Upcoming climate change conference in Bangkok

Upcoming climate change conference in Bangkok, Thailand, 30 August – 5 September 2012

A Short Overview

Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific

August 2012

Prepared by: Gabriela Fischerova, Regional Climate Change policy Advisor, UNDP BRC

GENERAL INFORMATION

The Bangkok climate change conference will comprise of three parallel sessions: • • •

The second part of the first session of Ad hoc Working Group on Durban platform – ADP1 The second part of the fifteenth session of the AWG LCA 17 The second part of the seventeenth session of the AWG-­‐KP

Additionally, five workshops under the AWG LCA will be organize1, (for more details see footnote) and/or www.unfccc.int.

Due to the financial constrains, all three meetings are organized in informal manners, and hence there will be no formal plenary meetings, no interpretation or webcast services and no official documents during the session. As there are also space limitations on the place, there will be no side events or exhibitions during the meetings.

The above-­‐mentioned sessions will be preceded by preparatory meetings of the Group of 77 and China, the African States, the small island developing States and the least developed countries from 24 to 29 August 2012.

The talks will take place at the United Nations Conference Centre (UNCC), of the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP) Rajdamnern Nok Avenue and Klong Phadung Krungkasem Road, Bangkok, Thailand.

They will start untraditionally on Thursday 30 August and finish on Wednesday 5 September 2012.

Registration of participants can be (for the first time) done ONLY via online registration system (https://onlinereg.unfccc.int/onlinereg/index_observers.html) by Designated Contact Points or Heads of Organizations. The same system will be used also for registration for COP18.

ADP 1 In Durban 2011, Parties have agreed that newly established Ad hoc Working Group on Durban Platform -­‐ ADP should aim to develop “a protocol, another legal instrument or an agreed outcome with legal force under the Convention applicable to all Parties” and was supposed to “start its work as a matter of urgency in the first half of 2012”, “…complete its work as early as possible but not later than in 2015…”,

1

1. Workshop on financing options for the full implementation of result-­‐based actions relating to REDD+, including modalities and procedures for financing these result based actions (30 August) 2. Workshop on a framework for various approaches (31 August morning) 3. Workshop on the new market-­‐based mechanism (31 August afternoon) 4. Workshop on quantified economy-­‐wide emission reduction targets by developed country Parties (2 September morning) 5. Workshop to further the understanding of the diversity of nationally appropriate mitigation actions by developing country Parties, underlying assumptions, and any support needed for implementation of these actions

2

and “plan its work in the first half of 2012 including, inter alia, on mitigation, adaptation, finance, technology development and transfer, transparency of action and support, and capacity-­‐building…”

(Decision 1/CP.17).

During its first session held in Bonn from 17 to 25 May 2012, the ADP agreed on its Bureau, adopted its agenda and initiated two work-­‐streams, one addressing matters related to paragraphs 2 to 6 (process to develop new instrument) of the of decision 1/CP.17 and another addressing matters related to paragraphs 7 and 8 (ways to enhance mitigation ambition) of that same decision.

Co-­‐chairs are currently consulting with Parties on ways to approach the ADP`s two workstreams when it reconvenes in Bangkok. The work in Bangkok will be based on submissions made by Parties before Bonn session and on views expressed during the first part of the ADP 1. Co-­‐chairs are also inviting Parties to provide additional inputs on how to advance the work of ADP. Further information on the approach to be proposed by co-­‐chairs will be made available on the UNFCCC website.

AWG LCA With new ADP, some Parties believe that many issues from AWG LCA agenda should be dealt with in this new subsidiary body, especially in light of the paragraph 1 of the decision 1/CP.17 according to which AWG LCA is supposed to reach agreed outcome and be terminated by COP18. However, many Parties believe that there is a need for continuation either within the existing setting by extending mandate of AWG LCA or by transferring all unfinished issues to the ADP or to the Subsidiary body for Implementation (SBI) or Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technical Advise (SBSTA).

In Bangkok, work will continue in several spin-­‐off groups on tasks mandated by COP 17, including on: shared vision; developed country mitigation; developing country mitigation; REDD+; sectoral approaches; various approaches, including markets; and review.

Many issues are already dealt with under other bodies or have their specific process (such as Green Climate Fund, Adaptation, Technology Mechanism), however, progress is expected on the selection of the host of Climate technology Centre and Network (CTCN) with currently three shortlisted candidates (Consortium of UNEP and other institutions; GEF; Det Norske Veritas) and even if the seat of Green Climate Fund is not officially on the agenda, it is expected that interested Parties (Germany; Mexico; Namibia; Poland; Republic of Korea; and Switzerland) will continue with their efforts to get support for their offers.

AWG KP As there is general agreement that the COP18 should deliver the formal adoption of the second commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol, the Bangkok session is likely to deal with the main unresolved issues: legal issues of transition from first to second commitment period; and carry-­‐over of surplus units from the first commitment period.

