Technical Expert Meetings (TEM)

Download Report

Transcript Technical Expert Meetings (TEM)

GCCA Intra-ACP Programme
ACP Special meeting in preparation
for the UNFCCC COP21
28th and 29th October, 2015
ACP House, Brussels
Mr Hernán Carlino
Senior Expert
Climate Support Facility
An initiative of the ACP Group of States funded by the European Union
The international landscape
The 2015 Agreement
Structure of the negotiation text
Elements of the Agreement
o Mitigation
o Adaptation
o Loss and Damage
o REDD-plus
o Finance
o Technology Transfer
o Capacity-building
• Workstream 2
The international landscape
• Challenges:
 Time is running out to act on climate change
 There are other pressing needs:
for poverty eradication;
income security and creation of new jobs:
achieving universal access to energy, food,
water, transportation, waste and housing
services; and,
 improving public health and education.
Ensure equitable access to sustainable development
The international landscape
• Those challenges cannot be addressed
• Ambitious climate mitigation and robust adaptation
are needed to avoid that sustainable development
and human wellbeing be hindered by climate
change impacts.
• However, the challenges currently posed by climate
change lose significance compared with what is
anticipated will occur.
The international landscape
• Broader global impacts on human life, ecosystems,
migration patterns and political stability, as well as
food and water security, are to be expected.
• Hence the future of the world’s climate system is
likely to be heavily dependent on actions to address
climate change urgently and over the next few
• An agreement in Paris is essential to launch
cooperative action at scale.
A 2015 Agreement as part of a Paris Package?
• A 2015 Agreement
• A Paris Pledge
• Commitment to the Implementation of the
• Acceleration of action
• Climate Finance as a pillar
• Technology enabling framework, in particular
through funding for innovation
• Coalitions for enhanced action
The 2015 Agreement
• Paris may be seen as the completion of a process
that started in Bali
• It can also be seen as a definition on how and
when developing countries come into the climate
regime and under what terms.
• An agreement that creates a climate risk
management regime
The 2015 Agreement
• Paris may be seen as the completion of a process
that started in Bali
• It can also be seen as the definition on how
developing countries come into the climate regime
and under what terms.
• An agreement that creates a climate risk
management regime
• A below 2°C agreement?
The 2015 Agreement
• Conditions
o A balanced agreement
o Creates a governance system
o Ensures environmental integrity
o Enhances justice and equity
o Is transparent
o Flexible
o Capable of moving from international debate to
international cooperation
o Reporting, review and communication
The 2015 Agreement
• Key elements
o It must be clear on when we meet again to
address the emissions gap
o Allows only to increase ambition
o A clear and precise review and ratchet up
Structure of the Text
Draft agreement and draft decision on workstreams 1 and 2 of the Ad Hoc
Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action
A. Draft Agreement: Preambular part and 26 articles.
Definitions, General, Mitigation (3 bis REDD+), Adaptation, Loss and Damage, Finance, Technology
Development and Transfer, Capacity-Building, Transparency, Global Stocktaking, Facilitating Implementation
and Compliance, CMA, Secretariat, SBSTA an SBI, Bodies and Institutional Arrangements, Signature and
Instruments, Further Requirements, Enter into Force, Amendments, Annexes, Settlement of Disputes, Voting,
Depositary, Reservations, Withdrawal, Languages
B. Draft Decision
I. Adoption of the Paris [agreement]
II. Intended Nationally Determined Contributions
III. Decision to give effect to the agreement
IV. Workstream 2 (issued separately)
Draft decision on workstream 2:
I.Preamble; II. Mitigation; III. Support; IV. Accelerated Implementation: V. Non-Party
Stakeholder Engagement; VI High Level Dialogue; VII Adaptation;
Elements of the Agreement
Central to climate action planning and implementation
Loss and damage
Means of implementation:
Finance, technology transfer, and capacity building
• Temperature Goal
o Referring to collective efforts, discussions have
addressed whether to include the temperature goal
and, if so, in which part of the agreement.
o The idea of including the temperature goal brought
back discussions about whether the agreement
should remain within the 2ºC goal or escalate
ambition for a 1.5ºC goal. The release of the report
on the 2013-2015 Review by the Structured Expert
Dialogue (SED) provides the basis to consider
strengthening the global goal to limit warming to
below 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.
• Temperature Goal
o A number of developing countries support the
inclusion of a temperature goal within the
agreement’s objective,
o The US supports reflecting the temperature goal in
the preamble, and refer to ‘net-zero emissions’ or
‘carbon neutrality’.
o Bolivia, the African Group and AOSIS supported
reference to a 1.5°C goal.
o The EU supports the agreement be compatible with
the below 2ºC objective
• Intended Nationally Determined Contributions
o The term ‘contributions’ emerged due to opposition by
China, India and others to refer to ‘commitments’ in an
agreement ‘applicable to all’. The term itself seems to imply
that actions are voluntary and confirm that the agreement
will be structured in a ‘bottom-up’ fashion. However, some
countries prefer contributions, others commitments and
others actions.
o The COP in Warsaw requested Parties to “initiate or
intensify domestic preparations for their INDCs, without
prejudice to the legal nature of the contributions”, which was
reiterated in Lima.
