Tag: NGO Participation

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>

From faith-based organisations

Faith-based organisations (FBOs) have increased their engagement in climate advocacy since forming an inter-faith caucus at COP14. As the Parties negotiate the 2015 agreement, faith movements are carefully watching the process.

Churches, mosques and temples are at the frontline of disaster relief services: helping to bury the dead and console the grieving. People turn to places of worship for safety, support and emergency services. FBOs are reporting soaring emergency expenditures and they feel a duty to be involved in climate crisis prevention. They argue that climate justice should be understood as part of a broader agenda of justice, peace and meaningful quality of life. Drivers of climate change are also related to the causes of other types of suffering.

FBOs are concerned that the UNFCCC process has shifted from the core mission of the United Nations. From the upholding of human rights, promotion of peace and security, these values seem to be morphing into competitive self-interest. Perpetrators of harmful climate impacts show no remorse, and the emerging economies are fiercely insisting on the right to the same harmful development pathway. As the Roman Catholic member of the FBO caucus noted, this is akin to the story of Cain and Abel: just as Cain kills his own brother, countries’ failure to address climate change threatens to harm all members of the human family.

 

Related Event: 
Related Newsletter : 

Can you hear us now?

Peoples' March Photo 2

People’s Climate March: 400,000 marching for Climate Justice in New York City, September 21, 2014

Political and religious leaders, progressive businesses, and most importantly, people from all walks of life have spoken with one voice: calling for immediate and ambitious climate action. The Peoples’ Climate March in New York, and associated events across the world, sent a clear call to all governments that they need to step up, phase out fossil fuels and massively scale up renewable energy. It’s a huge task, but ECO thinks that negotiators here in Bonn can take concrete steps forward.

First of all, negotiators should start by strengthening their pre-2020 commitments on mitigation and finance. That is unless we want to renegotiate the terms of the 2015 agreement and make it 4°C-compatible? ECO thinks not.

Secondly, they need to create the space for ambitious INDCs in the post-2020 agreement by negotiating the backbone of UFIs, or ‘Upfront Information’, requirements. ECO has long been calling for these UFIs to set meaningful and concrete benchmarks for ambition and equity. It’s now crunch time. The key elements that need to be discussed in Bonn and agreed at the Lima COP are outlined below:

Soon, soon, soon!! While INDCs are going to be nationally determined, they are contributions towards a global effort. These contributions should be measured against a country’s fair share, and they should measured well before Paris. That’s why it’s crucial for the INDCs of all developed countries and developing countries with equivalent capability and responsibility to come in early, and at the latest by March 2015, so they can be reviewed in light of equity and ambition. This equity review will determine whether collectively these nationally determined contributions set us on a climate-safe trajectory. It will also show us if what each country has proposed is equitable and fair in relation to the requisite global effort and respective capability and responsibility. It’ll encourage countries that fall short of what is required to increase their ambition before Paris.

Short, sweet and upwards! There is an imminent threat that at the end of this week that the EU will adopt a woefully inadequate 2030 energy and climate package. ECO can only (re)emphasise the need for the EU to raise its ambition levels and to support universal 5 year commitment periods, in order to avoid locking in low ambition for the next 16 years. Commitments should run from 2020-2025 and increase (drastically) after that. ECO says: no backsliding!

Lots and lots! Developed countries have yet to understand that providing climate finance is as much part of their fair share of global efforts as their own mitigation contributions. ECO suggests that the Paris agreement include new collective targets for the provision of public finance. These collective targets will have to be supplemented by individual financial commitments from contributing countries in order to achieve the collective target – and that’s where the INDCs come in: tell us what you plan to do on finance as well as domestic mitigation. ECO is very open-minded on the scope: countries can sign checks AND they can shift money domestically away from fossil fuels towards the good stuff, renewables.

Deal with it! Climate impacts are being felt everywhere and we need to address these impacts, both on the ground, and in the INDCs. Those most affected need to have clarity on the global adaptation response. They will also need to be able to measure if the progress being made on adaptation is sufficient to deal with climate impacts that are already evident, as well as impacts likely to be faced in future.

In the wake of last month’s public demand for much greater action on climate change, what’s needed is clear: real progress on all of these fronts by governments and their negotiators, right here, right now.

Related Event: 
Related Newsletter : 

CAN Intervention: SBI Closing Plenary SB40s, 15 June, 2014

Climate Action Network Intervention in SBI Closing Plenary, 15 June 2014 

Delivered by Alejandra Watanabe of WWF Peru

SBI Closing Intervention

In Spanish: 

Muchas gracias Co Chairs

Soy Alejandra Watanabe, y hablo en representación de Climate Action Network.