3

Analysis and Summary of the UNFCCC Climate Change Conference in Bonn, Germany, 14 – 25 May 2012

The meeting was the first negotiating session since a last-­‐minute deal was struck in the final hours of the Durban Conference last year. Five bodies convened, including the 36th sessions of the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI) and of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA), the 15th session of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-­‐term Cooperative Action under the Convention (AWG-­‐LCA), and the 17th session of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol (AWG-­‐KP). Importantly, Bonn also hosted the first session of the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action (ADP). Additionally the following events took place: • •

first meeting of the Durban Forum on Capacity Building; and 5 workshops on: equitable access to sustainable development; quantified economy-­‐wide emission reduction targets and related assumptions and conditions of the developed country Parties'; further clarification of the understanding of the diversity of nationally appropriate mitigation actions by developing country Parties, underlying assumptions, and any support needed for implementation of these actions; a framework for various approaches the new market-­‐based mechanism; and a workshop on options and ways for increasing mitigation ambition and possible further actions

With five negotiating tracks meeting simultaneously, parties faced a specific challenge – the organization of work. The last three years of negotiations have established numerous new bodies, mechanisms, committees and other means to discuss and implement activities to address climate change. In Bonn, negotiators needed to organize the massive landscape of overlapping groups to ensure that issues were thoroughly addressed without being weighed down by duplicative or conflicting workstreams. For example, currently adaptation is discussed though several tracks: National Adaptation Plans and Loss and Damage under the SBI, Nairobi Work Programme under SBSTA, Adaptation Committee under the Convention and the Adaptation Fund under the Kyoto Protocol. Throughout the two weeks, negotiators worked to clarify the various workstreams on adaptation and other topics to avoid confusion and delays. While the organizational issues seem mundane, the procedural decisions made in Bonn will shape the negotiations for years to come.

The workshops above contributed to the negotiating process with clarifying further the positions of the Parties and trying to propose solutions, and this format will continue to be used in the forthcoming sessions in Bangkok.

4

The Durban Platform The need for a clear workplan could not be more vividly demonstrated than in the discussions on the ADP (Ad-­‐ hoc Working Group on Durban Platform). In the final hours of COP 17/CMP 7 last year, parties agreed to establish the ADP that will strive toward a “protocol, another legal instrument or an agreed outcome with legal force under the Convention applicable to all parties.” When negotiators arrived in Bonn, they quickly realized that they had different interpretations of the Durban outcome. In particular, they disagreed on the scope of the ADP and expectations for what it will accomplish. Developed countries argued that the ADP should focus on creating a mitigation protocol including all countries that will come into force by 2020 and the need to increase mitigation ambition. Developing countries, on the other hand, argued that all parties are not obligated to the same levels of commitments. They saw the ADP as similar to the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol, and emphasized that the ADP must abide by the principles of “common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities” and equity. Many emerging economies also argued that “increasing ambition” applies to not only mitigation, but also adaptation, finance, technology and capacity building.

The stalemate translated into a heated debate over the agenda and chairmanship of the ADP that lasted the entire two-­‐week session. Norway, Trinidad and Tobago and India nominated candidates for respective regional groups or and developed and developing countries. for the Chair and Vice Chair of the ADP and countries were so sharply divided that a vote – the first in UNFCCC history – was nearly undertaken. At the final moments on the final day of the session, it was agreed that Norway and India would Co-­‐Chair in 2012 and an Annex I Party and Trinidad and Tobago would Co-­‐Chair in 2013. On the agenda, parties agreed that they would base their discussions on the Durban decision, including launching discussions under the ADP toward a legally-­‐binding agreement to come into force by 2020 and a workplan on enhancing mitigation ambition.

A number of developing countries, led by Venezuela, also argued for the principle of “pacta sunt servanda” (latin for “agreements must be kept”) to be discussed in the ADP to define issues of non-­‐compliance with the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol. Venezuela submitted this proposal in writing and it will be further discussed at the next meeting.

Parties also devoted a substantial negotiating time to the issue of selecting the host for the Climate Technology Centre and Network (CTCN). The evaluation panel consists of three members from Annex I Parties and three from non-­‐Annex I Parties assessed eight out from nine proposals received (one did not meet the the mandatory requirements for information) and presented a shortlist with ranking of proponents: 1 Consortium led by the United Nations Environment Programme 2 Global Environment Facility 3 Det Norske Veritas AS (DNV)

5

Kyoto Protocol In Bonn, negotiators had more productive discussions on the operational and legal issues for establishing a second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol that will begin in 2013. Parties focused on three key topics: the length of the commitment period, the number of Assigned Amount Units (AAUs) that will be carried over from the first commitment period to the second, and how to ensure “seamless continuity” so that there are no legal gaps between commitment periods. On the length of the second commitment period, developed countries argued for an 8-­‐year duration while Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), fearing for watered-­‐down commitments in such a long timeframe, argued for a 5-­‐year commitment period. Throughout the debate, countries called for increased ambition under the Kyoto Protocol and equivalent commitments of the growing list of countries that will not be a part of the second commitment period, namely the United States, Canada, Russia, and Japan. New Zealand and Australia have argued that they will not join the second commitment period unless emissions reductions pledges are made by emerging economies.

