Background paper
18th Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change Doha, Qatar 26 November – 7 December 2012
Prepared under the programme Strategic Initiative to Address Climate Change in Least Developed Countries (Boots on the Ground)
Bratislava, Slovakia, November 2012
This technical summary was prepared by Gabriela Fischerova, Regional Climate Change Policy Advisor, under the global UNDP project “Integrating Climate Change into National Policies and Programming” supporting the programme “Strategic Initiative to Address Climate Change in Least Developed Countries” (aka ‘Boots on the Ground’) with the aim to provide a quick orientation in the development of individual agenda items under each subsidiary body sessions and the specific areas of discussion in the ad hoc working groups held in UN Climate Conference in November - December 2012 in Doha, Qatar. The document is based on official UNFCCC documents published on the web site of the UNFCCC, and on the non-papers and informal summaries distributed during the earlier sessions. The views expressed in this document are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, the UNDP.
2
Table of Contents Summary of the negotiation process.........................................................................................4 Logistic Information .................................................................................................................7 Sessions ..................................................................................................................................7 High-level Segment ................................................................................................................8 Registration and visa .............................................................................................................8 Credentials .............................................................................................................................9 Key Issues for Doha ................................................................................................................ 10 Key political issues for Doha ................................................................................................... 11 Second Commitment period under the Kyoto protocol ..................................................... 11 AWG LCA and AWG KP termination ............................................................................... 13 Work of ADP ....................................................................................................................... 15 Key technical issues for Doha ................................................................................................. 19 Mitigation............................................................................................................................. 19 Adaptation ........................................................................................................................... 20 Finance ................................................................................................................................. 21 Technology ........................................................................................................................... 21
3
Summary of the negotiation process
With the first commitment period of the Kyoto protocol coming to the end by December 31 2012, and still increasing global emissions of greenhouse gases, upcoming climate change conference in Doha may set up an important milestone for future international climate change legal regime. Alongside two main outcomes expected, securing the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol and starting the substantial work on the post-2020 new legally binding instrument applicable to all parties, many other important decisions are to be taken on different technical and methodological issues concerning adaptation, mitigation, technology transfer, reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation to create the framework of the post-2012 climate change regime. No less than seven bodies will have to fit their work into two weeks. And we have to bear in mind that the good part of the second week is devoted to the high-level segment, when ministers and other senior officers from all around the world will come and try to resolve the most difficult and tangled questions from political (such as whether to close the two ad hoc working groups) to very technical (such as what type of safeguards should be used while reducing emissions from deforestation and land degradation). With 89 agenda items (and 101 sub-items) the complexity of the whole process is nearing the tipping point of capacities of both organizers and delegates. This document aims to provide a basic orientation and short overview of the key issues to be discussed and decided in Doha for those who do not follow the negotiations on daily basis or need only ad hoc information on the up-coming event. Key issues: There are three major outcomes expected from Doha which may be labeled as ‘political’. These are:
Second commitment period (CP2) of the Kyoto Protocol AWG LCA and AWG KP termination ADP work
Kyoto Protocol track (AWG-KP) At pre-ministerial meeting held in Seoul, Republic of Korea, 21 – 23 October 2012, five elements were define as remaining issues for adoption of the second commitment period: 1) Which text to use – the text from Durban (1/CMP.7) or also post-Durban inputs? 2) The length of the second commitment period (5 years (AOSIS, LDCs, Africa) or 8 years (Annex I Parties)) 4
