Transcript the slides - University of Sussex

Technology development and transfer
in the Paris Agreement: taking account
of innovation systems and capabilities?
Energy and Climate Seminar Series
Sussex Energy Group
October 4, 2016
Heleen de Coninck
Department of Environmental Science
Faculty of Science
Outline
The international climate negotiations and what happened at
COP21 in Paris
Zooming in on technology and innovation
• History of technology in the climate negotiations
• Article 10 on Technology in the Paris Agreement
• What functions does it fulfil?
Conclusions and discussion
Based on work with Ambuj Sagar (IIT Delhi), contribution to a book “Guide to the Paris
Agreement”, Oxford University Press, forthcoming
Republic of Indonesia
Each country has its own story
But most of them
• Rely heavily on fossil fuels for their
energy (80% of global energy
supply)
• Are not aware of their population’s
vulnerability for climate change
• See climate change mitigation as a
burden on the economy
Disinclined to incur high costs to solve
a contested problem with limited
political gain
How to get agreement among 192 countries
with very different stories and interests?
1997: Kyoto
Protocol
2009: Copenhagen
2015: Paris
•
•
•
•
Emission
reduction targets
for rich countries
(by 2008-2012)
Emissions trading
•
Summit failed: no
new treaty
Two-degrees
target agreed
•
Top-down approach
abandoned
Countries contribute
what they want
For example: Ethiopia
Source: Ethiopian INDC , June 2015
www.unfccc.int – INDC portal
The dry stuff: what was agreed?
COP-decision to adopt the Paris Agreement (annex to the decision)
• “…notes that much greater emission reduction efforts will be required than
those associated with the intended nationally determined contributions”
• “….by reducing (greenhouse gas) emissions to 40 gigatonnes in 2030” (in
stead of projected 55 Gt)
In the Paris Agreement:
• Not two degrees, but “well below 2 degrees” or even 1,5 degrees
• “to achieve a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources and
removals by sinks of greenhouse gases in the second half of this century”
• Legally binding and five-year review: ratification needed by 55 Parties
representing 55% of global GHG emissions
Gains and red lines for different country groups
United States: No mention of the United States or
strong language on absolute emission reductions
China: Sovereignty, no qualification as a
developed country
India: No obligation for developing countries
European Union: legal force, review
Small Island States: 1.5 degrees option
Least-developed countries: significant support for
finance, technology, capacity
Saudi Arabia: no decarbonisation
Helpful circumstances
Excellent chairmanship by France
Recent government changes in Canada,
Australia, Venezuela
Low oil prices
Dropping renewable energy costs
Paris terror attacks (?)
History of technology transfer in the UNFCCC
UNFCCC
Article 4.5 on
technology
transfer
Cancun
Agreements
Kyoto
COP 7:
Technology
transfer
framework
Paris
Agreement
Bali Action
Plan
Technology
Mechanism
established
Technology
framework
(re?)established
Expert Group on TT
Technology Mechanism
1992
1997
2000
2007
2010
2014
2015
Technology Mechanism (since COP16): two strands
Technology Executive Committee
Climate Technology Centre and
Network (CTCN)
20 members, mix of experts and
negotiators
Met 13 times since its inception
TEC briefs as main information channel
Mandate e.g.:
• “collaboration on the development
and transfer of technologies for
mitigation and adaptation between
governments, the private sector,
nonprofit organizations and academic
and research communities”
• seeks “cooperation with relevant
international technology initiatives,
stakeholders and organizations”
Independent institution based at UNEP
in Copenhagen
Overseen by a CTCN Advisory Board
Mandate e.g.:
• Facilitate a network of national,
regional, sectoral and international
technology networks, organizations
and initiatives
• Responds to requests made by
developing countries through their
National Designated Entities (NDEs),
the focal points in countries of the
CTCN
However, problems with Technology Mechanism
• Developed countries don’t want to help their future competitors (the
‘China trauma’)
- Companies want to protect their interests (and misconceptions on intellectual
property rights)
• Misconceptions of what is needed
- Developing countries: we need to build innovation systems through capabilities
- Developed countries: markets work! They are a part of innovation systems
• Technology Executive Committee fairly political (not fully an expert body)
• CTCN underfunded – link to Green Climate Fund missing
• R&D capabilities in developing countries underrated
Paris agreement on technology (Article 10) (1/2)
1. Parties share a long-term vision on the importance of fully realizing
technology development and transfer in order to improve resilience to climate
change and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
- What does “fully realizing” mean?
2. Parties (…) shall strengthen cooperative action on technology development and
transfer
3. The Technology Mechanism established under the Convention shall serve this
Agreement
- Seen as an important step by some (there was a threat that TM would die out
completely)
4. Technology framework provides overarching guidance for the work of the
Technology Mechanism
- The surprise. Different from “Technology transfer framework” (2001).
Paris agreement on technology (Article 10) (2/2)
5. Recognition that innovation is important and needs financing: “Such effort shall
be, as appropriate, supported, including by the Technology Mechanism and, through
financial means, by the Financial Mechanism of the Convention, for collaborative
approaches to research and development, and facilitating access to technology, in
particular for early stages of the technology cycle, to developing country Parties”
6. “Support, including financial support, shall be provided to developing country
Parties for the implementation of this Article, including for strengthening cooperative
action on technology development and transfer at different stages of the technology
cycle (..)
The global stocktake referred to in Article 14 shall take into account available
information on efforts related to support on technology development and transfer for
developing country Parties.”
Technology in the UNFCCC:
Recognising innovation systems?
- Innovation systems discussed in the TEC (National Systems of Innovation)
- Since then, officially used but linear model still intrinsic in conversations
- Recognition of the capability problem in the technology cycle
- Recognition of “cooperative action” – establishing network
- Climate Technology Network (as part of the CTCN): currently >100
members but no vision on how to use it
Conclusions: Paris as a launching pad
Best possible outcome, but insufficient for its own ambitions
Introduction of a positive dynamic?
• Ambition enabling implementation
• Implementation leading to more ambition
Technology: continued recognition, unclear whether much will change
Next question: Implementation, implementation, implementation
Thank you for your attention
ICTSD report: Coninck & Sagar (2015):
http://www.ictsd.org/themes/innovation-andip/research/technology-in-the-2015-paris-climateagreement-and-beyond