The Green Climate Fund Although there was no established group to discuss the Green Climate Fund (GCF) in Bonn, the new financial mechanism was mentioned in almost every negotiation. Major questions arose about how the yet-­‐to-­‐be-­‐ operational fund will relate to the UNFCCC negotiations on mitigation, adaptation, technology, capacity building and REDD, and how it will cooperate with bodies such as the Technology Executive Committee, Adaptation Committee and Standing Committee on Finance.

In the backdrop of the discussions, the first meeting of the GCF Board was postponed for the second time this year due to delays in confirming the nominations from regional groups. Given the commitment for the GCF to mobilize $100 billion per year by 2020, countries emphasized that the design of the fund should occur in a transparent and inclusive manner. The Africa Group went so far as to propose that the GCF be included in the discussions under the UNFCCC. This was met with disagreement from many developed countries, stating that only Board will have independent legal personality and the relationship of the GCF to the COP should be similar to that of the Global Environment Facility. All countries emphasized the urgency of getting the GCF operational and that there should be no funding gap between the end of the fast start finance period in 2013 and the first disbursements of the GCF. Another common theme among the discussions was the importance of identifying sources of climate finance and, in particular, the role of the private sector. Developed countries emphasized that the private sector must be mobilized by putting strong incentives in place for investment. Developing countries urged that private sector finance should not come at the expense of public commitments for finance, technology and capacity building. This debate will continue to Doha and beyond as countries attempt to further define the role of the private sector and how the political UNFCCC negotiations can offer enough stability and incentives for private sector engagement. However, representatives of private sectors pointed out that current practice of

6

statements from NGOs as the only entry point for private sector might not serve the process sufficiently to get private sector more involved.

The GCF board's first meeting was held in Geneva, Switzerland on 23-­‐25 August 2012 and started work on the board's organization and operations and the fund's first workplan.

A map from Durban to Doha The Bonn sessions further underscored that COP 18/CMP 8 in Doha will focus on clarifying and operationalizing the structures that have been created over the last three years. Many negotiators have described the upcoming Doha meeting as an “implementation COP,” where discussions will not create any new bodies. As part of this effort, negotiators have already begun examining existing implementation arrangements and the lessons learned from the GEF, Adaptation Fund, bilaterally-­‐funded progammes, and other initiatives. In Bonn, meetings such as the Durban Forum for Capacity Building and workshops on Nationally-­‐Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs) offered negotiators and practioners an important opportunity to learn from work on the ground. The next six months will be an important opportunity to further share these experiences and examine how lessons on the successes and challenges can be applied to the growing landscape of opportunities for countries to address climate change. Many negotiators have that Doha will be an important opportunity to better align the “talk” with the “walk.”

Doha will also represent change in another way: both Ad Hoc working groups under the Bali Action Plan – the AWG-­‐KP and the AWG-­‐LCA – are scheduled to end in Doha. The difficulty of the ADP discussions in Bonn signalled that the delicate balance that has been carefully crafted must be handled with care. In many ways, Doha will test the ability of countries to trust the process and each other enough to resolve the issues of the AWG-­‐KP and AWG-­‐LCA so that the ADP can take more meaningful steps to support countries on climate change.

There are still quite some political issues to be resolved at Doha COP, mainly with regards to the four big gaps: 1. The ambition gap – the mitigation pledges of both developed and developing countries are still not enough to assure the 2C target, neither after 2012 nor beyond 2020; 2. The financial gap – in general to cover the adaptation and mitigation needs, and in particular the fast start finance expires in 2012 and the GCF is still not operationalised and sourced; 3. The commitment periods gap – to assure that that there is no legal gap between commitment periods as currently the second commitment period is due in 2013, however still not agreed.

4. The legal gap – the transition from two track approach to defining one “protocol, another legal instrument or an agreed outcome with legal force under the Convention applicable to all parties.”

7

Upcoming Meetings • • • •

30 August – 5 September: UNFCCC negotiations in Bangkok, Thailand. This session is unconfirmed due to funding.

22 – 23 October in Seoul, Korea: Pre-­‐COP meeting Late October/early November: Second meeting of the Board of the Green Climate Fund, Republic of Korea 26 November – 7 December in Doha, Qatar: COP 18/CMP 8

8