3) Ensuring “legal continuity” from 1 January 2013 (To prevent “gap” from 1 January 2013 until CP2 entry into force) 4) Ensuring “operational continuity” from CP1 to CP2 (“Eligibility”: two facets – for CP2 Parties and non-CP2 Parties, implications for carbon market) 5) “Carry-over”&”surplus” of tradable units from CP1 to CP2 (Most relevant to assigned amount units – AAUs)
Convention track (AWG LCA) The mandate of the working group expires in Durban and in order to terminate its work, remaining unresolved issues will either be completed or new platform(s) where the work will continue needs to be identified. Overview of the work under the LCA as presented by the Chair at pre-ministerial meeting: Shared vision:
Long-term goal; Peaking; Context
Mitigation:
Developed countries (Clarification, ambition, comparability) Developing countries (Clarification) REDD+ Financing Framework for various approaches – New market based mechanism: modalities Sectoral approaches: General framework, international aviation and maritime Response measures Financing adaptation (linkages with means of implementation) NAPs for non-LDCs Economic diversification National and regional centres Continuity of finance (between 2012 and 2020) MRV on finance Arrangements between COP and GCF Fast start finance – linkages to the work on long-term finance Further guidance to TEC and CTCN Linkages with financial mechanism IP
Adaptation:
Finance:
Technology:
Capacity building:
Monitoring and indicators
Review:
Scope and process 5
Other matters:
Economies in transition Annex I with special circumstances
Ad hoc working group on Durban platform (ADP): The work will continue under the two workstreams as define in the agenda: 1. Matters related to paragraphs 2 to 6 (workstream on vision) – planning the work for 2013, indicating major reference points for the work up to 2015 2. Matters related to the paragraphs 7 and 8 (workstream on ambition gap) – advance work on bridging the current mitigation gap and delivering a new agreement in 2015 Set of questions were prepared by co-chairs based on the discussion in Bangkok for both workstreams to assist with streamlining the discussion. Clear and agreed calendar identifying elements of work and immediate practical activities for 2013 should be also agreed in Doha. Apart from political issues there are still many technical matters to be discussed and if possible resolved, such as
Mitigation – NAMAs, new market based mechanism, sectoral approach (agriculture), REDD+, CCS Adaptation – National adaptation plans, loss and damage, Nairobi Work Programme Finance – GCF relation to the COP, continuity of climate finance (mid-term finance) Technology – Host of Climate Technology Centre and Network, Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Response measures Capacity building
6
Logistic Information
Sessions The 18th Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change will be hosted by the Government of Qatar and held from 26 November to 7 December 2012 in the Qatar National Convention Centre in Doha, Qatar. The conference will comprise sessions of the following bodies:
The 18th session of the Conference of the Parties (COP 18) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change from 26 November to 7 December The 8th Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP 8) from 26 November to 7 December The 37th session of the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI 37) from 26 November to 7 December The 37th session of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA 37) from 26 November to 7 December The second part of the 17th session of Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol (AWG-KP 17-2) from 27 November* The second part of the 15th session of Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention (AWG-LCA 15-2) from 27 November* The second part of the 1st session of Ad Hoc Working Group on Durban Platform (ADP 1-2) from 27 November*
* The end date of the working groups will be decided Several preparatory meetings will take place before the conference: Group
Date
Least developed countries
20 to 21 November 2012
Small island developing States
22 to 23 November 2012
African Group
22 to 23 November 2012
Group of 77 and China
24 to 25 November 2012
The preparatory meetings will not be held at the conference centre but in Sheraton Doha Resort & Convention Hotel, Al Corniche Street, Kuwait. 7
There are no workshops scheduled for the conference. The informal consultations of the AWG KP Chair on eligibility issues relating to second commitment period with interested parties are planned to be held on 12 – 13 November 2012 in Bonn, Germany. More information about consultations can be found in the following document: http://unfccc.int/files/meetings/ad_hoc_working_groups/kp/application/pdf/awgkp_eligibilityann ouncement_15102012.pdf
High-level Segment The high-level segment, to be attended by ministers and other senior officials, will be inaugurated during the afternoon of Tuesday, 4 December. Statements by ministers and other heads of delegation will be heard in joint meetings of the COP and CMP on 5 and 6 December. The high-level segment will conclude on Friday, 7 December with the adoption of decisions and conclusions by the COP and the CMP. The duration of each statement is limited to three minutes. Statements on behalf of groups, where the other members of the group do not speak, are strongly encouraged and additional time will be provided for these. The list of speakers is open from Wednesday, 3 October to Friday, 9 November 2012. Registrations should be made using the form1 and should be addressed to the External Relations Officer, Conference Affairs Services, telephone: +49 228 815 1611 or +49 228 815 1306, fax: +49 228 815 1999, e-mail: sessions@unfccc.int. This applies to both parties and observers.