• Intended Nationally Determined Contributions
o Still there is no clarity on whether contributions
communicated by parties will be legally-binding.
o The discussions should clarify whether NDCs will be
internationally legally-binding or just nationally determined.
o Their legal character should- ideally- be established in the
agreement’s provisions and may differ from the legal nature
of the agreement.
• Deep implications of the contributions, including:
o underlying changes in global energy systems
o acceleration and consolidation of deep decarbonization paths,
• Massive submission of INCDs
• However, aggregate of INDCs is not enough.
Contributions not in a trajectory to below 2°C.
• Even if INDCs submitted INDCs will slow energy
emissions growth dramatically they still Set a path
for 2.7°C rise.
• Issues:
o How to secure that the global carbon budget
is not prematurely exhausted through non
cooperative action and free riding?
o How to address the mitigation gap?
o How to ensure the mutual reinforcement of
Intended Nationally Determined
Contributions (INDCs) and Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs)?
• Issues:
o The 2015 Agreement should establish a
clear mechanism to allow the regular,
predictable and timely revision of national
contributions and the global framework.
o The analysis of INDCs indicate that despite
proposed efforts there are risks of lock-in into
a high carbon trajectory if action is not
strengthened quickly.
• An international review of INDCs could contribute to
collective efforts and achievement.
• Different views were reflected in the GNT on how revision of
the aggregate effect of efforts should be done and what
would be the consequence of such a review, including
whether countries should adjust their mitigation (finance,
capacity building and technology transfer) contributions.
• Initially an ex-ante review was proposed to review the
aggregate level of INDCs presented, although at this point it
is clear that such a procedure would not be feasible before
Paris, although the report to be presented in November
2015 by the Secretariat will provide an indication of the
collective efforts.
• On adaptation, Parties discussed, inter alia:
o the relationship between collective and individual efforts;
o the difference between a goal/vision and collective effort;
o concerns about linking adaptation finance and the level of
mitigation achieved globally.
o using the best available science;
o linkages between adaptation and support;
o country-driven approaches to monitoring and evaluation;
o concerns with the term “mainstreaming”;
o avoiding prescriptive language on adaptation communications;
o gender-sensitive and human rights-based approaches;
o adaptation finance emerged as a cross-cutting issue.
• Issues being discussed in the last session of the
ADP included, inter alia :
o A global goal/long-term vision, including “enhancing
adaptive capacity”,
o Links between the level of mitigation and adaptation,
o The resilience of people and livelihoods to abrupt
climate change
o Adequacy of support: text on adaptation support to be
considered in other articles;
o Human rights and gender responsiveness of
Loss and Damage
• The negotiations on loss and damage evidences
one of the major fault lines in this process.
• COP 19 (Warsaw) established the Warsaw International
Mechanism for Loss and Damage associated with Climate
Change Impacts (WIM), subject to review by COP 22,
including on “its structure, mandate and effectiveness,” to
address loss and damage associated with extreme weather
and slow onset events in developing countries that are
particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate
• The future of loss and damage in the 2015
Agreement is considered under the ADP.
Loss and Damage
• According to AOSIS, LDCs, and LMDCs, the 2015
Agreement is to contain a separate section on loss and
damage in the agreement text.
• In addition, LDCs call for the 2015 Agreement to provide for
corresponding costs, including investment needs for risk assessment,
risk management, insurance and compensation, including the
associated overall costs and impacts of the residual damages occurring
in the form of loss and damage.
• Institutional arrangements, including a climate change displacement
coordination facility to deal with relocation and population displacement,
and a technical panel;
• A compensation scheme for countries affected by slow onset events.
Loss and Damage
• Loss and damage is addressed in Article 5 of the draft
agreement text. However, in the loss and damage
agreement text, both options were separately bracketed in
their entirety by Parties.
• Option 2 indicates that “No reference to loss and damage
(no Article 5).”
• It remains to be seen whether this is only a negotiation ruse
or a group of Parties is not willing to risk the implications of
establishing the entire loss and damage mechanism.
• REDD-plus includes activities pursuant to reducing
emissions from deforestation and forest
degradation in developing countries, and the role of
conservation, sustainable management of forests,
and enhancement of forest carbon stocks
• The Warsaw Framework for REDD-plus, comprises
seven decisions on REDD-plus finance, institutional
arrangements and methodological issues.
