptation actions • Capacity-building • Process to be conducted in AWG-LCA • Work to be completed in 2009 & report to COP 15

  9. AWG-LCA Mandate • The “agreed outcome” can take several forms • A new protocol under the Convention; • A set of decisions by the COP; or • A combination of the above. • Raises the issue of the architecture of the post-2012 climate change regime.

  10. AWG-LCA Issues & Outcomes A Shared vision on long-term cooperative action: • The long-term global goal for emission reductions and associated considerations • Expression of a shared vision for all elements of the Bali Action Plan • Review • Long-term global goal • Overall progress in implementing the Convention

  11. AWG-LCA Issues & Outcomes • Expressed as an aspirational long-term global goal: – GHG concentrations to below 300ppm CO2 equivalent; - maintaining temperature rise to below 1.5 C; - collectively reduce global emissions by 50-85-95 more than 100% by 2050. • Expressed as mid-term goal for AI: - peaking of GHG emissions by 2015/2020; - reduction by 40-50% by 2020, 80-95% by 2050. -DCs to mobilize USD 100 billion/make assessed contributions of 1.5 of GDP a year by 2020.

  12. Issues & Cancun Outcomes Mitigation under the BAP • Commitments or actions by developed country Parties • NAMAs by developing country Parties • Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in dcs and the role of forests (REDD-plus) • Cooperative sectoral approaches and sector-specific actions; • Various approaches, including opportunities for using markets; • Economic and social consequences of response measures

  13. Issues & Cancun Outcomes Issues in Developed Countries mitigation • How to define & adopt targets: bottom-up (pledges) or top-down (int’lly negotiated based on agreed aggregate; • Where to negotiate: AWG-LCA or AWG-KP; • MRV: Kyoto-rules or simple pledge & review; • Comparability of effort: through int’l process or a non-quantifiable general principle.

  14. AWG-LCA Issues Issues in Developing Countries Mitigation: • BAP-1 (b) (ii) – NAMAs in the context of SD, supported and enabled by technology, finance and CB, in a MRV manner; • 3 Types of NAMAs: • Domestically funded; • Supported NAMAs; and • NAMAs undertaken to generate carbon credits

  15. AWG-LCA Issues Issues in Developing Countries Mitigation • Packaging of NAMAs in an Appendix II; • Mitigation Mechanism for technical support & provision of financial, technological & CB support; • NAMA Registry – NAMAs implemented through or seeking int’l support to be recorded. Functions of registry. • MRV of NAMAs – domestic/int’l; ICA - facilitative, technical transparent, confidence-building,Party-driven process that respects national sovereignty

  16. AWG-LCA Issues Issues in Adaptation • Adaptation Framework: to enhance action & int’l cooperation; • Parties - planning, prioritizing & implementing adaptation actions; impact & vulnerability assessments; strengthening institutional capacities; building resilience of socio-economic and ecological systems. • Process for LDCs to formulate and implement national adaptation plans. • Scaled-up financial support as well as technological and CB assistance; • Adaptation Committee (and its functions) or existing institutional arrangements. • International mechanism to address loss and damage.

  17. AWG-LCA Issues Technology in the BAP • BAP- 1(d)- Enhanced action on technology development & transfer to support action on mitigation and adaptation: - Removal of obstacles & provision of financial & other incentives for scaling-up development and transfer of ESTs; -Ways to accelerate deployment, diffusion & transfer of affordable ESTs; -Cooperation in R&D; -Mechanisms & tools for cooperation in specific sectors.

  18. AWG-LCA Issues Issues in Technology Development & Transfer: • Technology Mechanism & functions -To consist of a Technology Executive Committee & a Climate Technology Centre & Network; -Functions of TEC: needs assessments; policies & guidance to COP; promote cooperation; address IPR issues; -CTCN: provide advice & support to Parties; facilitate deployment of technologies • The role of IPRs. • MRV of technological transfer and diffusion.

  19. AWG-LCA Issues Issues in Finance: • Sources of financing: public or private? Newmarket mechanism under the Convention? • Institutional Issues: FM Governance – New body of the FM; Strengthen existing institutions – Role of GEF; New Fund and its Finance Board; Funding windows – mitigation, adaptation. • Fast start finance: USD 30B for 2010-2012. • MRV of financial support.

