Tag: ADP

CAN Submission - How to advance the work of the ADP in Doha and Beyond, October 2012

Download the file - which contains full details on:


Practical ideas and suggestions on how the ADP can advance its work, both towards delivering an effective post-2020 agreement and bridging the ambition gap in the pre-2020 period

  • Produce a balanced package from every COP
  • Support ministerial round table
  • Ensure adequate negotiating time
  • Ensure that the ADP co-chairs and facilitators obtain clear mandates to begin work on text 
  • Embrace multi-stakeholder process

How best to advance the work of the ADP in Doha and beyond

  • Set milestones and detailed workplans for both ADP workstreams
  • Take work from other negotiating tracks into account
  • Ensure Civil Society Access to ADP
  • Involve ministerial level negotiators early in the process
  • Incorporate equity into Workstream 1 

Topics or questions that could be used to focus substantive discussions in Doha or in future sessions, building upon the roundtable discussions in Bangkok

  1. How to increase the pledged levels of ambition for Parties, including through enhanced support, to be in compliance with the ultimate objective of the Convention and the agreed 2ºC temperature increase limit
  2. How can we ensure that sufficient, predictable and public finance and other support is provided to meet urgent pre-2020 adaptation needs?
  3. How to ensure that predictable levels of financial, technological and capacity building support are made available to developing countries to implement the NAMAs they have already identified, and further support any additional NAMAs in the short term?

Equity questions:

  1. How should equity principles be applied in the new agreement?
  2. What indicators best specify those principles?
  3. How can we best ensure each Party is doing is its fair share of the global effort without compromising its sustainable development needs?
  4. How will we provide developing countries with the means to implement their commitments and how will we cooperatively ensure that the global emissions reach a rapid and sustainable peak, one consistent with an agreed temperature goal and cumulative emission reduction pathways that would allow the world to stay within that goal?

Practical Ideas and Suggestions on how the ADP can advance its work on bridging the ambition gap in the pre-2020 period


At Doha an ADP workplan to increase short term ambition must be agreed:

  • Informed by a technical paper assessing the gap in ambition and ways to close it and by the progress of the Review; increasing developed country economy wide targets  to close the gap between existing ambition and that needed to keep warming below 1.5oC; ensuring that any new market mechanisms add to overall ambition with stringent rules;  facilitating developing countries to reduce their emissions by rapidly scaling-up public climate finance, focusing on economy-wide or sector-wide actions that would rapidly and significantly lower emission trajectories and supporting initiatives that reduce costs and eliminate barriers and perceived risk, so that low and zero carbon technologies and approaches can quickly become competitive;  
  • To enable developing countries to increase their mitigation and adequately deal with adaptation public finance from 2013-15 must be at least double the amount of the Fast Start Finance, and there should be a process to reassess the adequacy of financial pledges in terms of overall scale required, thematic balance and geographical distribution starting in 2013.  A 2 year Doha Capacity Action Plan should be initiated.


CAN Intervention on International Transport - LCA Sectoral approaches spinoff group, Bangkok Sept 4, 2012


Delivered by Mark Lutes

Thank you for this opportunity to speak. I am from WWF and speak here on behalf of the Climate Action Network.

  • We are seeing a rich and wide-ranging discussion in many areas here in Bangkok, in particular a very interesting discussion in the ADP round tables, with many thoughtful and creative interventions about the shape of long-term efforts to address climate change;
  • Would be good for some of that same spirit to filter through into this group on the way to Doha, and to see some new thinking on how to break out of the same pattern of the past 10 years. I’m sure many of you are tired of saying the same things year after year. - What we need from the LCA this year under sectoral approaches is some way to break the deadlock and polarization that currently exists in the IMO and ICAO on market based measures;
  • How to do this – a signal to these bodies, or to parties to these bodies (to use a potentially useful wording from Japan), on how to address convention principals in the context of their own established approaches and customary practices.
  • Singapore provided a useful compromise – take account of the principals and provisions of the UNFCCC in the context of global measures under the IMO and ICAO, but it would be useful to go beyond this and say how this might be done.
  • One way would be through the use of revenue generated by MBMs, that can be used to address any impacts on developing countries, to support technology transfer and cooperation and transfer for developing countries, especially the most vulnerable, in implementing these measures, and also to provide financing for developing countries, while making sure that only financing raised from developed countries counts towards the commitments of those countries.
  • We are pleased to see the EU submission introduces the issue of finance, and perhaps these two text can be combined in a way that gives appropriate guidance on how to address CBDR, in global measures under the sectoral bodies.

