Transcript Slide 1

Understanding the UN
Framework Convention on
Climate Change
____________
M. J. Mace
17 June 2010
Stakeholder Forum
London
Overview
•
•
•
•
•
History and overview of Key Provisions
Implementing Bodies
Negotiating Process
Status of Negotiating Process
Ways to Impact the Process
I.
History: the UN Framework
Convention and Kyoto Protocol
Life Cycle of a multilateral
environmental agreement
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Negotiation – INCs, PrepComs
Adoption
Deposit of text with Sec. General of the UN
Circulation of Depository Notification
Treaty opened for signature/ratification
Treaty closes for signature
Entry into force
Accession to treaty possible
Conferences of the Parties
Adoption of amendments, protocols to the
treaty
Bangkok 2009
Treaty Evolution
• Complex issues, evolve over time
• Flexibility must be built in
• Regime evolves through COP and COP/MOP
decisions, SBI and SBSTA conclusions, treaty
amendments, annexes
• New agreements or Protocols, e.g.:
– 1997 Kyoto Protocol
– Copenhagen? Cancun?
History of Negotiations
IPCC
INC
UNFCCC
UNFCCC
COP 1
COP 2
COP 3
COP 4
COP 5
COP 6
COP 6 bis
COP7
COP 8
COP 9
COP 10
1988
1990
1992
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
1990
1990-95
Rio
-------Berlin
Geneva
Kyoto
Buenos Aires
Bonn
The Hague
Bonn
Marrakech
New Delhi
Milan
Buenos Aires
Kyoto Protocol 2005
COP 11 /MOP1 2005
COP 12 /MOP2 2006
COP 13 /MOP3 2007
COP 14/MOP 4 2008
COP 15/MOP 5 2009
COP 16/MOP 6 2010
------Montreal
Nairobi
Bali
Poznan
Copenhagen
Cancun
First Assessment Report
Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee
UNFCCC opened for signature
Entry into Force
“Berlin Mandate” (launched KP negs)
Kyoto Protocol adopted
Buenos Aires Plan of Action (on rules)
Bonn Agreements (core elements)
Marrakech Accords (KP rulebook)
Delhi Declaration
Buenos Aires Programme of Action on
Adaptation and Response Measures
Entry into Force
First Meeting of the Parties to the KP
Second MOP – Review of the Protocol
Third MOP – “Bali Action Plan”
Fourth MOP
Post-2012 Agreement - failed
Post-2012 Agreement?
UNFCCC and Kyoto Goals
• UNFCCC: Annex I Parties aim to return
individually or jointly their greenhouse gas
emissions to
– 1990 levels by 2000 (Art. 4)
• Kyoto Protocol: Annex I Parties to reduce
overall emissions by at least
– 5% below 1990 levels by 2008-2012 (Art. 3)
Country categories
• Annex I (developed countries)
– Annex II (wealthier developed)
– Economies in Transition (EITs)
• Non-Annex I (developing)
– Least Developed Countries (48)
– Small Island Developing States (40+)
– Others – 132 in total
UN Framework Convention on
Climate Change
• Objective: Achieve stabilization of
greenhouse gas concentrations at a level that
prevents dangerous anthropogenic
interference with the climate system.
• in a timeframe sufficient to allow ecosystems
to adapt naturally, to ensure food production
not threatened and to enable economic
development to proceed in a sustainable
manner
UNFCCC Definitions - Article 1
• “Climate change” - a change of climate attributed directly or
indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the
global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate
variability.
• “Emissions” - release of greenhouse gases and/or their
precursors into the atmosphere over a specified area and period of
time.
• “Reservoir” - component or components of the climate system
where a greenhouse gas or a precursor of a greenhouse gas is
stored.
• “Sink” - any process, activity or mechanism which removes a
GHG, an aerosol or a precursor of a GHG from the atmosphere.
• “Source” - any process or activity which releases a GHG, an
aerosol or a precursor of a GHG into the atmosphere.