Registration and visa Registration and visa application are managed through the electronic systems. Registration on-line is the only official channel to register participants for the sessions:
1
Registration form is at the page 21 of the information note:
http://unfccc.int/files/parties_and_observers/notifications/application/pdf/notification_to_parties_and_observer_states_cop_18cmp_8.pdf
8
https://onlinereg.unfccc.int/. The secretariat will not accept nominations by any other method such as e-mails, letters and faxes. The visa can be obtained via following link: http://www.cop18.qa/en-us/delegateinformation/obtainingvisa.aspx
Credentials As the amendment of the Kyoto Protocol is expected to be adopted, special attention is given to the credentials of the representatives of Parties. Only Parties with valid credentials will be able to participate in the adoption of amendments to the Kyoto Protocol. In the event of a vote, those Parties that have not submitted their credentials or have submitted credentials that are not valid will not be allowed to participate in the voting. In addition, if the secretariat is requested to confirm whether a quorum to take decisions is present, the quorum will be determined on the basis of Parties that have submitted valid credentials. Therefore, the credentials of representatives of Parties, as well as the names of alternate representatives and advisers, shall be submitted to the secretariat no later than 24 hours after the opening of that session. Credentials must be issued by the Head of State or Government or by the Minister of Foreign Affairs.
9
Key Issues for Doha
There are three major outcomes expected from Doha which may be labeled as ‘political’ and several of more of ‘technical’ nature. These are: Political:
Second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol AWG LCA and AWG KP termination ADP work
Technical:
Mitigation – NAMAs, new market based mechanism, sectoral approach (agriculture), REDD+, CCS Adaptation – National adaptation plans, financing adaptation, Nairobi Work Programme Finance – GCF relation to the COP, continuity of climate finance (mid-term finance), monitoring and reporting on finance Technology – Host of Climate Technology Centre and Network, Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Response measures Capacity building
Major part of the discussion will be carried out in contact groups established by individual bodies (COP, CMP, SBs…) preparing texts for adoption by final plenary of the conference. The issues the negotiators cannot resolve will be left for the decision and adoption by ministers during high-level segment in the second week of the conference. The items above are interlinked and conditioned so that the progress or lack of progress in one could seriously affect the progress of discussions on the other one, therefore, it is important to understand substance and linkages among individual agenda items and possible consequences of failures and successes. In the following text, each of these items is shortly explained and the current situation in negotiations described. The detailed agenda for each session and any additional information can be found at http://unfccc.int/meetings/doha_nov_2012/meeting/6815.php 10
Key political issues for Doha
Second Commitment period under the Kyoto protocol Adoption of the second commitment period is embedded in the article 3, paragraph 9 of the Kyoto protocol2. While for the first commitment period (2008 – 2012), 38 developed country parties of the KP were committed to reduce or limit their emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) (without the US who did not ratify the KP), now already three other parties have declared that they do not intend to commit themselves to any 2 nd CP under the KP: Canada, Japan, and Russia. Lately (not yet under the UNFCCC process), Australia announced its willingness to sign up for the second commitment period while New Zealand has announced that it will take its next commitments under the Convention Framework. This means that any potential CP2 would include parties responsible for less than 40% of developed countries emissions in 2008 and less than 25% of the global emissions. Many of them also consider the CP2 as transitional to a global treaty. Therefore, in order to reach the ultimate objective of the UNFCCC (to achieve … stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system) more actions are needed to curb the emissions from all major economies. At pre-ministerial meeting held in Seoul, Republic of Korea, 21 – 23 October 2012, five elements were define as remaining issues for adoption of the second commitment period: 1) What will be the basis for negotiations: text from Durban (1/CMP.7) or also post-Durban inputs? 2) Length of the second commitment period (5 years (AOSIS, LDCs, Africa) or 8 years (Annex I Parties)) 3) Ensuring “legal continuity” from 1 January 2013 (To prevent “gap” from 1 January 2013 until CP2 entry into force)
2
3.9. Commitments for subsequent periods for Parties included in Annex I shall be established in amendments to Annex B to this Protocol, which shall be adopted in accordance with the provisions of Article 21, paragraph 7. The Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to this Protocol shall initiate the consideration of such commitments at least seven years before the end of the first commitment period referred to in paragraph 1 above.
