UNECA Seventh African Development Forum10-15 October 2010UNCC, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Dan Bondi OgollaChief Legal AdviserUNFCCC secretariat<unfccc.int>

Climate Change Negotiations & The Cancun Outcomes

I. The current negotiation mandates

Overview: Negotiations under the Convention and under the Kyoto Protocol

COP 15 (2009)

Copenhagen

Kyoto Protocol

Convention

COP 11CMP 1 (2005)

Montreal

COP 13 (2007)

Bali

COP 16 (2010)Cancun

Long-Term Cooperative Action: Dialogue & BAP

Further commitments for Annex I Parties

Mandate

1/CMP.1under the Kyoto Protocol

Ad hoc working group onfurther commitments for

Annex I Parties(AWG-KP)

Specific mandate to agree targetsfor CP.2

1/CP.13under the UNFCCC

Ad hoc working group onlong-term cooperative action

(AWG-LCA)

Broad mandate to ensure long-termimplementation of the Convention

AWG-LCA Mandate

•Decision 1/CP.13–A comprehensive process to enable the full, effective and sustained implementation of the Convention through LCA, now, up to until & beyond 2012

AWG-LCA Mandate

– In order to reach an agreed outcome and adopt a decision at COP 15

– By addressing:• A shared vision for co-operative action –

including a long-term global goal for emissions reduction;

AWG-LCA Mandate

• Enhanced national/international action on mitigation of climate change including:

– MRV national mitigation commitments or actions, including QELRCs for all developed countries;

– NAMAs by developing countries – supported & enabled by technology, financing, & CB, in a MRV manner.

• Enhanced action on adaptation• Enhanced action on technology

development and transfer to support mitigation & adaptation actions

AWG-LCA Mandate

• Enhanced action on provision of financial resources & investment to support mitigation & adaptation actions

• Capacity-building

Process to be conducted in AWG-LCAWork to be completed in 2009 & report to

COP 15

AWG-LCA Mandate

• The “agreed outcome” can take several forms– A new protocol under the Convention;– A set of decisions by the COP; or– A combination of the above.

• Raises the issue of the architecture of the post-2012 climate change regime.

AWG-LCA Issues & OutcomesA Shared vision on long-term

cooperative action:• The long-term global goal for emission

reductions and associated considerations

• Expression of a shared vision for all elements of the Bali Action Plan

• Review– Long-term global goal– Overall progress in implementing the

Convention

AWG-LCA Issues & Outcomes• Expressed as an aspirational long-term global goal:

– GHG concentrations to below 300ppm CO2 equivalent; - maintaining temperature rise to below 1.5 C;- collectively reduce global emissions by 50-85-95 more than 100% by 2050.

• Expressed as mid-term goal for AI:- peaking of GHG emissions by 2015/2020;- reduction by 40-50% by 2020, 80-95% by 2050.-DCs to mobilize USD 100 billion/make assessed contributions of 1.5 of GDP a year by 2020.

Issues & Cancun OutcomesMitigation under the BAP

– Commitments or actions by developed country Parties

– NAMAs by developing country Parties– Reducing emissions from deforestation

and forest degradation in dcs and the role of forests (REDD-plus)

– Cooperative sectoral approaches and sector-specific actions;

– Various approaches, including opportunities for using markets;

– Economic and social consequences of response measures

Issues & Cancun OutcomesIssues in Developed Countries

mitigation• How to define & adopt targets: bottom-

up (pledges) or top-down (int’lly negotiated based on agreed aggregate;

• Where to negotiate: AWG-LCA or AWG-KP;

• MRV: Kyoto-rules or simple pledge & review;

• Comparability of effort: through int’l process or a non-quantifiable general principle.

AWG-LCA Issues

Issues in Developing Countries Mitigation:

– BAP-1 (b) (ii) – NAMAs in the context of SD, supported and enabled by technology, finance and CB, in a MRV manner;

– 3 Types of NAMAs:i. Domestically funded;ii. Supported NAMAs; and iii. NAMAs undertaken to generate carbon

credits

AWG-LCA Issues

Issues in Developing Countries Mitigation

• Packaging of NAMAs in an Appendix II;• Mitigation Mechanism for technical support

& provision of financial, technological & CB support;

• NAMA Registry – NAMAs implemented through or seeking int’l support to be recorded. Functions of registry.

• MRV of NAMAs – domestic/int’l; ICA - facilitative, technical transparent, confidence-building,Party-driven process that respects national sovereignty

AWG-LCA Issues

Issues in Adaptation• Adaptation Framework: to enhance action & int’l

cooperation;• Parties - planning, prioritizing & implementing

adaptation actions; impact & vulnerability assessments; strengthening institutional capacities; building resilience of socio-economic and ecological systems.

• Process for LDCs to formulate and implement national adaptation plans.

• Scaled-up financial support as well as technological and CB assistance;

• Adaptation Committee (and its functions) or existing institutional arrangements.

• International mechanism to address loss and damage.

AWG-LCA Issues

Technology in the BAP• BAP- 1(d)- Enhanced action on technology

development & transfer to support action on mitigation and adaptation: - Removal of obstacles & provision of financial & other incentives for scaling-up development and transfer of ESTs;-Ways to accelerate deployment, diffusion & transfer of affordable ESTs; -Cooperation in R&D;-Mechanisms & tools for cooperation in specific sectors.