Doha is the last chance to produce some useful outcomes from your five years of deliberations, and we urge you not to waste that opportunity.

Thank you


Where There's a Gap, There's a Way

ECO was pleasantly surprised by the tenor of interventions at the ADP roundtable on ambition Saturday. There was widespread acknowledgement that, as things currently stand, we are not on track for limiting global temperature rise to 2 degrees centigrade above pre-industrial levels. Many Parties lamented the lack of pre-2020 ambition, with one bright spark noting that failure to take decisive action in the short term has ominous implications for the post-2020 process.

In the words of one delegation “there is a serious gap”. This echoes what scientists have been telling us for some time now. In its “Bridging the Emissions Gap” report published at the end of 2011, UNEP undertook a systematic assessment of the size of what we should by rights be calling the Multi-Gigatonne Gap, concluding that it is in the range of 6-11 Gt.

So even under the most conservative assessment, which assumes perfect implementation of countries’ current pledges, the world is on a pathway to emit 50 gigatonnes of CO2-equivalent per year by 2020, instead of the needed 44 gigatonnes or less. This analysis is backed up by a whole host of studies, so it seems the science is pretty solid. We think the sheer scale of the gap should have countries setting up Emergency Emissions Reductions Crisis Centres (ECO would abbreviate them EEKKs! if it were in charge).

One reason for optimism is that as huge as the Multi-Gigatonne Gap is, UNEP estimates that emission reductions of between 14 to 20 Gt of CO2-equivalent are possible by 2020 and without any significant technical or financial breakthroughs needed. What is more, the costs incurred by these reductions would not be prohibitive. That sounds like a win-win situation to us.

So what exactly can countries do to stave off impending global meltdown (unfortunately, we are not talking figuratively here)? As it turns out, there’s rather a large menu of options to choose from. Many actions could be implemented with immediate effect, using existing frameworks outside the UNFCCC. The phase out of HFCs is an excellent case in point. Agreeing to a consumption and production phase-out of these super greenhouse gases under the Montreal Protocol, with cost-effective alternatives made available to developing countries, would avoid a whopping 88-140 gigatonnes/CO2e emissions by 2050 at a very reasonable price – the near-term emissions savings would also be sizeable. This approach was recently endorsed by the nations of the world at the Rio+20 Conference – all it would take now is for Parties to the UNFCCC to do the same, thereby freeing themselves up to tackle other challenges.

Other, equally crucial initiatives countries should undertake include addressing international emissions from aviation and shipping, which together account for a massive 5% of global CO2 emissions, abolishing fossil fuel subsidies and closing the huge loopholes in the current commitments (did you know that up to 13 billion surplus AAUs could make their way into the Kyoto Protocol’s next commitment period?) to name but a non-exhaustive few.

With such a long shopping list of potential measures to chose from, there really is no excuse for inaction.


Angels and Demons?


Welcome again to the Krung Thep, the city of angels. ECO hopes that this location will inspire delegates to put aside their devilish disagreements and instead move forward in a spirit of angelic cooperation in the fight against climate change and its deadly impacts. The recent flooding in Manila, the typhoon coming ashore near Shanghai and widespread drought and crop failures in the U.S.A. are stark reminders that the impacts of climate change are real, global and growing.

The large majority of countries, especially the poorest and most vulnerable, are demanding a global response that has a very high probability of limiting global warming to levels that do not threaten their livelihoods and their very existence. The best available science indicates that this will require global emissions to remain within a strict carbon budget – and a collective and rapid transition to a low carbon global economy.  It requires both an ambitious post-2020 treaty regime and much greater ambition between now and 2020 – the two-track approach agreed in Durban.

