21 years of COP and the international climate regime By Meena Raman Third World Network
About the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
• Grew out of Rio Summit • Concluded in 1992 • Only legally binding treaty on climate involving all parties together with Kyoto Protocol. • Objective is to stabilise the GHG levels at a level that allows ecosystems to adapt naturally and to enable food production and sustainable development
• Recognises that the historical emissions of developed countries which are responsible for much of current climate impacts • Recognition of the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) and equity • Which means – developed countries taking the lead in taking deep emission reductions; • Provide finance and technology transfer to developing countries to help them with mitigation, adaptation and loss and damage
Birth of Kyoto Protocol Why? • Developed countries were not cutting emissions • So – KP for developed country cuts • US signed and walked out • Only 5 % reductions compared to 1990 levels in first commitment period – 2008-2012 • Brought in Clean development mechanism – emissions trading
2 commitment period • 2013 – 2020 • Only 19 % reductions by 2020 • Agreed to review to raise ambition level to 25-40% reductions by 2014 • No review happened • Canada walked out of KP • Japan and Australia did not make commitments
Bali Action Plan and Cancun • Bali in 2007 – US came on board as well as developing countries to undertake mitigation actions – US to do comparable as those in KP 2CP (25-40% reductions) – • US announced that reductions of only 3% by 2020 and around 14% by 2025 compared to 1990 levels! • Finance – US 100 billion per year by 2020 • Green Climate Fund – only US$10.2 billion for 4 years at $2.5 per year – only 1% has come in when 50% is supposed to come in by end of April.
What is Paris agreement about? • Applicable to all Parties – under the Convention – what does that mean? • To come into effect post 2020 • Durban Platform to enhance action
Flash points/divergences Developed countries:
Differentiation –
No developed vs developing countries dichotomy- but new Current situation in the annex X (replace annex 1): based Climate Change on criteria related to evolving Convention- common but emissions and economic trends to be updated – “evolving differentiated responsibilities”; “countries in a responsibilities – position to do so”; “major developed and developing economies”; annex Y (replace countries; Annex 2) based on criteria related annex 1 and non-annex 1; to capability and evolving annex 2 and non-annex 2 – economic trends
based on historical responsibility
US and other Umbrella group: Self-differentiation: according to national circumstances
mitigation Long-term goal: some options Temperature target: 1.5 and 2 deg C Net zero emissions Based on carbon budget to be distributed according to principles: historical responsibility; capabilities; state of development; ecological footprint Commitments/contributions – Developed country paradigm: no differentiation; INDCs/DCs – bottom-up approach; nationally determined – economy-wide reductions for major economies (depending on national circumstances); for others -- other economy wide actions and sector targets but LDCs and SIDs can do actions in own way Push for new market mechanisms; land-use sector
Mitigation • Developing country paradigm: • Follow the Convention provisions: Article 4 differentiated – quantified economy wide targets for developed countries; developed countries take the lead; aggregate targets for them developing countries – diversity of actions – enabled and supported with finance and technology transfer Developing countries extent of mitigation depends on level of finance some developing countries supporting market mechanisms
Ex-ante review- to be or not to be • From bottom-up – how to assess and adjust before finalising targets? • How to ensure equity and fairshares approach? • Flashpoint – is there a differentiated approach between developed and developing countries • Fears – who will bear gap in ambition? • Ex-ante review of finance, technology transfer and capacity building? • Will adjustment take place – existing experiences eg. Kyoto experience
adaptation • Mainly about finance • Link to mitigation goal? • Adaptation for all? All parties – so less responsibility
Loss and damage – • New pillar vs none • Part of legally binding agreement or package of Paris?
finance • Numerical targets vs no targets and numbers • No numbers or no roadmap – developed countries • Not just a responsibility of developed countries – evolving responsibilities – countries in a position to do so • Developed countries position – collective responsibility to mobilise climate finance; need for support may change • Limit finance to LDCs and SIDs • Private sector role and enabling environment for investments
Technology • Is it transfer of technology or commercial venture? • Intellectual property rights – address and not to address • Technology assessment
Legal form • Options: new protocol – enhancing implementation of Convention or changing obligations Amendments to Convention COP decisions • Form follows content • Core agreement vs Paris package
Issues around process • Transparency • No Copenhagen • No secret texts • Inclusive and representative • Text based negotiations which are party driven • No to divide and rule
Pre-2020 commitments • Post 2020 focus to shift focus • Implementation gap – Mitigation commitments – Kyoto 2nd commitment period; assessing developed country mitigation Finance – GCF – reach US100 billion by 2020 - Only 1% of 10.2 billion pledged for 4 years – 2.5 billion a year met. Technology transfer