Concept of net emissions – sources (emissions) less sinks
(removals)
Developed and Developing
Country Commitments
Differentiated commitments on
• Mitigation
• Adaptation
• Reporting to COP
UNFCCC Commitments
Article 4
• 4.1 – Commitments for all Parties
– mitigation
– adaptation
– reporting
• 4.3 – Funding for developing countries
• 4.4 – Funding for particularly vulnerable
developing countries
• 4.5 – Technology Transfer
• 4.7 – Links commitments to funding and TT
• 4.8 – Actions for developing countries
• 4.9 – Actions to consider special needs of LDCs
Mitigation Obligations
• develop GHG inventories - 4.1(a)
• formulate national and regional programmes containing
mitigation and adaptation measures - 4.1(b)
• cooperate in development and transfer of technology in
all relevant sectors that reduce or prevent emissions
4.1(c)
• promote sustainable management of sinks - 4.1(d)
• take climate change into consideration in social,
economic and environmental policies - 4.1(f)
Adaptation Obligations
• formulate national and regional programmes
containing mitigation and adaptation measures 4.1(b)
• cooperate in preparing for adaptation; develop
integrated plans for coastal zone management, water
resources and agriculture and for the protection of areas
affected by drought and flood 4.1(e)
• take climate change into consideration in social,
economic and environmental policies (4.1(f))
Reporting Obligations
• National communications to the COP, reporting on
implementation (Art. 4 (j))
– National inventory of GHGs by sources and sinks
– Steps taken or envisaged to implement the Convention
• Staggered timeframes for different groups of
countries
Obligations on Information
Gathering and Dissemination
• promote and cooperate in scientific research,
systematic observation, development of data
archives (4.1(g) / Art. 5)
• promote and cooperate in education, training
and public awareness related to climate
change (4.1(i) / Art. 6)
Funding Obligations under the UNFCCC
Article 4.3: Developed country Parties shall
–
“provide new and additional financial resources” to meet
developing country costs in reporting on national needs
–
“provide such financial resources needed by developing
country Parties to meet the agreed full incremental costs” of
implementing planning and measures (under Art. 4.1)
Article 4.4: Developed country Parties shall
– “also assist the developing country parties that are particularly
vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change in meeting
costs of adaptation to those adverse effects.”
Article 12:
– All parties must submit national communications, detailing
adaptation and mitigation efforts
– Vulnerability and adaptation assessment, but limited funds
provided for this assessment
Kyoto Protocol then adds…
• Annex I UNFCCC (Developed) Countries commit to
reduce their aggregate emissions by at least 5
percent below 1990 levels between 2008 and 2012
• Quantified Emission Limitation or Reduction
Commitments (QELRCs) for each Annex I Party
• Commitments set out in Annex B of the Kyoto
Protocol
• Assigned Amount Units (AAUs) (budgets for allowed
emissions over a commitment period)
• Covered “basket” of 6 gases
• Flexible mechanisms
Annex B Countries and their
emission targets
EU-15
plus Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia,
Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Monaco, Romania,
Slovakia, Slovenia, Switzerland
-8%
US
-7%
Canada, Hungary, Japan, Poland
-6%
Croatia
-5%
NZ, Russia, Ukraine
0
Norway
1%
Australia
8%
Iceland
10%
Original division of assigned amounts
if US had participated
KP Assigned Amounts
(2008-2012)
Canada
United States
of America
France
Germany
Italy
Japan
Netherlands
Russian
Federation
United
Kingdom of
Great Britain
Kyoto Protocol Flexibility Mechanisms
• Three:
– Joint Implementation (Art. 6)
– Clean Development Mechanism (Art. 12)
– Emissions Trading (Art. 17 KP)
• Do NOT reduce global emissions
• but create flexibility WHERE and by WHOM
reductions are made – optimizing the use of
cheap reduction options
• Use of CDM increases total allowed domestic
emissions in Annex I; projects in developing
countries generate credits to offset emissions in
developed countries
Kyoto Protocol: Flexibility
3 “Flexible” Mechanisms:
Joint
Implementation
Article 6
(ERUs)
Clean
Development
Mechanism
Article 12 (CERs)
Emissions
Trading
Article 17
(AAUs)
A1
A1
A1
A1
A1
NA1
A1
III.