Success in the negotiations towards a fair, ambitious and legally binding deal by 2015 depends on bridging one of the fundamental divides in these talks. On the one side, we have those countries that want a scientifically responsive and responsible, rules-based system. On the other side, there are those that don’t want too many questions asked about their failure to act. (Of course, at least one of these countries doesn’t put it exactly this way, and calls for a more “flexible” approach.)

To meet the global climate challenge, the new ADP architecture for the post 2020 period must be viable for the long term, with a negotiated renewal of targets and actions every five years. It must also be dynamic, with respective changes in responsibility and capability fairly reflected in each renewal of the framework. It must further ensure that countries are accountable for doing what they agreed to do in both mitigation and in providing and effectively utilising support, with common accounting rules and a common, but differentiated, MRV system to allow transparent reporting of progress and to spotlight freeloaders. ECO notes that these are exactly the design elements that so many have fought hard to uphold in the Kyoto Protocol.

Against this fair, ambitious and legally binding deal are just a few countries. For these countries, fairness is finger pointing, ambition is for others and legally binding is too much of a bind.  If their lack of political will causes the world to blow past the 2 degrees Celsius target that their leaders have endorsed, well, that’s just too bad.

So what do negotiators at Bangkok need to work towards to receive their halos?  At COP18 in Doha, the world needs to see:

·       A Doha amendment for a second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol applying immediately to a range of developed countries, including Australia and New Zealand; this should include targets within the range of 25-40% below 1990 levels, with an adjustment procedure to increase ambition, and should enhance environmental integrity by minimizing carried over AAUs and improving CDM and JI rules to lead to real emission reductions.

·       Non-Kyoto developed countries adopting stringent QEROs, comparable in effort and transparency with Kyoto Parties. ‘Comparability’ requires common accounting!

·       Developing countries registering their mitigation actions and required support, and all developing countries to make pledges – including Qatar.

·       Agreement that global emissions will peak in 2015, which means that developed countries need  to reduce their emissions much more quickly, and provide support for developing countries to take more mitigation action.

·       Agreement on a detailed work plan for the ADP, both on the 2015 legally binding agreement and on ways to substantially raise pre-2020 ambition.

·       Commitment to at least $10-15 billion in new public finance for the Green Climate Fund over 2013-2015, together with meaningful steps to develop innovative sources of public financing and agree on a process to reassess the adequacy of financial pledges with the first reassessment in 2013.

·       Funding modalities for National Adaptation Plans in order to scale-up work immediately, and establishment of a second phase of the work program for loss & damage.

·       The rapid operationalisation of the GCF, the Standing Committee, the NAMA registry, the Adaptation Committee, the Technology Executive Committee and the Climate Technology Centre and Network

Laying the foundations for these successes in Doha means that this will be a busy week in Bangkok! As we all know, the devil is in the details. So, where better to get started than in the city of angels?


Roaming the corridors late on Thursday night, Ludwig heard rumours of agreement on the ADP agenda. Did he really hear right? After two weeks, can it really be that they've agreed on a footnote of an agenda, after being assured that the agenda is neutral and that the footnote doesn't mean anything?

Wow! Probably the most carbon-intensive footnote Ludwig has ever seen.

CAN Side Event: Pathway to Qatar and 2015

18:15-19:45 – Wind

How to build a workplan across KP, LCA and ADP to ensure a successful 2015 protocol

― Facilitator : Niranjali, CIEL

― Equity : Tim Gore, Oxfam

― Mitigation : Wael Hmaidan, CAN

― Support : Mahlet Eyassu, Forum for Environment, Ethiopia

― Elements of a 2012-2015 Workplan : Wendel Trio, CAN Europe

Related Newsletter : 

UNFCCC Presents - Bonn Climate Change Conference - May 2012


The 36th sessions of the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI) and of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA), the fifteenth session of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention (AWG-LCA), the seventeenth session of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol (AWG-KP) and the first session of the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action (ADP) will take place concurrently from 14 to 25 May. All sessions will be held at the Maritim Hotel in Bonn.