11
4) Ensuring “operational continuity” from CP1 to CP2 (“Eligibility”: two facets – for CP2 Parties and non-CP2 Parties, implications for carbon market) 5) “Carry-over”&”surplus” of tradable units from CP1 to CP2 (Most relevant to assigned amount units – AAUs) There is major consensus that even though the second commitment period may not have the desired reduction effect it is vital for keeping continuity in the mitigation efforts of developed countries, to provide (limited) level of certainty for private sector and trust and basis for the future structure; and also the understanding that securing the second commitment period has to agreed and adopted in Doha. Before doing so however, a couple of technical issues have to be resolved: a)
Text for negotiations – In Durban, Parties adopted the decision 1/CMP.7 with annex containing the textual proposals for Kyoto protocol amendments. Since Durban, the discussion progressed during the Bonn meeting in May and then in Bangkok, in September. The Chair of the AWG KP has prepared the proposal to facilitate the negotiations (FCCC/KP/AWG/2012/CRP.1) in the form of text for decision and amendments to the Kyoto protocol has restructured and streamlined the content of the non-papers without adding her own textual input
b)
The length of commitment period – there are two options; either 5 years (2013 – 2017) or 8 years (2013 – 2020). Both options have their pros and cons and their supporters. While developed countries favour the 8 years period arguing that after 2020 the commitments will seamlessly transit to a new agreement to be negotiated under the Ad hoc working group on Durban Platform, developing countries prefer 5-year period in order to avoid getting “locked” in low ambitious agreement for longer period.
c)
Implementation gap between first and second commitment period – if the amendments of the Kyoto protocol are adopted in Doha, it still takes some time for them to be legally in force due to ratification process. As the first commitment period ends on 31 December 2012 (some three weeks after the closure of the COP18) there will be the gap between first and second commitment periods. In order to avoid legal disturbances, parties proposed several options for the text to be inserted into the Kyoto protocol or as a text of the decision to make sure that the provisions of the protocol will be applied continually without interruption by all parties. Most of the options are based on the “provisional application” clause differentiating only in the formulations.
d)
Eligibility for participating in flexible mechanisms – as it is already known that some parties while having the quantified emission limitation or reduction objectives (QELROs) defined and assigned amount units allocated to their accounts in the registry for the first commitment period will not take commitments in the second commitment period. The current provisions of the protocol and decisions handling with the flexible mechanisms did 12
not prejudge such situation, some parties feel there is a need for organizing the carbon market and flexible mechanisms in such way that only parties with commitments under the second commitment period may be eligible to participate in the mechanisms. The issue will have implications to the carbon market both in case the rules will change for 2 nd CP and also in case the rules remain: Russia on one hand has rather substantive surplus of the AAUs and also large potential for joint implementation projects and on the other hand, Japan is the biggest buyer of units form all three flexible mechanisms (JI, CDM, IET) and neither of these two countries is intending to take commitments under the 2 nd CP. So if they are or they are not a part of the market it will have a great influence on the volume and price of units. e)
Carry-over of surplus of assigned amount units from the first commitment period – according to Article 3, paragraph 133, Party may transfer all unused assigned amount units from the first commitment period to the second commitment period. There is around 6 000 Mt CO2eq left among Annex I parties (most of them from Russia, Ukraine, and some of the EU new member states). This might seriously undermine the mitigation efforts of the second commitment period as the carry-over adds around 20% of the assigned amount to the emissions capped according to current pledges of Annex I Parties. The proposal is to allow for using the surplus units only for fulfilling commitments of the second commitment period if the emissions exceed the assigned amount of that period (e.g. they cannot be used for international emission trading, or used for cancellation if the party has the assigned amount units for the second commitment period). The issue of AAUs carry-over is closely linked to the eligibility of parties who do not intend to take commitments under the second CP in the flexible mechanisms (clean development mechanism, joint implementation and international emission trading).