Implementing Bodies
UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol Bodies
COP
(UNFCCC)
189 Parties
President, Bureau
COP/MOP
(Kyoto Protocol)
175 Parties
Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice
Subsidiary Body for Implementation
(SBSTA)
(SBI)
Chair, Vice Chair, Rapporteur
recommendations for draft decisions, conclusions
Chair, Vice-Chair, Rapporteur
recommendations for draft decisions, conclusions
EGTT
CGE
LEG
Expert Group on Technology Transfer
Consultative Group on Non-Annex I
Least Developed Countries
Expert Group
National Communications
A. Subsidiary Body on
Implementation (SBI)
Mandate under Article 10:
• Assist the Parties in the assessment and review of the
effective implementation of the Convention
• Consider information from all Parties on their
emissions inventories and on their steps taken to
implement the Convention reported in national
communications “to assess the overall aggregated
effect of the steps taken by Parties in the light of the
latest scientific assessments concerning climate
change”
• Consider information submitted by Parties through
national communications
B. Subsidiary Body on Scientific
and Technological Advice (SBSTA)
Mandate under Article 9:
• To provide COP and other subsidiary bodies with
timely information and advice on scientific and
technological matters
• Prepare scientific assessments on the effects of
measures taken in the implementation of the
Convention
• Identify innovative, efficient and state of the art
technologies
• Provide advice on scientific programmes and
international cooperation on R&D
3 Expert Groups created by
COP decision
•
•
•
•
•
Consultative Group of Experts on
Non-Annex I Communications (CGE)
Expert Group on Technology Transfer (EGTT)
Least Developed Countries Expert Group
(LEG)
Limited membership
All assist with reporting or implementation
1. Mandate of the Consultative Group of
Experts on Non-Annex I National
Communications (CGE)
• To improve the preparation of national communications
from developing countries
• To examine technical problems and constraints
• To provide inputs to ongoing review and implementation
of the guidelines
• To review existing activities and programmes
• 8/CP.5
• Membership of CGE: 15 developing countries, 6
Annex I parties, 3 international organisations
2. Mandate of the Expert Group on
Technology Transfer (EGTT)
• To facilitate and support financial, institutional and
methodological activities
• To enhance coordination of stakeholders and engage
stakeholders in cooperative efforts
• To accelerate transfer of technologies
• 4/CP.7 and 3/CP.13 (terms of reference)
• Membership of EGTT:
– 9 developing countries, 1 small island state, 7 Annex I
parties, 3 international organisations
3. Mandate of Least Developed
Countries Expert Group (LEG)
• To advise LDCs on the preparation and implementation
strategy for NAPAs
• To provide technical assistance in identifying data and
information for synthesis
• To advise on capacity building needs
• 29/CP.7, 7/CP.9, 4/CP.11, 8/CP.13
• Membership of LEG:
– 5 experts from African LDCs, 2 from Asian LDCs,
2 from small island states, 3 from Annex II parties
Constituted Bodies under the
Kyoto Protocol
•
•
•
•
•
•
Clean Development Mechanism Executive Board
(CDM EB)
Joint Implementation Supervisory Committee (JISC)
Compliance Committee (CC)
Adaptation Fund Board (AFB)
All assist with emissions trading and compliance;
Adaptation Fund receives a share of the proceeds of
CDM projects
All meet inter-sessionally
Mandate of the CDM Executive
Board (EB)
•
Day to day operation of the CDM
–
–
•
•
•
including accreditation of operational entities
approval of methodologies
Applies decision 17/CP.7, ‘Modalities and procedures
for a clean development mechanism as defined in
Article 12 of the Kyoto Protocol’
Issues certified emission reduction units (CERs)
Membership: 10 members (plus alternates), 1 from
each of five UN regions, one small island State, two
developing countries, 2 Annex I
Mandate of the Joint Implementation
Supervisory Committee (JISC)
•
•
•
Verifies emission reduction units (ERUs) transferred
and acquired under Article 6, in host countries that are
not fully meeting eligibility reqs relating to
methodological and reporting obligations
Decision 9/CMP.1 , ‘Guidelines for the Implementation of
Article 6 of the Kyoto Protocol’
Membership: 10 members (plus alternates), 3 from
countries with economies in transition (EIT), three from
non-EIT countries, three from developing countries, and
one small island State
Mandate of the Compliance
Committee
•
•
Decision 27/CMP.1 – procedures and mechanisms
relating to compliance with Kyoto targets and eligibility
for trading
Members serve in individual capacity
•
Membership: 20 members (plus alternates)
–
–
•
10 serve on enforcement branch
10 serve on facilitative branch
Each branch: one from each of 5 UN regional groups,
one small island State, two developing countries, two
from Annex I Parties.
