Tag: Equity/effort-sharing

CAN Annual Policy Document: "Lima: Raising the Curtain on Paris", Executive Summary, French, November 2014

2014 a vécu un moment citoyen historique quand plus de 400 000 personnes sont descendues dans les rues de New York en septembre pour appeler le monde à l’action climatique, maintenant. La COP 20 à Lima doit être un autre moment historique – cette fois-ci politique. La  réponse politique à cet appel citoyen mondial doit être à la hauteur.

En 2011, à la COP17, les gouvernements créaient la plateforme de Durban pour renforcer l'action. Les négociations sous cette plateforme vont franchir une nouvelle étape dans la lutte mondiale contre les changements climatiques, fin 2015, à la COP21. 

La COP 20 à Lima doit ouvrir la porte à cette nouvelle étape en définissant les paramètres de cet accord mondial qui sera finalisé à la COP21. Lima, en s’appuyant sur la dynamique de plus en plus à favorable à l’action climatique et dernier rapport du GIEC à l’appui, doit aboutir à des décisions importantes sur la forme, la composition et l'ambition de l'accord 2015.

Les décisions prises à Lima seront décisives pour l'action collective en matière de climat puisqu'elles vont créer ou non la dynamique et le contexte politique pour la COP21. Il est donc important de prendre des décisions ambitieuses à Lima pour renforcer le momentum politique et citoyen créé au sommet de New York sur le climat et reconnecter les enjeux de l'accord fin 2015 avec les conclusions du 5ème rapport du GIEC.

Ci-dessous, les recommandations du Climate Action Network International sur les questions à traiter à la COP de Lima pour poser de bonnes bases pour l’accord 2015.

 

LES DECISIONS CLE QU'IL FAUT PRENDRE A LIMA

POUR RENFORCER L’AMBITION AVANT 2020 EN MATIERE D’ATTENUATION ET DE FINANCEMENTS

La COP devrait

·       Appeler tous les pays à réviser leurs engagements et actions pre-2020

·       Mandater l’ADP pour développer un programme de deux ans (2015-2017) qui étudieraient les étapes concrètes pour combler le « gigaton gap » et passer à l’action

·       Renforcer le rôle des TEMs avec un mandat plus fort pour étudier non seulement les actions de réduction d’émission à fort potentiel mais aussi les moyens pour mettre en œuvre ces actions

·       Enregistrer les contributions déjà faites au Fonds Vert, vérifier que ces contributions sont adéquates, et négocier le volume annuel des futures contributions au Fonds Vert à atteindre d’ici 2020 (par exemple).  

·       Décider que les pays développés et que les autres pays en mesure de le faire, contribuent chaque année au Fonds Vert de manière à atteindre l’objectif fixé.

·       esquisser une feuille de route globale des financements climat d’ici à 2020 qui comprend des informations sur (a) l’augmentation des financements publics d’ici 2020 (b)  les types de financement et les instruments qui seront utilisés et (c) les canaux, les sources et l’allocation des financements entre adaptation et atténuation avec l’objectif de renforcer la prévisibilité et l’augmentation progressive des financements publics et de fixer des jalons intermédiaires.

·       Contribuer au moins 80 millions USD au Fonds pour l’Adaptation, et réfléchir à créer des sources de financement plus soutenables pour abonder le Fonds.

·       Annoncer les montants financiers qui seront dépensés en 2015 et 2016

·       Etudier la synthèse du rapport du GIEC à la lumière des « progrès accomplis sous l’objectif ultime de la Convention » via le dialogue structuré des experts

·       Conclure que les actions pre-2020 des gouvernements sont insuffisantes et devraient être révisées

 

POUR DEFINIR LE PERIMETRE ET LE CONTENU DE L’ACCORD 2015

La décision sur les contributions nationalement déterminées (INDC) devrait inclure::

·       un processus pour évaluer si les contributions nationales (INDCs) sont adéquates et équitables via une évaluation ex-ante de l’ambition et de l’équité avant la COP21

·       une section sur les financements

·       Une section (volontaire) sur l’adaptation tout en encourageant les Etats à préciser leurs contributions en matière d’adaptation et en s’assurant que les Etats les plus pauvres et vulnérables reçoivent un appui pour préparer leur contribution.

·       Un rôle important pour la société civile, la société civile locale et les autres parties prenantes  dans l’élaboration de la contribution nationale des pays. Il faut encourager les Etats à organiser des consultations nationales au cours de la préparation de leur INDC.

