Tag: CAN intervention

CAN Intervention: APA Opening, Bonn SB44/APA1, 17th May 2016

~~Dear Co-Chairs,

My name is Fatima Ahouli, I am speaking on behalf of Climate Action Network. The world celebrated when countries agreed to a new international climate treaty at COP21 in Paris. However, if efforts stop here success will quickly fade because the submitted contributions leave us on track for 3ºC instead of 1.5ºC as promised.

In Bonn Parties should deliver a clear work programme for the APA to raise ambition.

Parties must start preparing for the resubmission of NDCs in 2018 at the latest and provide more certainty on climate finance. By taking immediate steps to develop a road map towards the $100 Billion per annum and by including support as a central component of the facilitated dialogue, important ambition in both mitigation and adaptation can be unlocked.

Specific emission reduction initiatives need to be delivered this year, including through scaling up national pre-2020 targets, the LPAA, the technical examination processes and the annual high-level event.

Parties must also come to agreement on how those most vulnerable, already experiencing loss and damage, will be supported.

Finally, we call for a renewed spirit of collaboration between governments and civil society to ensure that our rights are upheld, including the right to meaningfully inform the process.

Thank you.


CAN Intervention: SBI Opening Bonn SB44/APA1, 16th May, 2016

~~Dear Co-Chairs,

My name is Inga Fritzen Buan and I am speaking on behalf of Climate Action Network.
World leaders have agreed to keep global warming well below 2°C and to pursue efforts to limit to 1.5°C. However, if more is not done now, action under the Paris Agreement might be too little, too late. We need more action, faster action, now.
Therefore, the technical expert meetings must be results-focused and serve as incubators for globally transformative initiatives in specific sectors and technologies.
We ask that the SBI and SBSTA initiate a process to develop criteria to ensure that these projects and initiatives respect human rights and food sovereignty, have environmental integrity, and that potential risks associated with new technologies are assessed.
Overcoming barriers to finance should be on the agenda for every TEM and part of the high-level champions’ work. To overcome the significant finance gap, CAN expects developed country Parties to be proactive about drafting the finance roadmap agreed to in Paris. The result should be presented at COP22 at the latest.
CAN asks that the champions produce a scenario note for 2016 and 2017, including on resource mobilization and engagement with Parties and non-Party stakeholders on how to turn words into action.
We look forward to meaningful civil society participation in both technical processes.
Thank you.


CAN Intervention: SBSTA Opening Plenary, Bonn SB44/APA1, 16th May 2016

~~Dear Co-Chairs,

My name is Eddy Pérez, speaking on behalf of Climate Action Network.

Key to the Paris agreement are various provisions that allude to potential review and revision of ambition over the course of time.  Given that the current set of INDCs are completely inadequate and would set the world, in the best case, on a 3-4ºC temperature pathway, CAN strongly encourages countries to increase their INDCs before inscribing them under the new agreement.

The 2018 facilitated dialogue will be one key opportunity for governments to review, revise, and resubmit their NDCs in line with credible science and equity considerations. Countries must consider the IPCC Special Report on impacts and potential pathways of 1.5ºC as they prepare for this dialogue.

The guidelines to be developed for the 2023 global stocktake need to be robust and must ensure the active participation of civil society. It must be comprehensive, and should actively encourage countries to revise their NDCs. The guidelines for the global stocktake should be anchored around science and equity. This can be facilitated through improving the information requirements for INDCs.

Thank you


CAN Intervention: Opening Intervention, Bonn SB44/APA1, 16th May, 2016

~~Dear Madame President,

My name is Sebastien Duyck and I am speaking on behalf of Climate Action Network.

In Paris, the international community came together to commit to the most significant environmental agreement of our generation. COP-21 marked an unprecedented convergence of actors around the necessity to take ambitious and equitable action to preserve the climate for current and future generations.

As we now focus on the operationalisation of the Paris commitments, the role of civil society remains crucial to ensure transparency and the highest level of ambition.

We call on negotiators to renew the spirit of partnership between governments and stakeholders and to allow civil society to engage meaningfully to support ambitious and equitable climate action

Firstly, the voices of all stakeholders must be listened to in this process. Chairs and negotiators should ensure that sessions and workshops benefit from the expertise and perspectives of civil society.