Mandate of the
Adaptation Fund Board
• Decision 1/CMP.3
• To supervise and manage the Adaptation Fund, develop
strategic priorities, policies and guidelines; decide on
projects including allocation of funds.
• Membership: 16 members (plus alternates), two from
each of 5 UN regional groups, one small island State,
one LDC, two developing countries, two from Annex I
Parties.
III.
The Negotiating Process
Source: ENB, www.iisd.ca
Montreal, COP 11 / MOP 1 – Establishment of AWG-KP
and Dialogue on Long-term Cooperative Action
Practical Questions
• How can negotiations even take place on this scale?!!
• What mechanisms enable countries to reach
agreement?
• How do negotiating blocs work?
• How are decisions actually produced?
• What is the role of a ‘contact group’? ‘Informals’? Who
are ‘friends of the chair’?
• Where is my issue being negotiated? How do I follow it?
• Where does negotiating text come from? What is
bracketed text?
• What is the difference between recommendations,
conclusions and decisions?
• What is the value of side-events?
UNFCCC Structure
negotiating process
COP
190+ Parties to the UNFCCC
170+ Parties to the KP
COP/M0P
SBI
SBSTA
Contact Group
Contact Group
Contact Group
Contact Group
Informals
Informals
Subsidiary bodies
serve both COP
and COP/MOP
(CMP)
Contact groups
formed to
negotiate
different issues
For Cancun - 6 negotiating bodies
each with its own agenda
• COP - Conference of the Parties
• COP/MOP - COP serving as the meeting of the Parties
to the Kyoto Protocol
• SBSTA - Subsidiary Body on Scientific and Technical
Advice
• SBI - Subsidiary Body on Implementation
• Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for
Annex I Parties
• Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative
Action to Enhance Implementation of the Convention
Source: ENB, www.iisd.ca
Overview of a negotiating session
Daily Programme – Bali COP 3 – December 3, first day
Example of a Daily Programme – Bali COP
Coalitions
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
EU – European Union (27)
JUSCANNZ - Japan, US, Australia, Canada, NZ,
Norway, Switzerland, Iceland
Umbrella Group – JUSCANNZ plus Russia, Ukraine
Group of 77 & China – developing countries (132)
AOSIS – Alliance of Small Island States (43)
LDC Group – Least Developed Countries in Africa,
Asia, Latin Am (48)
EIG – Environmental Integrity Group (Mexico, Korea,
Switzerland, Monaco, Lichtenstein)
GRULAC – Latin American and the Caribbean and
ASIAN for nominations to regional groupings
Upper end
OPEC
13
G-77
SIDS
43
LDCs
49
Lower end
Differentiation within the G77
Provisional Annotated
Agendas
Copenhagen Agendas for example:
COP
CMP
SBI
SBSTA
AWG-KP
AWG-LCA
FCCC/CP/2009/1
FCCC/KP/CMP/2009/1
FCCC/SBI/2009/9
FCCC/SBSTA/2009/4
FCCC/KP/AWG/2009/15
FCCC/AWGLCA/2009/15
AWG-LCA: Report of the AWG-LCA on its 7th
Session
AWG-KP: ‘Documentation to Facilitate
Negotiations’
Which documentation for
which issue?