·       Une section qui demande à tous les Etats de préciser en quoi leur contribution est adéquate et équitable, et référencer les indicateurs d’équité utilisés (adéquation, responsabilité, capacités, besoins de développement, besoins d’adaptation).

 

La décision sur les éléments de l’accord 2015 devrait inclure:

§  des objectifs de long terme pour progressivement supprimer les émissions liées aux énergies fossiles et créer un futur 100% renouvelable et pour tous, le plus tôt possible, et en 2050 au plus tard.

§   Un engagement partagé des Etats à rediriger les soutiens publics (financiers et règlementaires) des énergies fossiles vers la résilience climatique et l’accès équitable et universel aux énergies renouvelables

§  Des objectifs globaux en matière de financement public

§  Un accord pour étudier et créer/mettre en oeuvre des nouveaux instruments/canaux/sources pour mobiliser des financements climat additionnels et internationaux

§  Un accord pour adopter un système de MRV honnête et robuste pour comptabiliser et suivre les financements climat

§  Décider que l’accord de 2015 comprendra un objectif global ambitieux en matière d’adaptation. La COP doit aussi promouvoir la planification et l’action nationale d’adaptation dans les pays en développement.

§  un programme de travail solide de deux ans sur les pertes et dommages

§  l’accès effectif à l’information, la participation publique dans tous les mécanismes de la Convention et proposer des options qui facilitent la participation active de la société civile locale et des autres parties prenantes dans la mise en œuvre et le système MRV.

§  La décision de créer un organe de coordination du renforcement des capacités (CBCB) à la COP21 à Paris.

§  Une recommandation au conseil du CTCN d’inclure les activités suivantes dans le programme de travail du CTCN : fournir des conseils et un soutien aux pays en développement, y compris sous forme de renforcement de capacité, pour évaluer des technologies nouvelles ou émergentes. 

<MORE>

Region: 

CAN Annual Policy Document: "Lima: Raising the Curtain on Paris", Executive Summary, Spanish, November 2014

En septiembre, se hizo historia cuando más de 400,000 personas de diversos trasfondos tomaron las calles de la ciudad de Nueva York para decirle al mundo, “Más Acción Climática, Ahora”. La COP 20 que se llevará a cabo en Lima debe ser un momento de pronunciación de voluntad política para que los gobiernos reflexionen en el llamado ambicioso de la gente a través del planeta.

En la COP 17, los gobiernos acordaron la Plataforma de Durban para una Acción Reforzada(ADP).  Las negociaciones dentro de la  plataforma de Durban culminarán en 2015 en la COP 21 en París, en donde las Partes van a ratificar la próxima fase de un acuerdo global climático.

La COP 20 en Lima es clave para esta próxima fase ya que definirá los parámetros del acuerdo global del 2015. La COP de Lima, guiada por el fuerte impulso para una mayor acción climática y por el reciente informe científico del IPCC, tiene que dirigir la voluntad política para lograr tomar decisiones sobre la forma, la composición y la ambición del acuerdo del 2015.

Dado que en Lima asentarán las bases para lograr obtener resultados en París, Climate Action Network presenta su visión sobre los temas que serán discutidos en la COP 20 de manera que se establezcan las bases correctas para el acuerdo del 2015.

 