• The main questions on the incorporation of REDD+
into the 2015 agreement concern whether:
o REDD+ actions will be accounted for the
accomplishment of mitigation actions; and,
o whether countries willing to do so would be
able to use markets to finance REDD+.
• Predictability and availability of financing is a
relevant issue that will largely depend on how
REDD+ is included in the 2015 agreement.
• During its last session in June, SBSTA has agreed
on forwarding three draft decisions on REDD+ for
consideration by the COP to adopt in Paris.
• These decisions address:
o further consideration of guidance for
o non-market mechanisms; and,
o non-carbon benefits.
Means of Implementation
• Securing real rights of access to enhanced finance,
technology transfer and capacity development
opportunities for developing countries is the only
way of implementing the Common but
Differentiated Responsibilities.
• Means of implementation are essential to allow
developing countries that are currently building
much of their infrastructure to avoid being locked
into a high‐carbon development and increasingly
vulnerable pathway.
Means of Implementation
• MOI as a framework that facilitates developing
countries to implement and reinforce their INDCs
and their overall adaptation efforts through access
o climate finance, to be able to de‐risk future
investment and facilitate access to capital;
o knowledge networks to share experiences,
including about institutional upgradation and
technological innovation; and
o high‐level academic education, international
scientific programs and R&D cooperation.
Climate Finance
• Climate finance is a pivotal element of the
Agreement, both a means and an incentive to
• Thus, a critical component of success.
• Economic and solidarity dimensions should be
considered and addressed effectively.
Climate Finance
• Issues:
o How financial commitments are expressed and
o Will there be an upgrade of contributions by
large emerging economies?
o How to ensure scaled up climate finance in line
with enhanced ambition in mitgation and
Climate Finance
• There is a need for an upgrading of the Green
Climate Fund and expanding international public
climate finance, despite pressures on public
• Despite the operationalization of the GCF being a
relevant step, outstanding issues on long-term
finance remain, which include the amount of
climate finance, who is providing the financial
support and public versus private sources of
Climate Finance
• Innovative financial instruments and enhanced
coordination -within the international financial
system- focused on mobilizing and making
available financial streams at a scale
commensurate with developing countries
requirements, should be put in place.
Climate Finance
• There are a number of conditions that allow to
expand climate finance, beyond the current limited
pledges, to address the finance gap:
o Huge liquidity at the global level
o Massive investment capacity by institutional
o Monetary policies to be deployed, including
the experience gained in quantitative easing
during the last financial crisis.
Technology Transfer
• Most discussions on this issue this year related to
the linkage between finance and technology
transfer and how to integrate the created
mechanisms for this purpose, including the
Technology Executive Committee (TEC) and the
Climate Technology Centre and Network (CTCN)
vis-à-vis the new agreement.
• Most long-lasting issues on which Parties have
different views pertain to institutional arrangements
and IPRs
Capacity Building
• Key issues under discussion continue to be
whether a new capacity-building mechanism should
be created, a view that is supported by developing
• Developed countries oppose, suggesting the
Durban Forum on Capacity-building could be
• A few Parties stressed that regardless of whether
the institution is new or old, its ability to meet the
capacity-building needs of developing countries will
be defined by its work programme.
Work stream 2
• This workstream has received less attention than
workstream 1.
• This is an issue of discussion where developing
countries deem a decision on this workstream as a
key element of the ‘Paris package’.
• To enhance ambition, in the past years, developing
countries have emphasized the need to not only
talk about mitigation ambition but also to enhance
means of implementation, including capacity
building, finance and technology transfer.
Work stream 2
• Technical Expert Meetings (TEM): Decision 1/CP.19 agreed to intensify
the technical examination of opportunities for actions with high mitigation
potential through TEMs. The technical examination process consists of
regular in-session thematic TEMs and follow up work conducted by
parties, international organizations and partnerships.
• The Technical Examination Process (TEP): the COP in Lima decided
to continue the technical examination of opportunities with high
mitigation potential in the period 2015-2020, including those with
adaptation health and sustainable development co-benefits and
requested the ADP to make recommendations on further advancing the
examination process including the periodic assessment of the TEMs, to
COP 21
Work stream 2
• Despite its adoption in 2012, the Doha Amendment to the
Kyoto Protocol, whose second commitment period is
expected to end in 2020, has not yet entered into force.
• The entry into force requires 144 ratifications but, as of 2
September 2015, 43 countries have ratified.
• The Lima-Paris Action Agenda (LPAA) is aimed at
strengthening climate action throughout 2015, in Paris in
December in areas such as mobilizing robust global action
towards low carbon and resilient societies; providing
enhanced support to existing initiatives; mobilizing new
partners and providing a platform for the visibility of their
actions, commitments and results in the run up to COP21.
• Thank you
• Contact: Dr. Pendo MARO, ACP Secretariat
[email protected] or +32 495 281 494