• COP, CMP, SBI, SBSTA: annotated
agendas provide citations to relevant
documentation, issues ripe for decisions,
conclusions
• AWG-KP: “Documentation to facilitate
negotiations”
• AWG-LCA: Text to “facilitate negotiations”
Negotiating Process
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
4.
Opening Statements by Heads of Groups (Coalitions) and
Delegations
- At a very general level
Adoption of Agenda, then proceed through each agenda
item
- Oral “interventions” now more specific
Chairs listen to comments, then typically refer issues to
“contact groups” or name persons to facilitate “informal
consultations”
Contact groups open to the public; informals are not
Most heated debates take place in informals
If Parties agree on conclusions or draft decisions, these
conclusions or draft decisions are forwarded back to the
bigger group (SBI, SBSTA, COP or CMP) for adoption
COP 10 – Buenos Aires - 2004
Source: ENB, www.iisd.ca
What outcomes?
• COP and COP MOP take “decisions”, and meet
once a year.
• SBI and SBSTA deliver “conclusions”, and meet
twice a year.
• Often conclusions contain “draft decision text”,
prepared with a view to adoption by the next
COP or COP/MOP.
Provisional Annotated Agenda –
Example for REDD
Helpful materials during session
• Annotated Agendas
• Daily programmes
• Earth Negotiations
Bulletin
• ECO
• TWN Publications
Photo: http://www.iisd.ca/climate (Accra session)
Negotiating etiquette
• Hierarchy of speakers
– Large groups speak first (G-77,
EU, Umbrella Group, AOSIS,
LDC Group, Env’tl Integrity
Group
– Chair of group speaks
– Individual countries take the
floor to support what has been
said and then elaborate
• Diplomatic language
– Mr. Chair, as I am taking the
floor for the first time, let me
express my delegation’s
pleasure to see you once again
leading this process. My
delegation has full confidence in
your abilities to steer us to a
favorable outcome and pledges
its full support to you over the
coming days….
Photos: www.unfccc.int; http://www.iisd.ca/climate
Bracketing text
• ‘The Parties [ are urged to ] [ shall ] [ must ]
[should ] [ may ] submit their reports to the
Secretariat [ before ] [ no later than ]
[January 1, 2005 ] [ June 30, 2005 ] [ the Xth
session of the Subsidiary Bodies].’
• Text may be adopted only after brackets
have been cleared.
• ‘L’ documents - limited circulation documents
AWG-KP Vienna August 2007
V.
Status of the Post-2012
Negotiating Progress
. . . (ii) Nationally-appropriate mitigation actions by developing country
Parties in the context of sustainable development, supported and enabled
by technology, financing and capacity-building, in a measurable, reportable
and verifiable manner
...
(c) Enhanced action on adaptation,
(d) enhanced action on technology development and transfer
(e) enhanced action on financing for mitigation, adaptation,
technology transfer
Annex I Emission Trends: 1990 - 2007
FCCC/SBI/2009/12 (Oct. 2009)
Annex I Party Emission Trends: 1990-2007
FCCC/SBI/2009/12 (Oct. 2009)
Emission Trends: 1990 - 2007
FCCC/SBI/2009/12 (Oct. 2009)
Projected Emissions of GHGs in 2025
% Percent change from 2000
Source: Figure 3.1. Projected Emissions of GHGs in 2025, World Resources Institute
Source: IPCC Third Assessment Report, Summary for Policymakers, Figure SPM 5
(http://www.ipcc.ch/pub/un/syreng/spm.pdf)
Source: IPCC Fourth Assessment Report
Political challenge
• Kyoto Protocol Art. 3.9 requires Parties with targets to begin
discussion of new targets no later than 7 years before the end of
the first commitment period (by 2005).