DECISIONES CLAVES A TOMARSE DURANTE LA COP 20

PARA AUMENTAR LA AMBICION EN MITIGACION Y FINANCIAMIENTO PRE 2020

  • La COP 20 debe instar a todos los países a revisar sus compromisos  y acciones de mitigación pre 2020.
  • La COP 20 debe dar el mandato al ADP para desarrollar un plan de trabajo de 2 años del 2015 – 2017 con pasos concretos sobre cómo el trabajo para cerrar la brecha se llevará a cabo y cómo las discusiones van a ser traducidas en acciones reales.
  • La COP 20 debe mejorar los TEMs con un nuevo y acentuado mandato para que no sólo se enfoque en acciones de mitigación de alto potencial, sino que también incluya los medios de ejecución para llevar a cabo estas acciones.
  • La COP 20 debe captar los aportes realizados, evaluar la suficiencia de los compromisos existentes y discutir un futuro objetivo de contribuciones anuales al GCF a ser alcanzado, como por ejemplo, para el 2020.
  • La COP 20 debe decidir que los países desarrollados y otros en posición de hacerlo, deben aumentar constantemente sus contribuciones al GCF para lograr alcanzar el objetivo establecido.
  • Los Ministros en Lima deben ponerse de acuerdo para elaborar colectivamente una hoja de ruta de financiamiento climático global hacia el 2020 que incluya información sobre: (a) la ampliación de las finanzas públicas hacia el 2020, (b) los tipos e instrumentos de financiación a ser utilizados, y (c) los canales, recursos y distribución sectorial entre adaptación y mitigación, con el fin de garantizar el financiamiento ampliado y predecible y los hitos intermedios.
  • Los Ministros en Lima deben reflexionar sobre las fuentes de financiamiento más sostenibles para el fondo de adaptación.  Los países desarrollados deben utilizar Lima para comprometerse por lo menos con $80 millones para el fondo de adaptación.
  • El Diálogo Estructurado de Expertos (SED) debe discutir el Informe de Síntesis del IPCC teniendo en cuenta ‘el progreso logrado para alcanzar el objetivo final de la convención’.
  • El Grupo de Contacto Conjunto (JCG) para la revisión del 2013-2015 debería concluir que en base a la evidencia científica, las acciones pre 2020 que actualmente han sido prometidas por los gobiernos son inadecuadas y deben  ser revisadas.

DEFINIENDO EL ALCANCE Y EL CONTENIDO DEL ACUERDO DEL 2015

El texto de decisión de las “Contribuciones Nacionalmente Determinadas Previstas” (INDCs) debe incluir:

  • Un proceso para evaluar la suficiencia y la equidad de las INDCs propuestas basado en una revisión de la evaluación ex-ante de la ambición y la equidad antes de la COP 21.
  • Las finanzas dentro del alcance de las INDCs
  • La adaptación dentro de las INDCs, que podrían ser voluntaria, aunque los países deberían ser alentados a presentar su contribución a la adaptación. Los países en desarrollo vulnerables deberían ser apoyados en su preparación hacia el desarrollo de sus contribuciones.
  • Se debe estimular y motivar una mayor participación de la sociedad civil, la sociedad civil local y otros grupos de interés para que contribuyan en el desarrollo de las INDCs de las naciones. A su vez los países a las naciones deben ser motivados a celebrar consultas nacionales, mientras preparen sus INDCs.
  • Una cláusula en la que los países expliquen por qué las contribuciones que presentan son suficientes y equitativas, por lo tanto, todos los países deberían incluir información sobre los indicadores de equidad (suficiencia, responsabilidad, capacidad, necesidad de desarrollo, necesidad de adaptación).

El texto de decisión sobre los elementos del acuerdo del 2015 debe incluir:

  • Metas globales a largo plazo para lograr la eliminación gradual de todas las emisiones de combustibles fósiles y la introducción progresiva hacia un futuro basado en 100% energía renovable con acceso a energía sostenible para todos, lo más pronto posible, pero no más tarde del 2050.
  • Un compromiso colectivo para cambiar el apoyo del público (financiera y políticamente) de los combustibles fósiles hacia la resiliencia climática y un acceso universal y justo de la energía sostenible.
  • El establecimiento de objetivos globales para el financiamiento público.
  • Un acuerdo para considerar y establecer/desplegar nuevos instrumentos y canales para movilizar más financiamiento climático internacional de nuevas fuentes.
  • Un acuerdo para adoptar un sistema de Medición, Reporte y Verificación (MRV) para el financiamiento climático.
  • La decisión de tener un objetivo global de adaptación que sea ambicioso dentro del acuerdo del 2015. La COP también debe fomentar y promover la planificación de adaptación nacional y de acción en los países en desarrollo.
  • La COP debe adoptar un plan de trabajo fuerte de 2 años para el mecanismo de pérdidas y daños.
  • Una decisión de establecer un Grupo Coordinador de Capacitación (CBCB) en la COP 21 en París.
  • Un mayor rol para la sociedad civil en todos los mecanismos establecidos en la convención así como también en la implementación y el cumplimiento de los acuerdos. La sociedad civil local y otros grupos de interés deben participar activamente en el cumplimiento y los procesos de MRV en el nuevo acuerdo.
  • Tecnología - La COP debería recomendar al Consejo Asesor del Centro de Tecnología del Clima y Redes el tener en cuenta las siguientes actividades: proveer asesoramiento, apoyo y fortalecimiento de capacidades para los países en desarrollo, llevando a cabo evaluaciones de tecnologías nuevas y emergentes.