AWG LCA and AWG KP termination In Bali, at the COP 13, parties have established the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention4. The mandate of the group was extended several times in order to allow parties to complete the work assigned to the group. In Durban last year,
3
3.13. If the emissions of a party included in Annex I in a commitment period are less than assigned amount under this Article, this difference shall, on request of that party, be added to the assigned amount for that party for subsequent commitment period 4
Decides that the process shall be conducted under a subsidiary body under the Convention, hereby established and known as the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention, that shall complete its work in 2009 and present the outcome of its work to the Conference of the Parties for adoption at its fifteenth session
13
the COP 17 decided on the termination of the AWG LCA work 5 and at the same time, established the Ad hoc Working Group on Durban Platform. The mandate of the AWG LCA had been extended by one year several times since Bali (in 2009, 2010 and last time in Durban in 2011). However, many developing countries feel that the work of AWG LCA is not finished while developed countries argue the potential of the working group is exhausted and all unfinished issued are either placed in other bodies (permanent like SBI or SBSTA) or newly created for the purpose of dealing with the specific issues (like Joint Forum for potential consequences or Adaptation Committee, Standing Committee, Technology Executive Committee, etc.) or they can be taken further under the Ad hoc working group on Durban Platform. At the ministerial pre-COP meeting, the Chair of AWG LCA outline main outstanding issues under the chapters of the outcome of AWG LCA as adopted in Durban. These are:
5
Decides to extend the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention for one year in order for it to continue its work and reach the agreed outcome pursuant to decision 1/CP.13 (Bali Action Plan) through decisions adopted by the sixteenth, seventeenth and eighteenth sessions of the Conference of the Parties, at which time the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention shall
be terminated; 14
Although these issues are under the agenda of the AWG LCA, a lot of detailed technical work was and will continue to be carried out under the agenda of subsidiary bodies (SBSTA: Nairobi work Programme on Adaptation, Forum on Response measures, Report from the Adaptation Committee, report of the Technology Executive Committee, methodological issues such as biennial reports, carbon capture and storage, etc.; SBI: registry for NAMAs, national Adaptation Plans, loss and damage, capacity building, etc.). AWG KP mandate established in 2005 in Montreal at COP 11 will expire after the adoption of the amendment of the Kyoto Protocol on second commitment period and all issues where further work is needed will be transferred either to SBs or to the ADP. The final decision whether to streamline the negotiations under only one working group (ADP) or to continue with one or two others (LCA and possibly KP) will depend on two issues: a) Whether there is some progress under the ADP in Doha and whether the CP2 period of the Kyoto Protocol is adopted; and b) On political will to focus the efforts regarding future international climate regime towards one agreement covering all major emitters. At present it is hard to tell what option is more likely to happen as there are too many uncertainties in respect of the development of negotiations in Doha in both tracks: Convention (LCA) and KP.
Work of ADP The ADP was created in Durban in 2011 as a UNFCCC forum for the newly launched process to “develop a protocol, another legal instrument or an agreed outcome with legal force under the Convention” applicable to all parties. This new legal instrument should be completed by 2015 and should enter into force in 2020. It is the first time that the considerations on GHG emissions reductions will cover all major emitters, including US, China, India and other emerging economies. The working group was asked to “…start its work as a matter of urgency in the first half of 2012…”6. However, for major part of two weeks in Bonn, parties were not able to adopt the agenda and agree on the officers for this new body. Until the very last day of the session, the possibility of voting (first time in the history of the UNFCCC was looming above the delegates.
6
Decision 1/CP.17
15
This was partly due to rather ambiguous text of the decision when it comes to the expected outcome and the work plan, and partly due to the fact that new protocol (or any other instrument) should be legally binding across the whole spectrum of countries so some of the major economies might have to share some part of burden to reduce emissions. This led also to the division among usually rather homogeneous positions of developing countries: AOSIS singled itself from G&&countries by requesting actions not only from developed but from some developing countries as well. India, China, Brazil and some other more advanced developing countries were hesitant on some aspects of the mandate for ADP, especially with regard to the period: should it be 2012 – 2020 or post 2020. Irrespective of how countries lay out their positions the outcome of the ADP very probably would not apply uniformly to developing countries. Most of the other developing countries continue to stress the principle of common but differentiated responsibility, and argue that the eradication of poverty remains their overriding priority. The officers were elected and the agenda for ADP was adopted in Bonn in the last minute. It was decided that the work of ADP will follow two workstreams: 1.
Matters related to paragraphs 2 to 6 (workstream on vision)
2.