• Some developed country Convention Parties with major
emissions have decided not to ratify Kyoto Protocol – and thus are
not working within an emissions reduction target
– United States represented 36% of industrialised country
emissions in 1990
• Some developing countries that have ratified Kyoto do not have
targets but have rapidly increasing emissions
– e.g., China, India, Korea; China is the world’s second largest
polluter
How to address this dynamic?
• In addition to Art. 3.9, another process had to be found for engaging
US and developing countries.
• Two parallel processes created in Montreal at COP 11/MOP 1:
1. Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for
Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol (AWG-KP) (discussing
targets)
2. Dialogue on Long-term Cooperative Action to Enhance
Implementation of the Convention under the Convention
(Dialogue)
• In Bali at COP 13, the Dialogue was converted to an Ad Hoc
Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action to Enhance
Implementation of the Convention (AWG-LCA) (discussing efforts
for all Parties under the Convention under 4 ‘building blocks’)
• Both AWGs have work programmes to conclude in Copenhagen,
2009
Montreal, COP 11 / MOP 1 – Establishment of AWG-KP
and Dialogue on Long-term Cooperative Action
1. AWG on Further Commitments for
Annex I Parties (AWG-KP)
• Analysis of mitigation potential of current and future policies,
measures and technologies (what reductions are possible)
• Identification of possible ranges of emission reductions by
Annex I Parties, through their domestic and international
efforts, and analysis of their contribution to the ultimate objective
of the Convention (25-40% below 1990 levels discussed)
• Analysis of means that may be available for Annex I Parties to
reach their emission reduction targets and ways to enhance
these means (e.g., CDM, emissions trading, Joint
Implementation, land use change and forestry, sectoral
emissions, additional gases, sectors)
• Agree upon ranges of emission reductions by Annex I
Parties
• Agree targets
2. Ad Hoc Working Group on Longterm Cooperative Action (AWG- LCA)
Bali Action Plan launches a comprehensive process . . . “to reach
an agreed outcome and adopt a decision at its fifteenth
session, by addressing”, inter alia:
(a) A shared vision for long-term cooperative action, including a
long-term global goal for emission reductions, to achieve the
ultimate objective of the Convention . .
(b) enhanced national/international action on mitigation,
including consideration of
(i) Measurable, reportable, verifiable nationally appropriate
mitigation commitments or actions, including targets, by all
developed country Parties, while ensuring the comparability of
effort among them, taking into account differences in their national
circumstances (United States)
. . . (ii) Nationally-appropriate mitigation actions by developing country
Parties in the context of sustainable development, supported and enabled
by technology, financing and capacity-building, in a measurable, reportable
and verifiable manner
...
(c) Enhanced action on adaptation,
(d) enhanced action on technology development and transfer
(e) enhanced action on financing for mitigation, adaptation,
technology transfer
Key issues in the negotiating process
• The objective of the Convention is to stabilize GHG
emissions to avoid dangerous climate change.
• At what level should GHG concentrations be stabilized?
• Over what time frame? Should there be a peaking year
for global emissions?
– 2015? 2020?
• Should there be a temperature limitation and/or a
concentration limitation?
– e.g., 2 degrees, 1.5 degrees?
– e.g., 450 ppmv, 350 ppmv?
• How to broaden participation of major-emitting
developing countries in emission reductions?
• How to bring in the United States?
• How to bring in major-emitting developing countries?
• How to achieve greater reductions from Annex I Parties
that are already Parties to the KP?
– Should new flexible mechanisms be created?
– Should commitments be established through a top-down process
as in the KP, or a bottom up process as with the Copenhagen
Accord’s pledge and review format?
• Should the KP disappear in favor of one broad Protocol?