<more>

Region: 

CAN Annual Policy Document: "Lima: Raising the Curtain on Paris", Executive Summary, English, November 2014

History was created when more than 400,000 people from all walks of life took to the streets of New York City in September to tell the world, ‘More Climate Action, Now’.  COP 20 in Lima must be the turning point for political will from governments to reflect these ambitious calls by people from across the world.

At COP 17, Governments agreed to the Durban platform for enhanced action.  Negotiations under the Durban platform will culminate in 2015 at COP 21 in Paris, where Parties are to agree to the next stage of a global climate agreement.

COP 20 in Lima holds the key to this next stage as it is set to define the parameters of this 2015 global agreement.  The Lima COP, guided by the strong momentum for greater climate action and the recent IPCC scientific assessment, needs to steer political will to deliver decisions on the shape, composition and ambition of the 2015 agreement.

As Lima will set the foundations for the outcomes in Paris, Climate Action Network presents its views on issues that need to be addressed at COP 20 in order to set the right foundation for the 2015 agreement.

<more>

KEY DECISIONS TO BE TAKEN AT COP 20 -

FOR INCREASING PRE 2020 AMBITION ON MITIGATION AND FINANCE

  • COP 20 should urge all countries to revise their pre 2020 mitigation commitments and actions.
  • COP 20 should mandate ADP to develop a 2-year work plan from 2015-2017 with concrete steps on how the work to close the gap would be undertaken and how discussions would be translated into real actions.
  • COP 20 should enhance the TEMs with a new and increased mandate to focus not just on high potential mitigation actions but also on means of implementation for realizing these actions.
  •  COP 20 should capture contributions made, assess the adequacy of existing pledges, and discuss a future target level of annual contributions to the GCF to be reached, for example, by 2020.
  • COP 20 should decide that developed countries, and other countries in a position to do so, should continuously increase annual contributions to the GCF to reach the desired target level.
  • Ministers in Lima should agree to collectively draw up a global climate finance roadmap towards 2020 that will include information on (a) the scaling up of public finance through to 2020, (b) types and instruments of finance to be deployed, and (c) channels, sources and sectoral distribution between adaptation and mitigation, with a view to help ensure predictable and scaled up finance and intermediate milestones.
  • Ministers in Lima should reflect on more sustainable funding sources for the adaptation fund. Developed countries should use Lima to pledge at least $80 million to the adaptation fund.
  • The Structured Expert Dialogue (SED) should discuss the IPCC Synthesis report in light of ‘progress made towards achieving the ultimate objective of the convention’.
  • The Joint Contact Group (JCG) for the 2013-2015 Review should conclude that based on scientific evidence, pre 2020 actions as currently committed by governments are inadequate and should be revised.

DEFINING THE SCOPE AND CONTENT OF THE 2015 AGREEMENT

Decision text on Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDC) should include:

  • process to assess the adequacy and equitability of proposed INDCs in an ex-ante ambition assessment and equity review prior to COP 21.
  • Finance within the scope of INDCs.
  • Adaptation within INDCs, which could be voluntary though countries should be encouraged to put forward their adaptation contribution. Vulnerable developing countries should be supported in their preparation towards developing their contributions.
  • A greater role for civil society, local civil society and other stakeholders should be encouraged and empowered to assist in development of a nations’ INDC and countries should be encouraged to hold national consultations while preparing their INDCs.
  • A stipulation for countries to explain why the submitting country considers its contribution to be both adequate and equitable and therefore all countries should include information on equity indicators (adequacy, responsibility, capabilities, development need, adaptation need).

Decision text on elements of the 2015 agreement should include: 

  • Long term global goals of phasing out all fossil fuel emissions and to phase in a 100% renewable energy future with sustainable energy access for all, as early as possible, but not later than 2050.
  • A collective commitment to shift public support (finance and policy) away from fossil fuels towards climate resilience and universal and fair access to sustainable energy.
  • Establishment of global goals for public finance.
  • An agreement to consider and establish/deploy new instruments and channels to mobilise additional international climate finance from new sources.
  • An agreement to adopt a robust and honest Measuring, Reporting and Verification (MRV) system for climate finance.
  • decision to have an ambitious global adaptation goal within the 2015 agreement. The COP should also encourage and promote national adaptation planning and action in developing countries.
  • COP should adopt a strong 2-year work plan for the Loss and Damage mechanism.
  • A decision to establish a Capacity Building coordinating Body (CBCB) at COP-21 in Paris.
  • An enhanced role for civil society within all mechanisms established under the convention and in the agreements’ implementation and enforcement. Local civil society and other stakeholders should be able to participate actively in compliance and MRV processes within the new agreement.
  • Technology - The COP should recommend to the Advisory Board of the Climate Technology Centre and Network, to take into account the following activities: Providing advice, support and capacity building to developing country, conducting assessments of new and emerging technologies.

