1 / 13

National Institutional Framework for the Kyoto Protocol Implementation in Europe and the CIS

National Institutional Framework for the Kyoto Protocol Implementation in Europe and the CIS. Daniela Stoycheva Climate change and emissions trading consultant. Content. Examples and Challenges: KP structures CDM structures - DNAs JI structures List of questions for panel discussions.

vui
Download Presentation

National Institutional Framework for the Kyoto Protocol Implementation in Europe and the CIS

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. National Institutional Framework for the Kyoto Protocol Implementation in Europe and the CIS Daniela Stoycheva Climate change and emissions trading consultant

  2. Content Examples and Challenges: • KP structures • CDM structures - DNAs • JI structures • List of questions for panel discussions

  3. KP structures • KP national focal point • NCs and inventories (NAPCC) • Participation of other ministries and institutions • Legislation • Financing – UNDP, donors • Challenges – CC not first priority, awareness, all kind of resources

  4. DNA - structure • Ministry of environment – 1or 2 departments • Interministerial committee ( DNA Steering committee) • Secretariat • Outsourced • BUT permanent legal status of the DNA and financial support is a necessity

  5. DNA - staff • Steering committee – senior vs. technical level • Secretariat – technical level, full time vs. part time • Division of tasks between the SC and the Secretariat • Involvement of experts (Panel of experts) and public • Financing – project based vs. sustainable • Challenges – training, leavings, payment, overloading, changes in the government

  6. Evaluation procedures • One fold – only PDD • Two folds – PIN and PDD • Criteria for evaluation • Only SD or plus • Additionality and • Determination report • Others – fees, fiscal treatment; updates

  7. SD criteria • SD criteria adjusted to the national ones • Measurable indicators • Which method to use? • Yes/No • Scores • Scores and values • Combinations • Simple and easy to use

  8. Evaluation procedures: • Transparent • Reliable • Fixed timing • Equity issues • Legal - approved • Formats downloadable • Updated when necessary

  9. Outreach activities of the DNA • Necessary • Target groups • Websites • Printed materials • Direct communications (Wshps) • Media • Challenges – financing, overload, lack of awareness, innovative approaches

  10. Joint implementation JI • Marrakech accords eligibility criteria – strict rules for reporting; registry;track 1 and track 2 • Large scale and small scale projects in the period 2008-2012 • Early and late credits • Coexistence with GIS and EU ETS– double counting; limited scope, fiscal treatment and Voluntary markets – offsets, Belarus, Turkey • National rules: MoU, LoA, national procedures for track 2 - but still only for approval and not for monitoring and transfer; national procedures for track 1; ERPA • National structures – National systems, National registry, NFP on CC and DNF on JI • Future of the JI as a mechanism and structures

  11. JI Track 1 and Track 2 • Track 1 • Country’s responsibility in issuing ERUs • Domestically governed system • More like IET • Advantages: • Might be faster track • Could be lower transaction costs • Flexible methodology • Disadvantages: • Track 1 eligibility needed • Depends on government to establish Track 1 guidelines • Could be possible link to “hot air” • Track 2 • International supervision by JISC • international verification of PDDs and ERUs • CDM-like • Advantages: • International standard • JISC procedures established and functioning • Predictable • Disadvantages: • JISC fees • Possibly slow approval -review • JI methodologies

  12. Questions for the Panel discussion • How to improve the efficiency/sustainability of the DNA/NFP? • How to improve the procedures for CDM/JI projects approval? • What about national procedures for program based CDM? • What do you think about applying fees for approval? • Did you plan arrangements for the fiscal treatment of the CERs/ERUs? • How to promote better CDM/JI in and out of the country? What the DNA/NFP can do in this regard? • Do you consider establishment of a link to the UNFCCC CDM registry? • Future needs of the DNAs/NFPs (donor’s support)?

  13. Thank you!danielast11@yahoo.com

More Related