Secondly, stakeholders must be allowed to contribute to the transparency and ambition processes established under the Paris Agreement. This role will be key to guarantee trust and to provide the right incentives necessary for a virtuous ambition cycle.

We look forward to working with all parties to ensure that the Paris Agreement lives up to its promises.

Thank you



Thank you for the opportunity to provide a written statement in advance of ADP 2-11.

Procedurally, the new Co-Chairs’ non-paper of 5 October represents a welcome shift in gear in the ADP process. But this text cannot be endorsed as the basis for text-based negotiations as it stands as its elements have been presented in a lowest common denominator form, manifestly lacking the ambition needed to prevent further environmental and human harms. However, it is a workable document whose options are far less divergent than those contained in previous drafts of the negotiating text. 

An adequate long-term vision, scientific integrity, as well as key equity, human rights and public participation considerations are missing from the current draft text. Certain political convergences, including from the lunch meeting hosted by Secretary General Ban at the UN General Assembly this September, are insufficiently reflected in the document.     

 ADP 2-11 needs to arrive at an ambitious “advanced draft Paris climate package” that paves the way for an outcome in Paris that will act as a springboard towards a climate-safe world. The main task for delegates at this session is to work from this non-paper to increase ambition across the various elements of the text, including – as set out below – on a robust review and revision mechanism, a long-term mitigation goal, adaptation, loss & damage, demonstrating that financial support from developed to developing countries will be scaled up, and pre-2020 action. 

Introducing the necessary durability and adequacy into the climate regime requires that the Paris Agreement establish a review and revision mechanism to increase Parties’ ambition over time consistent with limiting global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. The draft text alludes to the five-year commitment periods that are an essential starting point in this regard. However, the “Global Stocktake” proposed in the current text is a far cry from the robust process necessary to ensure countries realise an increase in efforts and ambition over time.

CAN proposes the adoption of a “Paris Ambition Mechanism” (PAM) in the Paris Agreement that should link and synchronise Parties' mitigation, finance and adaptation commitments in 5-year cycles. The PAM should facilitate ambition within the Paris Agreement to close any foreseeable ambition or implementation gaps within the relevant 5-year cycle of commitments. It should combine a review of the adequacy and equity of commitments with the matching of finance, technology and capacity building support to the requirements of countries that wish to act beyond their domestic capabilities as stated in their INDCs. A first review round should take place well before 2020 and lead to the ratcheting up of inadequate commitments for the determinative 2020-2025 period in a fair and ambitious manner.

The PAM’s work must be directed by a long-term vision of the world we need: countries must commit to reach full global decarbonisation and a complete transition to renewable energy by 2050. To achieve full decarbonisation in a way that is just and achieves wider sustainable development objectives, each country should develop national decarbonisation strategies to shift rapidly from a high-carbon economic growth model to sustainable development.

For where mitigation action falls short, the Paris Agreement must moreover make a much clearer link to increased financial support for adaptation, and recognise that rising temperatures will require greater adaptation efforts taking into account the expected temperature increase.

On loss and damage, the Paris Agreement should go much further than merely noting the problem and the need for international solutions: it should ensure that institutional arrangements under the Paris Agreement will further strengthen the work on and support for loss and damage as the problem evolves. This section must remain separate from adaptation.

Success in any and all of these elements requires an increase in the provision of financial support from developed to developing countries. The current draft, however, fails to provide even the most basic level of assurance and predictability in this regard. The Paris Agreement must establish that every five years, collective targets (with separate targets for mitigation and for adaptation) for the provision of new and additional public financial support will be set; and introduce a general commitment by developed countries and developing countries with a higher capacity and larger responsibility in a position to do so to contribute to meeting these.       

On Workstream 2, the Paris COP Decision must enable a move from discussion of opportunities to catalysing implementation on the ground, including through appointing high-level champions to help matchmake mitigation opportunities to partners and financing, as well as through strengthening of the technical examination processes.

Parties should also promote further adaptation efforts before 2020, including through identifying support and cooperation needs at different levels in order to achieve the speedy implementation of additional adaptation actions and components in INDCs and NAPs.