<MORE>

CAN Annual Policy Document: "Lima: Raising the Curtain on Paris", November 2014

 

Executive Summaries: English, French, Spanish, Russian, Chinese 

History was created when more than 400,000 people from all walks of life took to the streets of New York City in September to tell the world, ‘More Climate Action, Now’.  COP 20 in Lima must be the turning point for political will from governments to reflect these ambitious calls by people from across the world.

At COP 17, Governments agreed to the Durban platform for enhanced action.  Negotiations under the Durban platform will culminate in 2015 at COP 21 in Paris, where Parties are to agree to the next stage of a global climate agreement.

COP 20 in Lima holds the key to this next stage as it is set to define the parameters of this 2015 global agreement.  The Lima COP, guided by the strong momentum for greater climate action and the recent IPCC scientific assessment, needs to steer political will to deliver decisions on the shape, composition and ambition of the 2015 agreement.

As Lima will set the foundations for the outcomes in Paris, Climate Action Network presents its views on issues that need to be addressed at COP 20 in order to set the right foundation for the 2015 agreement.

 

KEY DECISIONS TO BE TAKEN AT COP 20 -

FOR INCREASING PRE 2020 AMBITION ON MITIGATION AND FINANCE

  • COP 20 should urge all countries to revise their pre 2020 mitigation commitments and actions.
  • COP 20 should mandate ADP to develop a 2-year work plan from 2015-2017 with concrete steps on how the work to close the gap would be undertaken and how discussions would be translated into real actions.
  • COP 20 should enhance the TEMs with a new and increased mandate to focus not just on high potential mitigation actions but also on means of implementation for realizing these actions.
  •  COP 20 should capture contributions made, assess the adequacy of existing pledges, and discuss a future target level of annual contributions to the GCF to be reached, for example, by 2020.
  • COP 20 should decide that developed countries, and other countries in a position to do so, should continuously increase annual contributions to the GCF to reach the desired target level.
  • Ministers in Lima should agree to collectively draw up a global climate finance roadmap towards 2020 that will include information on (a) the scaling up of public finance through to 2020, (b) types and instruments of finance to be deployed, and (c) channels, sources and sectoral distribution between adaptation and mitigation, with a view to help ensure predictable and scaled up finance and intermediate milestones.
  • Ministers in Lima should reflect on more sustainable funding sources for the adaptation fund. Developed countries should use Lima to pledge at least $80 million to the adaptation fund.
  • The Structured Expert Dialogue (SED) should discuss the IPCC Synthesis report in light of ‘progress made towards achieving the ultimate objective of the convention’.
  • The Joint Contact Group (JCG) for the 2013-2015 Review should conclude that based on scientific evidence, pre 2020 actions as currently committed by governments are inadequate and should be revised.

DEFINING THE SCOPE AND CONTENT OF THE 2015 AGREEMENT

Decision text on Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDC) should include:

  • A process to assess the adequacy and equitability of proposed INDCs in an ex-ante ambition assessment and equity review prior to COP 21.
  • Finance within the scope of INDCs.
  • Adaptation within INDCs, which could be voluntary though countries should be encouraged to put forward their adaptation contribution. Vulnerable developing countries should be supported in their preparation towards developing their contributions.
  • A greater role for civil society, local civil society and other stakeholders should be encouraged and empowered to assist in development of a nations’ INDC and countries should be encouraged to hold national consultations while preparing their INDCs.
  • A stipulation for countries to explain why the submitting country considers its contribution to be both adequate and equitable and therefore all countries should include information on equity indicators (adequacy, responsibility, capabilities, development need, adaptation need).