CAN quisiera utilizar esta oportunidad para enfatizar la participacion "crucial e integral" de la sociedad civil en estas negociaciones, incluyendo el acceso de los observadores a las negociaciones de la COP. En estas intersesionales estamos particularmente preocupados por el sistema de recuperación de costos propuesto para la los eventos paralelos. Estos eventos son una de las pocas oportunidades que tenemos los observadores para compartir diversos puntos de vista, presentar investigaciones actuales y soluciones innovadoras que contribuyen con ideas y generan momentum positivo en las negociaciones. La oficina de enlace de observadores de la Secretaría de la CMNUCC desempeña un rol vital en la facilitación de este compromiso.

CAN quiere hacer un agradecimiento especial a las Partes que han defendido los principios democráticos de apertura y transparencia y esperamos que la Secretaría retire la propuesta de recuperación de fondos  de USD1000 por cada evento paralelo. CAN espera trabajar conjuntamente con la Secretaría para que se respeten los procesos adecuados y así encontrar un camino que ayude a mejorar, en lugar de reducir, nuestra participación. Debemos encontrar una solución que reconozca que se deben ser asignar recursos adecuados para la participación de los observadores como parte de las funciones básicas en el sistema de la CMNUCC. A los observadores se nos debería permitir jugar nuestro rol en la lucha contra el cambio climático para asegurar que juntos podamos alcanzar la victoria. 

 

In English

Thank you Co Chairs.

I am Alejandra Watanabe speaking on behalf of Climate Action Network.

CAN would like to use this opportunity to reemphasize the “crucial and integral” participation of civil society in these negotiations, including access of observers at COP negotiations. At this intersessional CAN has been particularly alarmed about the proposed cost recovery system for side events. These events are one of the few opportunities that observers have to share diverse views and to present current research and innovative solutions that contribute ideas and positive momentum to negotiations. The observer liaison office of the UNFCCC Secretariat plays a vital role in facilitating this engagement.

CAN would especially like to thank the Parties that have stood up for the principles of democratic openness and transparency and we are encouraged that the secretariat has removed the proposal of cost recovery of USD1000 per side event. CAN looks forward to a meaningful engagement with the secretariat that respects proper processes so that we can find a way forward that helps enhance, rather than diminish, our participation. We must find a resolution that recognises that adequate resources should be allocated to observer participation as part of the core functions of the UNFCCC system. Observers should be allowed to play our role in the fight against climate change to ensure that we can achieve victory together.

Region: 
Organization: 
Related Member Organization: 

Thank you

A heartening moment occurred yesterday before an informal conversation on the coordination of support for REDD+. Many Parties, literally, stood side by side with NGOs and refused to enter the meeting room until the NGOs were also allowed in – which they eventually were. ECO thanks the Parties involved and hopes that this sort of Party-driven support for transparency will catch on.

Related Newsletter : 

Statement regarding cost recovery policy on behalf of all observer constituencies

Even though the Secretariat and Parties keep saying that civil society plays a critical role in the negotiations, there’s very little they’re doing to help us participate effectively. The proposed cost recovery policy for side events and exhibits is a case in point. The following is the collective response on behalf of all non-governmental observer constituencies, which offers to work with the Secretariat and Parties to find a real and sustainable solution. Why not give us more than four days and an open and participatory process to do so.

On behalf of the constituencies representing business and industry, research groups, indigenous peoples organisations, environmental groups, women and gender, trade unions, local government and municipal authorities, farmers and youth, we would like to express our concern regarding the policy on cost recovery announced in the Secretariat’s information note dated June 4th. This policy threatens to undermine the quality of observer participation in the UNFCCC process.

From its beginning, the UNFCCC has recognised the value of observer participation, most recently during Thursday’s Article 6 dialogue on public participation. Within the SBI negotiations and workshops, numerous ministerial statements and today’s discussion, the Secretariat and Parties have repeatedly acknowledged the “crucial and integral” role of observers in and the value of our contributions to this process. 

Despite this widespread recognition, the proposed cost recovery policy would effectively exclude many voices that cannot afford to pay the new costs, and threaten the credibility and legitimacy as well as mutual trust that have been established within this process. It would also undermine our ability to share diverse views and to present current research and innovative solutions to this complex problem. 

This policy – which essentially shifts the burden from Parties to observers – would have significant impacts on our ability to engage in, inform and influence the process. Many observer organisations face significant resource and capacity constraints and, as recognised by the Secretariat, have limited opportunities to share their views and perspectives. The voices of civil society, in particular organisations from developing countries and regions and other groups representing those most vulnerable, will be further marginalised if the right to speak is premised on the ability to pay.

As we’ve demonstrated in the past, we are committed to working with the Secretariat and Parties to find solutions together. We are willing to work with the Secretariat to find a real solution that doesn’t link financial contribution to the ability of observers to effectively participate in this process.  In the interim, we urge you to put this policy on hold until other options have been considered through a transparent and participatory process, involving the constituencies, which is critical to protecting diverse points of view and ensuring legitimate outcomes.

Let us work together to find a solution.

Related Newsletter : 

Pages

Subscribe to Tag: NGO Participation