AWG-LCA Issues

Issues in Technology Development & Transfer:

• Technology Mechanism & functions -To consist of a Technology Executive Committee & a Climate Technology Centre & Network; -Functions of TEC: needs assessments; policies & guidance to COP; promote cooperation; address IPR issues; -CTCN: provide advice & support to Parties; facilitate deployment of technologies

• The role of IPRs.• MRV of technological transfer and diffusion.

AWG-LCA Issues

Issues in Finance:• Sources of financing: public or private?

New market mechanism under the Convention?

• Institutional Issues: FM Governance – New body of the FM; Strengthen existing institutions – Role of GEF; New Fund and its Finance Board; Funding windows – mitigation, adaptation.

• Fast start finance: USD 30B for 2010-2012.

• MRV of financial support.

AWG-LCA Issues

REDD-Plus in the BAP:BAP-1(b)iii-Policy approaches & positive

incentives on issues relating to reducing emissions from deforestation & forest degradation in dcs; and the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of carbon stocks in dcs.

• Forests play an important role in global C budget, acting either as sinks or sources of C.

Issues and Cancun Outcomes

Issues in REDD-plus• Establishment of a REDD-plus

mechanism & its functions;• Actions in the forest sector &

incentives – eligibility for funding;• Role of indigenous peoples & local

communities;• Launch of a readiness phase for

REDD-plus.

Issues in REDD-plus:Different phases for implementing

REDD-plus activities: an initial readiness phase, a policy implementation and demonstration activities phase and a full implementation phase. Each of these phases will likely require different levels and/or types of financing.

AWG-LCA Cancun OutcomesBalanced Outcome in Cancun under the

BAP:• At the August session in Bonn Parties called for

a politically balanced outcome in Cancun covering all elements of the BAP.

• The outcome to be in the form of decisions for immediate implementation.

• But also call for balance between the 2 tracks.• The AWG-LCA Chair tabled at the session held

in Tianjin last elements of such an outcome. These are:

Shared Vision: for long-term cooperation +long-term global goal for reductions; process to review progress + goal.

Issues & Cancun OutcomesMitigation:• Targets or actions for DCs;• MRV for developed countries & actions;• NAMAs by developing countries & associated

support;• MRV for NAMAs;• Readiness phase of mitigation activities in the

forest sector (REDD-plus);• PoW on mitigation in agriculture;• Bunker fuels;• Various approaches, including markets;• Econ & soc consequences of response

measures

Issues & Cancun Outcomes

Adaptation:• Adaptation framework &

implementation institutions.• Approach to address loss &

damage.

Issues & Cancun OutcomesFinance, Technology & CB• Reporting on fast-start finance;• New Fund & process of its design;• Arrangements to improve coherence &

coordination in CC financing- Oversight Body;

• Mobilization of long-term finance;• MRV of support;• Establishment of Tech Mech, TEC & CTCN• CB

III. AWG-KP Mandate

• I/CMP.1: a process to consider “further commitments” of AIPs for the period beyond 2012 in accordance with Art. 3.9 of the KP -AIP targets.

• Other issues– Mechanisms– LULUCF– Greenhouse gases, sectors & source

categories– Potential consequences

• Art. 3.9 - commitments for CPs adopted through amendments to Annex B.

AWG-KP Issues

Scale of Annex I Parties emission reductions (IPCC AR 4 ranges of 25-40%)– Proposals: range 15 to 50% by in 2020; &

80-95% by 2050.– Current pledges by AIPs (bottom-up)

reduction of 17-25% by 2020;– Upper range of pledges conditional upon

major economies action• Means of achieving the QELROs:

– Role of mechanisms and supplementarity of their use to domestic emission reductions

– Role of the LULUCF sector and rules for CP2;– How to treat assigned amounts carry-overs

from the CP1 and surplus units in CP2

Outcome under the AWG-KP• Transforming pledges into QELROs

– Base year: 1990, 2000 and 2005– Number and duration of CPs one (2013-

2020), or two (2013-2017, 2018-2022)– Starting point for emissions trajectory for

transforming pledges into QELROs: current level of emissions, or QELROs for CP1

• LULUCF: Negotiations on the definitions, modalities, rules and guidelines for the treatment of land use, land use change and forestry in CP2

AWG-KP Issues

Mechanisms:• increase the scope of the mechanisms

(nuclear in CDM/JI, CCS in CDM)• change the operation of the

mechanisms (co-benefits in CDM/JI, standardized baselines in CDM, discount factors in CDM, regional distribution in CDM)

• accounting rules (carryover limits CP2 to CP3, share of proceeds, access to emissions trading and use of units)

• establish new market mechanisms

AWG-KP Issues

• GHGs, sectors and source categories– Prevent the use and emission of “new gases”

as alternatives to those being phased out under the MP: E.g. new species of HFCs and PFCs.

Potential consequences of policies of AIPs:-Enhance understanding;-Provision of info & assessment of impacts;-Permanent forum for reporting & evaluating

impacts & consequences.

AWG-KP Cancun Outcomes

• Clarity on the future of KP: CP 2;

• Formalization of mitigation pledges put forward by AIPs in 2010;

• Agreement on number and duration of commitment periods?

• Agreement on base-year?

Thank you!

For further information: <unfccc.int>