  20. AWG-LCA Issues REDD-Plus in the BAP: BAP-1(b)iii-Policy approaches & positive incentives on issues relating to reducing emissions from deforestation & forest degradation in dcs; and the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of carbon stocks in dcs. • Forests play an important role in global C budget, acting either as sinks or sources of C.

  21. Issues and Cancun Outcomes Issues in REDD-plus • Establishment of a REDD-plus mechanism & its functions; • Actions in the forest sector & incentives – eligibility for funding; • Role of indigenous peoples & local communities; • Launch of a readiness phase for REDD-plus.

  22. Issues in REDD-plus: Different phases for implementing REDD-plus activities: an initial readiness phase, a policy implementation and demonstration activities phase and a full implementation phase. Each of these phases will likely require different levels and/or types of financing.

  23. AWG-LCA Cancun Outcomes Balanced Outcome in Cancun under the BAP: • At the August session in Bonn Parties called for a politically balanced outcome in Cancun covering all elements of the BAP. • The outcome to be in the form of decisions for immediate implementation. • But also call for balance between the 2 tracks. • The AWG-LCA Chair tabled at the session held in Tianjin last elements of such an outcome. These are: Shared Vision: for long-term cooperation +long-term global goal for reductions; process to review progress + goal.

  24. Issues & Cancun Outcomes Mitigation: • Targets or actions for DCs; • MRV for developed countries & actions; • NAMAs by developing countries & associated support; • MRV for NAMAs; • Readiness phase of mitigation activities in the forest sector (REDD-plus); • PoW on mitigation in agriculture; • Bunker fuels; • Various approaches, including markets; • Econ & soc consequences of response measures

  25. Issues & Cancun Outcomes Adaptation: • Adaptation framework & implementation institutions. • Approach to address loss & damage.

  26. Issues & Cancun Outcomes Finance, Technology & CB • Reporting on fast-start finance; • New Fund & process of its design; • Arrangements to improve coherence & coordination in CC financing- Oversight Body; • Mobilization of long-term finance; • MRV of support; • Establishment of Tech Mech, TEC & CTCN • CB

  27. III. AWG-KP Mandate • I/CMP.1: a process to consider “further commitments” of AIPs for the period beyond 2012 in accordance with Art. 3.9 of the KP -AIP targets. • Other issues • Mechanisms • LULUCF • Greenhouse gases, sectors & source categories • Potential consequences • Art. 3.9 - commitments for CPs adopted through amendments to Annex B.

  28. AWG-KP Issues Scale of Annex I Parties emission reductions (IPCC AR 4 ranges of 25-40%) • Proposals: range 15 to 50% by in 2020; & 80-95% by 2050. • Current pledges by AIPs (bottom-up) reduction of 17-25% by 2020; • Upper range of pledges conditional upon major economies action • Means of achieving the QELROs: • Role of mechanisms and supplementarity of their use to domestic emission reductions • Role of the LULUCF sector and rules for CP2; • How to treat assigned amounts carry-overs from the CP1 and surplus units in CP2

  29. Outcome under the AWG-KP • Transforming pledges into QELROs • Base year: 1990, 2000 and 2005 • Number and duration of CPs one (2013-2020), or two (2013-2017, 2018-2022) • Starting point for emissions trajectory for transforming pledges into QELROs: current level of emissions, or QELROs for CP1 • LULUCF: Negotiations on the definitions, modalities, rules and guidelines for the treatment of land use, land use change and forestry in CP2

  30. AWG-KP Issues Mechanisms: • increase the scope of the mechanisms (nuclear in CDM/JI, CCS in CDM) • change the operation of the mechanisms (co-benefits in CDM/JI, standardized baselines in CDM, discount factors in CDM, regional distribution in CDM) • accounting rules (carryover limits CP2 to CP3, share of proceeds, access to emissions trading and use of units) • establish new market mechanisms

  31. AWG-KP Issues • GHGs, sectors and source categories • Prevent the use and emission of “new gases” as alternatives to those being phased out under the MP: E.g. new species of HFCs and PFCs. Potential consequences of policies of AIPs: -Enhance understanding; -Provision of info & assessment of impacts; -Permanent forum for reporting & evaluating impacts & consequences.

  32. AWG-KP Cancun Outcomes • Clarity on the future of KP: CP 2; • Formalization of mitigation pledges put forward by AIPs in 2010; • Agreement on number and duration of commitment periods? • Agreement on base-year?

  33. Thank you! For further information: <unfccc.int>

More Related