Matters related to the paragraphs 7 and 8 (workstream on ambition gap)
In Bangkok, in September 2012, the discussion progressed well. Many parties expressed their views on what the new legal instrument should be. Even though the views are very different (from flexible format, flexible dynamic targets to the strict Kyoto-like architecture including numerical commitments) most parties agreed that the new instrument should built on the positive features of the existing regime while include new approaches respecting basic principles of the Convention. All agreed that the new agreement should be with universal participation and enhanced actions. In Doha, co-chairs of ADP hope that parties will:
To continue planning the work of the ADP for 2013, in the context of a broader vision, indicating major reference points for this work up to 2015
To advance our substantive work on bridging the current mitigation gap and delivering a new agreement by 2015
The Co-Chairs have prepared summaries of the two roundtable discussions in Bangkok and the note “Reflections on the Bangkok session with a view to Doha and beyond”. The co-chairs summarized points of interest for further discussion as follows:
16
Workstream 1:
How the principles of the Convention will be applied in the new agreement How national circumstances and changes thereof should be taken into account How the new agreement will be “applicable to all” in practice, including approaches to defining differentiated commitments Ways to incentivize full and ambitious participation and ensure effective implementation and compliance arrangements How the new agreement will strengthen the multilateral, rules based regime under the Convention How the ADP will take into account relevant work being undertaken by other institutions and processes under the Convention Lessons learned from the implementation of the Convention and its Kyoto Protocol and other multilateral agreements Planning of the ADP’s work with a focus on 2013
Workstream 2:
How to increase the ambition of existing pledges from Parties and encourage those who have not yet submitted their pledges to do so How international and national actions that are additional and are therefore supplementary to the pledges that Parties have made can be strengthened, encouraged, and supported by the Convention The role of means of implementation in increasing ambition How to catalyze actions and initiatives with the largest mitigation potential Ways to showcase ongoing initiatives and to share best practices Ways to undertake more in-depth work, including technical and quantitative analysis of options to increase ambition Ways to incentivize mitigation actions and ensure effective implementation Ways to ensure high-level engagement and stakeholder involvement How principles of the Convention will be applied in the context of enhancing ambition
Clear and agreed calendar identifying elements of work and immediate practical activities for 2013 should be also agreed in Doha. However, there are some voices (Brazil) suggesting that the debate on ADP work “should be deferred until next year. COP in Doha should prioritize the
17
extension of the Kyoto protocol and the rules for longer-term agreement rather than to be distracted by the crucial but contentious issue of global emission reductions”.7 Work of ADP will be conducted in informal discussions, roundtables and contact group that can take stock of the work. Secretariat also offers to arrange bilateral meetings between co-chairs and groups of parties or individual parties. The request for such bilateral meeting should be made via mail contact: secretariat@unfccc.int
7
Statement of the Brazil`s chief negotiator Luiz Alberto Figueiredo on 15 November 2012 http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/nov/15/doha-carbon-cuts-climate-change?intcmp=122
18
Key technical issues for Doha
Mitigation The mitigation is discussed under the AWG LCA agenda item 3 (b) Enhanced national/international action on mitigation of climate change. Basically two broad groups of mitigation action are discussed:  
Mitigation action to be taken by developed countries (which mostly reflect the discussion under the Kyoto protocol); and Nationally appropriate mitigation actions by developing countries (NAMAs).
Related to the mitigation action, there are many technical sub-points to be resolved, such as the registry where the action will be registered and matched for support; new market based mechanism (NMM), which is still not defined, but some broad rules are already proposed. Even there is yet no consensus on whether the NMM should be a part of the future regime, modalities will be subject of discussions but no major progress on this issue is expected in Doha. Sectoral approaches currently deal with two sectors: agriculture; and International aviation. Both are significant contributors to the emissions of green house gases on the other hand both are very sensitive from economic and/or development point of view. The progress is widely expected in the Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) where SBSTA will continue its work on developing modalities for a national forest monitoring system and for measuring, reporting and verifying anthropogenic forest-related emissions by sources and removals by sinks based on the document FCCC/SBSTA/2012/L.9/Rev.1. (Mechanism for financing REDD activities will also be discussed, more info under the chanter Finance). Carbon capture and storage (CCS) in geological formations as clean development mechanism project activities – will be discussed under the SBSTA agenda item Methodological issues under the Kyoto Protocol. This item is on the agenda since November 2005 and up to now parties discussed and agreed that CCS activities may be included under the CDM under certain conditions. At CMP7 in Durban, parties adopted modalities and procedures for CCS inclusion into CDM, and agreed to continue their work in Doha on:
19
(a) The eligibility of carbon dioxide capture and storage project activities which involve the transport of carbon dioxide from one country to another or which involve geological storage sites that are located in more than one country; (b) The establishment of a global reserve of certified emission reduction units for carbon dioxide capture and storage project activities, in addition to the reserve referred to in paragraph 21(b) of the annex to this decision. Response measures are discussed under the KP track and LCA track, and also in the Forum on the impact of implementation of response measures established jointly under the SBSTA and SBI. There are divergent views among parties whether the Forum should be the only platform to discuss the matters of response measures, or the decision text should be negotiated and adopted. While developed countries prefer the first option, developing countries proposed several texts for the decision, dealing with unilateral measures, including tariff, non-tariff, and other fiscal and non-fiscal border trade measures, against goods and services from developing country Parties on any grounds related to climate change.