Decision text on elements of the 2015 agreement should include: 

  • Long term global goals of phasing out all fossil fuel emissions and to phase in a 100% renewable energy future with sustainable energy access for all, as early as possible, but not later than 2050.
  • A collective commitment to shift public support (finance and policy) away from fossil fuels towards climate resilience and universal and fair access to sustainable energy.
  • Establishment of global goals for public finance.
  • An agreement to consider and establish/deploy new instruments and channels to mobilise additional international climate finance from new sources.
  • An agreement to adopt a robust and honest Measuring, Reporting and Verification (MRV) system for climate finance.
  • A decision to have an ambitious global adaptation goal within the 2015 agreement. The COP should also encourage and promote national adaptation planning and action in developing countries.
  • COP should adopt a strong 2-year work plan for the Loss and Damage mechanism.
  • A decision to establish a Capacity Building coordinating Body (CBCB) at COP-21 in Paris.
  • An enhanced role for civil society within all mechanisms established under the convention and in the agreements’ implementation and enforcement. Local civil society and other stakeholders should be able to participate actively in compliance and MRV processes within the new agreement.
  • Technology - The COP should recommend to the Advisory Board of the Climate Technology Centre and Network, to take into account the following activities: Providing advice, support and capacity building to developing country, conducting assessments of new and emerging technologies.

<MORE>

CAN Submission: 2015 Agreement and Post-2020 Actions, November 2014

 

While pre-2020 actions will determine a strong platform and foundation for the 2015 agreement, Governments are also deliberating on the shape, composition and ambition of the new agreement under work stream 1 of the ADP to come into action in 2020. Below are some of the issues CAN would like to see resolved by Governments at COP 20, in Lima.

KEY DECISIONS TO BE TAKEN AT COP 20 DEFINING THE SCOPE AND CONTENT OF THE 2015 AGREEMENT

Decision text on Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDC) should include:

  • A process to assess the adequacy and equitability of proposed INDCs in an ex-ante ambition assessment and equity review prior to COP 21.
  • Finance within the scope of INDCs.
  • Adaptation within INDCs, which could be voluntary though countries should be encouraged to put forward their adaptation contribution. Vulnerable developing countries should be supported in their preparation towards developing their contributions.
  • A greater role for civil society, local civil society and other stakeholders should be encouraged and empowered to assist in development of a nations’ INDC and countries should be encouraged to hold national consultations while preparing their INDCs.
  • A stipulation for countries to explain why the submitting country considers its contribution to be both adequate and equitable and therefore all countries should include information on equity indicators (adequacy, responsibility, capabilities, development need, adaptation need).

Decision text on elements of the 2015 agreement should include: 

  • Long term global goals of phasing out all fossil fuel emissions and to phase in a 100% renewable energy future with sustainable energy access for all, as early as possible, but not later than 2050.
  • A collective commitment to shift public support (finance and policy) away from fossil fuels towards climate resilience and universal and fair access to sustainable energy.
  • Establishment of global goals for public finance.
  • An agreement to consider and establish/deploy new instruments and channels to mobilize additional international climate finance from new sources.
  • An agreement to adopt a robust and honest Measuring, Reporting and Verification (MRV) system for climate finance.
  • A decision to have an ambitious global adaptation goal within the 2015 agreement. The COP should also encourage and promote national adaptation planning and action in developing countries.
  • COP should adopt a strong 2-year work plan for the Loss and Damage mechanism.
  • A decision to establish a Capacity Building coordinating Body (CBCB) at COP-21 in Paris.
  • An enhanced role for civil society within all mechanisms established under the convention and in the agreements’ implementation and enforcement. Local civil society and other stakeholders should be able to participate actively in compliance and MRV processes within the new agreement.
  • Technology - The COP should recommend to the Advisory Board of the Climate Technology Centre and Network, to take into account the following activities: Providing advice, support and capacity building to developing country, conducting assessments of new and emerging technologies.

<more>

A parable for our time

Far back in the mists of time, Parties agreed on a Durban Platform. Concerned that the train of negotiations might leave the station and quickly gather speed, Parties proceeded to have a two-year “contemplation phase” in an effort to stay on track.

They then decided to go into a “workshop phase” where they were expected to express their basic desires to their benign and all-knowing spiritual guides. These guides would then translate these desires into suitable language for polite company before presenting them to the outside world. But some of the travellers began to complain that they preferred their own words, however unrefined and divergent.

The language of the much-anticipated central covenant of all the peoples was given special treatment, since agreement was not needed immediately. It was particularly elevated and deliberately vague, so that the travellers would not begin to bicker over the details. But some began to rebel against the ritualistic debates and increasingly frustrating attempts to discover exactly what others were talking about, and what they might be able to agree on once they had to make decisions.

More of them started putting forward their own versions of the covenant. Though the guides paid little attention to their crude efforts, they did generously offer the possibility of going into a side carriage on their own and return with more worthy offerings. But they never said what fate would await these offerings.

Meanwhile in the main carriage, the travellers continued to offer up their modest ideas, in the hope the guides would find some of them worthy to put into their non-covenant. But most of them looked in vain for a true representation.