Crucially in pre-2020 finance, developed countries must demonstrate how they intend to scale up public finance in order to meet the financial commitment they made in Copenhagen to mobilise 100 billion dollars per year by 2020.

Finally, as an overarching concern, the current language of the draft Agreement and draft COP Decision should be improved across all sections to be more detailed, and far less ambiguous. Parties’ contributions should be anchored as “commitments” to show they are serious about meeting them. An overarching reference to human rights in the operative text of the Agreement must furthermore be included to help ensure that Parties respect human rights when developing and implementing these commitments and other climate actions. Parties should also reiterate their resolve to enhance public participation in climate policies.

The INDCs tabled over the course of this year are wholly inadequate for keeping the world on a pathway of less than 1.5°C temperature rise and preventing catastrophic climate impacts.  To achieve the necessary change, COP 21 must ensure a consistent increase in ambition over time across all elements of the Paris Package, requiring the current text to improve substantially. Governments must ensure they get this right, and the Climate Action Network looks forward to further opportunities for stakeholders to contribute to this process.


CAN Opening Intervention ADP 2-10, August 2015


Thank you for the opportunity to provide a written statement in advance of ADP 2-10.

Climate Action Network International (CAN) believes that the Co-Chairs’ tool and the Elements for a Draft Workstream 2 Decision Document, both published on 24 July 2015, form a conducive basis for discussions going forward.

However, several decisive issues still require further consideration and strengthening to instill confidence that the Paris outcome will be scientifically adequate, durable, and meet the needs of the most vulnerable.

Recognising that only 10 official negotiating days remain before the start of COP21, and thus the need to prioritise key issues, CAN recommends that delegates ensure the following issues are addressed at ADP 2-10:

1. Ensuring appropriate placement of ‘Section III’ issues

2. Uptake and elaboration of a credible and durable Ambition Acceleration Mechanism

3. Increasing pre-2020 ambition

CAN's ADP 2-10 Opening Intervention sets out a number of concrete steps in this regard.


Mónica López Baltodano speaks intervenes on loss and damage

I am Mónica López Baltodano and I am speaking on behalf of Climate Action Network.

Last year in Doha, all countries decided that institutional arrangements such as an international mechanism on loss and damage would be established at the climate conference in Warsaw. There shouldn’t be a U-turn on that now and all parties (and let me stress ALL parties!) should come forward and engage constructively here in Warsaw. The International mechanism must be established here with agreement on key functions, while modalities can be detailed in 2014 so that the mechanism can be operationalised by 2015. We have a precedence of Green Climate Fund, wherein the fund was established and the modalities were developed later.

It is important to mention that the proposed International Mechanism on Loss and Damage is not just about developing financial measures to address climate change impacts that cannot be adapted to. It is also about generating knowledge and finding new ways to deal with non-economic losses such as loss of biodiversity, indigenous knowledge, human mobility, cultural heritage, ancestral burial sites etc.

As I speak here, the devastating Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines is sending us a harsh reminder that there can't be any further delay in intensifying our efforts to tackle mounting loss and damage. Tackling loss and damage is about climate justice. Those who are mainly responsible for climate change must act. It is about protecting people, their livelihoods and most importantly their human rights and dignity.

Related Member Organization: 

Vositha Wijenayake intervenes in the CMP opening plenary in Warsaw at the UN climate talks

My name is Vositha Wijenayake and I am speaking on behalf of Climate Action Network.

The latest Emissions Gap Report from UNEP, like the others before it, shows that current mitigation pledges fall short of what is needed resulting in a large mitigation gap between what science requires and what countries have pledged. Not closing this gap now and urgently, will mean more costly action later and probably closing the door on the ability to limit warming to 1.5 C. 

This is a clear signal for all parties to increase their 2020 emission reductions efforts as soon as possible. For developed countries, this means targets must absolutely be increased no later than the 2014 Bonn Ministerial. Increasing ambition now will instill confidence in other countries and build trust that will allow governments to come to the Ban Ki Moon Summit with ambitious mitigation commitments.  CAN therefore urges Annex 1 parties to increase 2020 commitments so that their collective effort moves towards more than 40% below 1990 levels by 2020. The lack of political will and irresponsibly low 2020 targets put forward by most countries is unacceptable and insufficient to avoid the devastating impacts of climate change on the poor and vulnerable people across the world.

