<\/b>ECO was excited to see emerging convergence among Parties on five-year cycles in the new text. But ECO has one simple, but very important, question: when does it start?<\/b> We are not on track to stay below even 2\u00b0C. We also know that without increasing the ambition of INDCs before implementation in 2020, the 1.5\u00b0C door will rapidly close.<\/p>\n
We need a review of INDCs in 2018 and a re-submission pre-2020. Yet paragraphs 24 and 25 set the date for submitting or updating INDCs at 2020 or 2021. These paragraphs only do half the job. Those with 2030 targets are invited to \u2018confirm or update\u2019 them, but those with 2025 targets seem to be off the hook. Their 2020-25 efforts get no mention and instead they are invited to put forward a new (2030) target.<\/p>\n
The first round of review would have to happen before 2020, so we can update insufficient INDCs that currently lock us into a 3\u00b0C pathway. The current weak \u2018facilitative dialogue\u2019 in the decision text has to be strengthened. To allow for this first round in 2018, we should also look back and assess how well developed countries have implemented their pre-2020 commitments through a process of accelerated implementation. If we want to make the 5-year cycle more effective, it should consider not only INDCs but also means of implementation.<\/p>\n
Another important question: does the stocktake influence individual countries\u2019 targets?\u00a0From that perspective, we are very sad to see \u2018ex ante\u2019 review disappear from the text. ECO hopes that delegates are not planning too long a holiday. You all deserve nice holidays after this hectic conference.\u00a0But get the world back on track first.<\/p>\n