Adaptation National adaptation plans were agree as a part of the Cancun Adaptation Framework with the objective to reduce vulnerability to the impacts of climate change by building adaptive capacities and resilience and to facilitate the integration of climate change adaptation into relevant new and existing policies, programmes and activities, in particular development planning processes and strategies, within all relevant sectors and at different levels, as appropriate. They should facilitate country-owned, country-driven action, should be not prescriptive, nor result in the duplication of efforts undertaken in-country. The initial guidelines on the basic groundwork, preparatory elements, implementation strategy, and reporting, monitoring and review were adopted in Durban, now the crucial question to be discussed is the issue of financing adaptation both national adaptation plans and the implementation of adaptation measures. In Doha, Parties will continue to discuss the text of the draft decision (FCCC/SBI/2012/15/Add.2, page 18 - 21) in consideration of guidance on policies and programmes to enable financial, technology and capacity-building support for the NAP process for the LDC Parties at SBI 37, with a view to making recommendations to the COP at COP 18. Nairobi Work Programme – was established as a five year programme in 2005 with the objective to assist parties, in particular developing countries, including least developed countries and small island states to improve their understanding and assessment of impacts, vulnerability and adaptation to climate change; and to make informed decisions on practical adaptation actions and measures. NWP mandate was extended by COP17 to 2013. In Doha, the SBI will consider the progress in the implementation through considering following documents: 20
Report on the technical workshop on water and climate change impacts and adaptation strategies; Compilation of case studies on national adaptation planning processes; Progress made in implementing activities under the Nairobi work programme.
Finance During the Conference of the Parties (COP15) held in December 2009 in Copenhagen developed countries pledged to provide new and additional resources, including forestry and investments, approaching USD 30 billion for the period 2010 – 2012 and with balanced allocation between mitigation and adaptation. This collective commitment has come to be known as ‘fast-start finance’. Following up on this pledge, the Conference of the Parties in Cancún, in December 2010, took note of this collective commitment by developed country Parties and reaffirmed that funding for adaptation will be prioritized for the most vulnerable developing countries, such as the least developed countries, small-island developing states and Africa. The fast-start finance is coming to an end in December 2012 and now the developing countries call for additional pledges – mid-term finance – to cover the period between now and the year 2020 when the long-term finance and 100 billion USD pledged in Copenhagen in 2009 by developed countries should be ready and accessible through Green Climate Fund. With the Green Climate Fund Executive Board and Standing Committee established and working (both bodies have met twice this year) and the decision on the host of GFC Secretariat taken (it will be Songdo, Incheon City, Republic of Korea) now the focus is on more practical issues such as what will be the relation between GCF and the COP; how the finance will be monitored and reported and what might be the linkages between fast-start (and possibly mid-term) finance and long-term financing. Discussion will be based on the reports form GEF, GCF, and Standing Committee, Report on the workshops of the work programme on longterm finance (FCCC/CP/2012/3) and on submission form parties. There is no formal document yet and only a very preliminary text may be expected to come on this form Doha.
Technology Technology mechanism established by Cancun Agreements in 2010 and consisting of Technology Executive Committee (TEC) and Climate Technology Centre and Network (CTCN) is close to the full function, with the TEC already working since 2011 and CTCN host selected – UNEP-led Consortium – (host agreement to be signed at COP18 in Doha). At the last meeting of 21
parties in Bangkok, the issue of intellectual property rights was raised again by developing countries as one of the main barriers to technology transfer and they are requesting the issue to be discussed while developed countries oppose this option arguing that there are other fora such as WIPO and/or WTO to deal with it. Due to very limited time available in Doha, it might be expected that the issue will be brought to discussion again however, no progress would be reached.
22