Parties must also not weaken the positive steps taken in Doha to remove Hot Air from the Kyoto System through questionable interpretations of Article 3.7. Increased emission reduction targets by parties and strong rules will avoid putting the world on an irreversible pathway to climate catastrophe.

Related Member Organization: 

CAN Intervention - LCA Sectoral Approaches Spin-Off Group - May 23, 2012


Thank you Mr. Chairman for the chance t
o speak on sectoral approaches and more specifically 
on addressing emissions from bunker fuels. I am speaking behalf of the Climate Action 
We would like to address the questions you have posed to this group.
On the first question: We find ourselves in the interesting position of agreeing with Canada, 
and also with Burkina Faso, Singapore and Chile on the special status of international 
transport. There has to be separate treatment of those inherently international sectors where 
emissions occur outside and between national boundaries. So it is likely not a useful exercise 
to spend more time and efforts to develop a framework covering all sectors, unless it is 
involves recognizing and starting from this distinction.
ON the second question, we welcome the willingness expressed by most parties to send a 
signal to IMO, but we note some differences in what that signal should be. We think 
international maritime transport and aviation should be seen as uniquely global sectors with 
shared and overlapping jurisdiction between UNFCCC and the specialized agencies IMO and 
ICAO. In this context, it is not useful to propose that the principals of one body taking 
precedence over another, but of finding arrangements that reflect the principals and 
customary practices of both bodies. Saying that the principals of one body should take 
precedence over another is a clear recipe for continued stalemate.
On the third question – we think it is extremely important to get a robust outcome from Doha. 
For bunker fuels we need a signal that recognizes and encourages the ongoing work of the 
IMO and ICAO, and gives them advice on a way forward that reconciles the principles and 
procedures of the different bodies, and notes that these sectors should contribute their fair 
share to global efforts and increased ambition. We understand that the best way to do this in 
the context of the current discussions in both bodies of global market based measures, is to 
pursue global measures consistent with the procedures of the IMO and ICAO, while addressing 
differentiation and the UNFCCC principles through the use of revenue generated. This revenue 
can be used to directly address impacts on developing countries from the measures 
themselves, and additional financing can be channeled to developing countries for climate 
actions through the Green Climate Fund, as well as for in-sector actions.
Thank you Chair

CAN Intervention - Long Term Finance Consultations - May 17, 2012


Distinguished delegates,
My name is Mahlet Eyassu, Forum for Environment, Ethiopia and I will speak on behalf of the Climate Action Network.At a time when the impacts of climate change are increasingly severe, progress on long-term finance must be more ambitious and cannot be delayed any longer.Since the commitment to mobilize $100 billion in climate finance by 2020 was made in 2009 we’ve seen little progress towards it.  Even more worrying is the fact that there is currently no certainty on how much climate finance will be delivered after the Fast Start Finance period ends this year.
The long-term finance work programme provides a critical opportunity for focused and constructive engagement on mobilizing and scaling up climate finance that must not be wasted. It is vital the Work Programme contributes to decisions at COP 18 that:
1. Identify and advance promising sources of finance, especially public sources, such as providing guidance to the IMO and ICAO on generating financing from measures to address emissions from international shipping and aviation; as well as public finance liberated in developed countries through the elimination of their fossil fuel subsidies.
2. Provide a roadmap for agreeing to specific pathways for mobilising $100 billion by 2020 - including maximization of public sources, an appropriate role for the private sector and trajectory for scaling up.
3. Establish a shared understanding of developing country financing needs – based on a review of recent literature on mitigation and adaptation financing requirements; and
4. Explicitly commit to providing scaled up financing from 2013 onwards, including for the capitalization of the Green Climate Fund.
In addition to constructive engagement on these areas through the work programme, parties must also be afforded sufficient contact group time in Bonn, Bangkok and Doha to negotiate vital decisions for agreement at COP 18.  In this respect it is imperative the Work Programme is seen as a compliment to, rather than a substitute for, the formal negotiations.
Related Member Organization: 


Subscribe to Tag: CAN intervention