CAN Submission: Workplan for the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action

CAN welcomes the establishment of the Ad Hoc Working group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action.  Now that Parties have agreed to negotiate a legally binding instrumentto be adopted no later than 2015, it is time to negotiate the substance. 

CAN sees two distinct timeframes within the Durban Platform – the work to increase ambition in the short term, as identified in paragraphs 7 and 8 of the Durban Platform, must occur in parallel with negotiations for reaching an ambitious comprehensive global climate change agreement by 2015 at the latest.  CAN has detailed the actions necessary to increase ambition before 2020 in an earlier submission.  Evading near term responsibility will undermine the chances of a successful 2015 agreement and have a catastrophic impact on the climate.

Parties must learn from the disaster at Copenhagen and ensure that in 2012 they agree on a clear workplan towards 2015 including a timeline for achieving key issues, marked by clear milestones and deadlines.  Parties must commit to meeting these milestones and deadlines and honour this commitment.  Parties will need to conclude a number of agenda items in 2012, 2013 and 2014.  Parties must build into the workplan a balanced package of decisions to be agreed annually.

Equity, including common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities (CBDRRC), needs to be at the very heart of the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action for it to be able to deliver adequately for the climate.

The internationally legally binding protocol now under negotiation must include common and accurate accounting, MRV, strong compliance and enforcement, all respecting the principles of equity, including CBDRRC.  It must have fair targets and actions that are consistent with a 1.5ºC global carbon budget.  It should build on, develop and improve the rules already agreed under the Kyoto Protocol and the Convention.

After the disaster of Copenhagen, leaders do not have another ‘trick up their sleeve’.  Countries must deliver this comprehensive deal by 2015 at the latest, putting in place the first steps in the pre 2020 ambition workplan, ensuring that warming stays below 1.5oC, hence preventing catastrophic climate change.  There is no atmospheric nor political space for a second failure.

CAN Submission - Views on Options and Ways to Further Increase the Level of Ambition - February 2012


Views on Options and Ways to Further Increase the Level of Ambition

28 February 2012

Submission to the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action 

Current unconditional pledges and lenient accounting rules are set to result in global emissions of 55 GtCO2e in 2020. According to the Climate Action Tracker current pledges put the world on a pathway towards 3.5°C of warming and several potential global-scale tipping points. These tipping points include possible dieback of the Amazon rainforest, irreversible loss of the Greenland ice sheets, risk of release of methane hydrates in ocean floor sediments and permafrost thawing. The window of opportunity to prevent catastrophic climate change is rapidly closing.  

An emissions pathway consistent with keeping global temperature increase to below 2°C with likely probability requires global emissions to peak by 2015 in accordance with the most ambitious scenario assessed by the IPCC.  According to UNEP, global emissions in 2020 should be not higher than 44 GtCO2e, compared with 50 GtCO2e today.  After 2020, global GHG emissions would have to steeply decline by at least 80% by 2050 below 1990 levels, and continue to decline thereafter towards net negative emissions to have a likely chance to not exceed 1.5 degree in the long-term. While in theory there may be emission pathways consistent with current pledges (i.e. leading to 55 GtCO2e in 2020) and still keep long-term warming below 2°C, in practice such a scenario would require a rate of global reductions between 2020 and 2050 around 3.8% per year, which is economically and hence politically very difficult, if not impossible, to achieve. Proposals to not increase ambition for the 2013-2020 timeline beyond current pledges should be treated as what they are: attempts to dodge responsibility. 

At the same time CAN urges Parties to see a transition to emissions pathways consistent with 2°C/1.5°C as offering opportunities including early-mover advantages for new markets and clean technologies, driving innovation, investments, employment and economic – low emission – growth. Additionally, tapping into the abundant potentials for domestic renewable energy sources, energy efficiency, and shifts towards more sustainable lifestyles support national energy security, lowering dependencies on energy imports, as well as increased health benefits through reduced air pollution. 


Subscribe to Tag: ADP