However, the words of one wise traveler resonated from beyond the dawn of time: “Discussions in the absence of negotiations cannot prosper.”

Then began a clamour for true negotiations –to engage with the actual words of their fellow travellers, and not the words of the guides. More and more of them made this demand, but fearful of the consequences if the travellers became too aware of the real divisions among them, the guides preferred to hold to their more refined version as long as possible…

Related Event: 
Related Newsletter : 

Mail: from the UN Human Rights Council

Dear Negotiator,

We know you’ve been busy trying to hammer out the details of the Paris Agreement, but ECO would like to draw your attention to an important letter that has been addressed to YOU. This letter was sent, last week by 28 independent experts from the UN Human Rights Council.

Tasked to provide support to all countries with the promotion of human rights—like the right to clean drinking water to development–-these experts all came to the same conclusion: climate change threatens to undermine the protection of human rights. Let this sink in for a moment: it means that the UNFCCC has a crucial role in effectively protecting human rights for all. If you haven’t read the letter, please check your inboxes.

The open letter clearly states that “all of the State Parties to the UNFCCC have committed to respect and protect human rights.” Building on the Cancun Agreements, that makes reference to these obligations, the UN human rights experts urge Parties to:

recognise the adverse effects of climate change on the enjoyment of human rights, and to adopt urgent and ambitious mitigation and adaptation measures to prevent further harm. We call on the State Parties to include language in the 2015 climate agreement that provides that the Parties shall, in all climate change related actions, respect, protect, promote, and fulfil human rights for all. And we urge the State Parties at COP 20 in Lima to launch a work program to ensure that human rights are integrated into all aspects of climate actions.

On behalf of present and future generations, ECO supports these conclusions and calls on all Parties to include rights protections for all.

Related Event: 
Related Newsletter : 

Beyond binary

ECO has always believed that the Convention, with its Annexes and principles, need not, and must not, be a straight jacket that restricts the ability of the UNFCCC to adapt to emerging realities. While some developed countries give the distinct impression that they would like to sweep the Annexes (and perhaps the whole Convention) aside and start over, there are now some developing countries showing how we can move forward by building on the current structure of the Convention.

Different proposals have been put forward that provide interesting ways to move past a binary world to cross the rigid firewall.

The LDCs proposed an interesting idea in this regard: Annex I Parties should adopt economy-wide targets, and non-Annex I Parties “in a position to do so” (the so-called “POTODOSO countries”) should do the same. Both of these groups – all parties with economy-wide commitments – would then inscribe these commitments in Annex A to the new agreement. This would be an elegant way of using the current Annexes to ensure no backsliding, while progressing beyond an exclusive reliance on these commitments. ECO could imagine other creative ways to do the same thing.

Another way of moving beyond a binary world is the route proposed by Brazil (yes, that Brazil!). Making clear they did not support a bifurcated approach, Brazil proposes “concentric differentiation”, where Annex I countries with absolute reductions targets are at the centre of concentric circles of less rigorous commitments going outward. (ECO is paraphrasing here.)

So far, so good (or, “so far, so Art. 4.1/4.2”, as it were). But where Brazil advances the discussion is by saying that everyone should be encouraged to move towards the centre over time. This would pave the way for voluntary graduation, and prevent any voluntary backsliding. Many countries should be prepared to move close to (and some into) the coveted inner circle now. ECO is sure they know who they are.

Not content to just signal an interest in an enhanced interpretation of the Convention, Brazil also made a very useful suggestion on finance. Brazil recommended that developing countries indicate South-South financial contributions and collaborative actions in their INDCs. The LDCs’ and AILAC’s submissions also call for financial contributions from an expanded group of countries, while placing primary responsibility on Annex II Parties.

ECO wonders how developed countries will justify their refusal to talk about finance in their INDCs when developing countries are willing to do so.

Related Event: 
Related Newsletter : 

Equity: a pathway to ambition and sustainable development

ECO has done some late night soul searching and come to the conclusion that the Paris agreement will have to be fair if it is to achieve the extremely high ambition that the science demands. Equity is not just the pathway to ambition; it is also the pathway to survival. As ECO has concluded, and as you know in your heart of hearts to be true, to be fair the new agreement will have to actively promote sustainable development, facilitate poverty eradication, protect livelihoods, and promote robust adaptation solutions even as it facilitates the rapid and more or less complete elimination of carbon emissions.