– What is lost if the KP is lost?
– Can Parties agree to a second commitment period?
– What happens to the existing flexible mechanisms? The
adaptation fund?
• What is the role of the Copenhagen Protocol?
• How can financing for adaptation and mitigation be
scaled up?
• What can be done about emissions from aviation and
bunker fuels?
– Should the IMO and ICAO address, or the UNFCCC?
– As the IMO and ICAO have different principles (principle of equal
application), what role if any does the UNFCCC principle of
CBDR have?
• What about the impacts on developing countries of
measures that are taken by developed countries to
reduce emissions? (impact of response measures)
• Should more market mechanisms be created to scale up
private sector investment in emission reductions?
– For example through sectoral rather than project based
mechanisms?
Limiting temperature increase to
2 degrees C above pre-industrial levels
CO2-equivalent
Stabilization level
(2005 = 375 ppm
CO2e)
Global Mean
temperature
increase at
equilibrium (ºC)
Global average
sea level rise
at equilibrium
from thermal
expansion only
445 – 490
2.0 – 2.4
0.4 – 1.4
2000 – 2015
-85 to -50
490 – 535
2.4 – 2.8
0.5 – 1.7
2000 – 2020
-60 to -30
535 – 590
2.8 – 3.2
0.6 – 1.9
2010 – 2030
-30 to +5
590 – 710
3.2 – 4.0
0.6 – 2.4
2020 – 2060
+10 to +60
710 – 855
4.0 – 4.9
0.8 – 2.9
2050 – 2080
+25 to +85
855 – 1130
4.9 – 6.1
1.0 – 3.7
2060 – 2090
+90 to +140
Source: Fourth Assessment Report
Year global
CO2 needs to
peak
Reduction in
2050 global
CO2 emissions
compared to
2000
Costs of Adaptation?
Funds available?
Source: WWF, Beyond Adaptation (2008)
COP 12 – Nairobi 2006
Source: ENB, www.iisd.ca
AWG Sessions - Vienna August 2007
AWG-KP Vienna August 2007
V. Ways to Impact the Process
• Organise “side events”
• Draft papers on current negotiating topics
• Discuss issues with negotiators in advance
of the negotiations
• Make formal submissions to the process in
response to a call for submissions
- for AWG-LCA Submissions from observer orgs see:
http://unfccc.int/meetings/ad_hoc_working_groups/lca/items/4381.php
- For examples of submissions by IGOs and NGOs, see:
http://unfccc.int/documentation/documents/document_lists/items/2960
.php
Side events
Sponsored by
• Research organisations
• Parties
• Intergovernmental Orgs
• NGOs
• Trade associations
Informative and open
to the public
Thank you
_____________
M.J. Mace
[email protected]
Decision 1/CP.13 - Bali Action Plan –
elements for consideration on Adaptation
(c) Enhanced action on adaptation, including, inter alia,
consideration of:
(i) International cooperation to support urgent implementation of
adaptation actions, including through vulnerability assessments,
prioritization of actions, financial needs assessments, capacitybuilding and response strategies, integration of adaptation actions
into sectoral and national planning, specific projects and
programmes, means to incentivize the implementation of adaptation
actions, and other ways to enable climate-resilient development and
reduce vulnerability of all Parties, taking into account the urgent and
immediate needs of developing countries that are particularly
vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change, especially the
least developed countries and small island developing States,
and further taking into account the needs of countries in Africa
affected by drought, desertification and floods;
• (ii) Risk management and risk reduction strategies, including risk
sharing and transfer mechanisms such as insurance;
• (iii) Disaster reduction strategies and means to address loss and
damage associated with climate change impacts in developing
countries that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of
climate change;
• (iv) Economic diversification to build resilience;
• (v) Ways to strengthen the catalytic role of the Convention in
encouraging multilateral bodies, the public and private sectors and
civil society, building on synergies among activities and processes,
as a means to support adaptation in a coherent and integrated
manner.