Technical paper Summary of the COP16/CMP6 CANCUN AGREEMENT (29th November - 11th December 2010)
Prepared by: Daniela Stoycheva- climate change policy advisor UNDP BRC Bratislava, Slovakia, 10 January 2011
General observation ........................................................................................................................... 3
Cancun Agreement – technical review (1/CP.16 and 1/CMP.6) ....................................................... 4
Shared vision for long-term cooperative action ......................................................................................... 4 Mitigation .................................................................................................................................................. 6 3.
Other COP/CMP decisions .............................................................................................................. 10 3.1.
Clean Development Mechanism (CDM): ................................................................................ 10
Joint Implementation (JI):........................................................................................................ 11
Compliance: ............................................................................................................................. 12
Parties’ proposals for Protocol Amendments: ......................................................................... 12
Adaptation Fund: ..................................................................................................................... 12
Kazakhstan’s proposal to amend the Protocol: ........................................................................ 13
Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI-33)................................................................................ 13
Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA 33)......................................... 17
Other useful information.................................................................................................................. 20
General observation Governments met in Cancun, Mexico, from 29th November until 11th December 2010, for 16th Conference of the Parties (COP16) under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, and the 6th Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP6). As a result of extensive negotiations, the COP and CMP adopted the Cancun Agreement a set of decisions that will finally lead to a new treaty for post-2012 global climate change regime. A number of institutional mechanisms were established in Cancun to deal with adaptation, mitigation, financing, technology transfer, REDD+ and capacity building. The Cancun decisions set in place the working groups and committees to develop the details of operationalization of the agreed mechanisms to be agreed at COP17/CMP7 in Durban, South Africa in 2012. A major part of the success in Cancun can be attributed to the Mexican Presidency. Their tireless efforts before and during the meeting, as well as their diplomatic skills, consultations, and respect for transparency, made this conference a success. After the breakdown of the negotiations in Copenhagen in 2009, the Cancun Conference has restored the confidence of the international community in UN process and in multilateralism. Although not a treaty, the decisions are formal agreements under the COP and CMP, and governments see this package as laying the foundation for a post-2012 climate regime. Importantly from a development policy perspective, the package “realizes that addressing climate change requires a paradigm shift towards building a low-carbon society that offers substantial opportunities and ensures continued high growth and sustainable development”. The agreement covers both the UNFCC Convention and the Kyoto Protocol negotiating tracks. The Cancun Agreement is a comprehensive decision under the Convention, and sets up a wide variety of new instruments, mechanisms, and processes under the UNFCCC. The agreement reaffirms that negotiations will continue on finalizing this in a treaty in a near future (two additional meetings of the AWGs were agreed to take place in 2011, the place and time to be decided). The decision on the Kyoto Protocol complements this by agreeing to continue its work, with a view to have in place a second commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol for developed countries to begin in 2013. The main achievements of the Cancun Agreement are formalizing the agreements that were contained within the Copenhagen Accord, establishing the Green Climate Fund and guiding work in areas such as the technology mechanism and adaptation framework. Much work needs to be done to establish a comprehensive long-term framework for controlling the emissions of greenhouse gases under the KP. In fact, the majority of the work still has to be undertaken and hard decisions on targets and timetables (and to which countries they apply) have still to be tackled. It is likely that 2011 will be rather a ―technical‖ year of negotiations, implementing the decisions from Cancun and building up the institutions that have been detailed in the Cancun Agreement. 3
At the closing Plenary all governments expressed a renewed energy to build on this foundation and continue working together in 2011. Notably, Bolivia was not content with the package of decisions, expressing strong concerns over environmental integrity and the outlook for the Kyoto Protocol. However, while noting this opposition, the conference President H.E. Patricia Espinoza, Mexican Minister of Foreign Affairs - pushed through the package for adoption on the understanding that one country could not ―veto‖ a deal that is supported by all other governments. Cancun therefore sets a new precedent for international climate negotiations - one in which opposition from one party is not necessarily able to derail negotiations. The formal meetings of UNFCCC COP 16; Kyoto Protocol COP/MOP 6; Thirteenth session of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the UNFCCC (AWG-LCA 13); Fifteenth session of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties under Kyoto Protocol (AWG-KP 15); and Thirty-third sessions of the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI 33) and Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA 33) resulted in the adoption of a number of COP decisions, CMP decisions and a number of conclusions by the subsidiary bodies. These outcomes covered a wide range of topics, but with the exception of the continued reform of the CDM were, in principle, solely procedural to enable continued operation of the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol. Cancun Agreement – technical review (1/CP.16 and 1/CMP.6)
The Cancun Agreement was the key outcome from COP16 and CMP6 and is detailed in decisions 1/CP.16 and 1/CMP.6. 2.1.