It will simply not do to say that equity is a matter of opinion. The pre-Paris assessment of the adequacy and equitability of INDCs needs to be based on the Convention’s equity principles of adequacy, CBDR+RC, and equitable access to sustainable development. In case Parties are wondering how to operationalise these high-level principles, ECO suggests these five core indicators that together can do the job quite nicely: adequacy, responsibility, capability, sustainable development need, and adaptation need.

Equity and adequacy reviews must be an integral part of the new agreement, so that in each commitment period contributions are finalised only after a robust, science-based Equity Review. Unfortunately, such a fair and straightforward process is out of our grasp to implement today, because, if ECO may be frank, the level of trust is far too low. Consider then, dear delegate, a few difficult questions:

Will an Equity Review shift responsibilities to the South?

ECO believes that developed countries’ failure to inscribe contributions in line with science and the Convention’s equity principles is effectively shifting responsibility onto developing countries. This situation is aggravated by the sad fact that support for developing country mitigation and adaptation remains entirely inadequate.

Would an Equity Review shift even more responsibilities onto the South? Not if it were a proper review, one based on the Convention’s equity principles and the indicators above. It would affirm and clarify that the larger efforts lies with developed nations on both domestic mitigation and support for developing countries. The adequacy of aggregate effort and of each country’s contribution could be assessed, thus preventing the transfer of responsibility from developed to developing countries. It would provide a sound basis for developed countries to finally take the lead.

A well designed Equity Review would show that significant increases in developed countries’ international support and domestic mitigation commitments are required to keep warming below 2°C and certainly 1.5°C. For the lowest-income countries, it would likely show that all mitigation below the baseline would remain conditional on international support.

What will it take to ensure equitable access to sustainable development?

In a fair, equitable and safe post-Paris world a strong review, and ratcheting-up mechanisms, could drive ambition and sustainable development for all. To do so, the Paris deal must support faster and more expansive low-carbon climate resilient development around the world, and provide the mitigation support necessary to empower developing countries to facilitate their own sustainable development strategies. Such a review would not only benefit the climate, but it would also allow developing countries to shape the transformation towards low-carbon societies, grow their economies and reduce global inequality.

Building cooperation

Acknowledging our differences is crucial in order to build cooperation. All countries must do their equitable share(s) in the common global effort. A proper science-based Equity Review that builds on the Convention’s core equity principles would do just this, by prioritising the needs of the developing countries. This way, it would make real cooperation possible. Not inevitably, but possibly.

Related Event: 
Related Newsletter : 

Will the INDCs add up to a safe climate?  The truth is out there.

Many countries are already working hard to prepare their INDCs. ECO has said repeatedly that INDCs need to be assessed for adequacy (do INDCs sum up to <2°C?) and equity (are countries doing their fair share?). The INDCs must include all the elements, and also set out an assessment phase between March 2015 and Paris. This must include:

  • all important timelines for INDC communication by March/June 2015;
  • requirements for a proper assessment including the equity indicators of adequacy, responsibility, capability, development need and adaptation need; and
  • a process for conducting assessments.

Following the first batch of INDCs in March, the Secretariat should prepare a compilation paper and public online database, to be updated as INDCs continue to be submitted or amended. The Secretariat should also arrange for an assessment of the collective adequacy of all received INDCs at a June 2015 workshop series, that is also periodically updated. The series of workshops at the June session should:

  • give governments an opportunity to clarify their INDCs by responding to questions from other Parties and observers;
  • present the outcome of the assessment of collective adequacy to verify if we are on track towards staying well below 2°C; and
  • facilitate equity reviews of received INDCs, including opportunities for observers to present their own equity assessments.

These workshops should create momentum towards more substantive ongoing review and ratcheting processes. The purpose of the exercise isn’t to finger-point but, instead, should lead to the up-scaling of INDCs before they are inscribed as part of the new agreement. Parties have different options to improve their ambition. Developed countries can increase emission reduction efforts, and adopt or improve RE targets or EE targets. Developed countries and others with similar capabilities can put up more finance or other MOI support for mitigation actions in developing countries. Developing countries have options as well, for example, they can increase actions without requiring support or outlining additional activities they could undertake if international support is there.

A final note: developing countries have many reasons to support an assessment with an equity review. It would raise overall ambition, support development, build cooperation and can be a way to ensure developed countries can’t walk away from their equitable shares.

Related Event: 
Related Newsletter : 

Pages

Subscribe to Tag: Equity/effort-sharing