The outcome of work by the AWG-LCA
The outcome of AWG-LCA contains the main elements of the Bali Action Plan, namely: a shared vision for long-term cooperative action; adaptation; mitigation; finance; technology; capacity building and others, which are now included in Decision 1/CP.16. This decision also extends the mandate of the AWG-LCA to 2011 to carry out the undertakings contained in the decision. It also continues the discussions of legal options to complete an agreed outcome based on the Bali Action Plan. The AWG-LCA has been requested to present the results for adoption at COP17 in Durban. Shared vision for long-term cooperative action The shared vision of the Agreement affirms that the climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our time. Further affirms that scaled up overall mitigation efforts are needed; adaptation must be addressed in the same priority as mitigation; mobilization of new, scaled up, additional, adequate and predictable financial resources is necessary; capacity building is essential. Parties recognized that deep cuts in global greenhouse gas emissions are required according to science, and as documented in the IPCCC FAR, with a view to reducing global 4
greenhouse gas emissions so as to hold the increase in global average temperature below 2°C above pre-industrial levels (for the first time approved in a Decision). Revision of the target is envisaged on the basis the best available scientific knowledge in relation to a global average temperature rise of 1.5°C. Parties have to achieve the peaking of global and national greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible (year not included), but for the developing countries timeframe will be longer. Another very important element agreed is that a low-carbon development strategy is indispensable to sustainable development and that addressing climate change requires a paradigm shift towards building a low-carbon society that offers substantial opportunities and ensures continued high growth and sustainable development, based on innovative technologies and more sustainable production and consumption and lifestyles, while ensuring a just transition of the workforce that creates decent work and quality jobs. Issues discussed: a long-term global goal for emission reductions; provisions on a review; ―historical responsibility‖ and ―atmospheric space.‖ including: short-term goals; sustainable development; human and indigenous rights; the rights of Mother Earth; creation of a climate court of justice; financial obligations; the 2°C goal or below 1.5°C; water and water management; a requirement for Annex I parties to contribute 6% of their Gross National Product (GNP) to finance mitigation and adaptation in developing countries and 1% of their GNP to support forest-related activities as ―repayment of their climate debt.‖ Adaptation Under the Cancun Agreement, the Cancun Adaptation Framework is established. This framework has an extensive list of activities, including support to adaptation planning, programmes and projects, vulnerability assessments, strengthening institutional capacities, disaster risk reduction, and knowledge and information sharing.
The agreement mandates the SBI to establish a process to enable Least Developed Countries and any other developing countries to formulate and implement national adaptation plans. These plans will identify medium and long-term adaptation needs and developing and implementing strategies to address those needs. Networks play a prominent role in the Framework. The agreement calls for the establishment of regional centres and networks, as well as an international centre to enhance adaptation that will be established in a developing country. Cancun also establishes an Adaptation Committee under the Convention, which will promote the implementation of enhanced action on adaptation. The Committee will provide technical support and guidance, strengthen and consolidate relevant information, promote synergies and strengthening engagement with national, regional and international organizations, centres and networks. Importantly, it will also serve as a ―match-maker‖ for funding by providing information and recommendations. The
UNFCCC is requested to compiled submissions by parties on the composition of and procedures for the Committee. Establishes a work programme for losses and damages under the Convention to consider approaches to reducing the negative impacts for developing countries. However, the thorny question of defining ―vulnerability‖ was not elaborated in the text.
Mitigation Under the Cancun Agreement on long-term cooperative action, a new regime for mitigation actions and reporting has been created. This has many implications for development policy and UNDP programming.
Pledges made by developed and developing countries under the Copenhagen Accord have been noted and are to be placed into the text (an informal document to be prepared FCCC/SB/2010/INF.X with Parties’ submissions to the Secretariat). This is seen as significant progress because it represents considerable movement towards the idea of developing nations taking on commitments if such an instrument is negotiated in the future. As per the Bali Action Plan, developing countries will also now undertake mitigation actions under the UNFCCC process. The Cancun Agreement “encourages governments to prepare low-carbon development strategies in the context of sustainable development”. Moreover, “developing countries will undertake nationally appropriate mitigation actions (NAMAs) in the context of sustainable development”. At this stage, the agreement contains no details on what will constitute a NAMA; however, it requests the UNFCCC Secretariat to organize a workshop as soon as possible to understand the variety of NAMA definitions, as well as the relationship between strategies and NAMAs. Decides that developed country parties will provide financial, technological and capacity building support for preparation of NAMAs and enhanced reporting, probably through the new fund (see below). The agreement invites developing parties to voluntarily submit information on their NAMAs to the Secretariat, as was done by many developing countries after Copenhagen. Initially the Secretariat will compile this information into a document; however, the agreement also creates a ―registry‖ to be managed by the Secretariat that will house this information. The registry will list NAMAs seeking international support, support available from parties, and support provided for NAMAs. In a separate section, domestic unsupported NAMAs will be listed. The Secretariat will regularly update the registry. For NAMAs that receive international support, international measurement, reporting and verification of actions will take place. Guidelines and modalities for this will be elaborated in 2011. For those NAMAs that are not internationally supported, developing countries will undertake domestic MRV and report their actions through new, enhanced national 6
communications every four years. In addition, developing countries will be required to submit biennial reports that include GHG inventories and information on mitigation actions, needs and support received. These biennial reports will then be subject to International Consultation and Analysis (ICA) by experts in consultation with the country concerned. Again, guidelines will be developed for domestic MRV and new national communication/biennial report methodologies in 2011. Financial support for these activities will continue to be provided under the Convention funds. Finance The financial mechanism of the UNFCCC will be substantially changed by the Cancun Agreement.
The Cancun Agreement establishes the Green Climate Fund (GCF) as an operating entity of the financial mechanism of the UNFCCC, alongside the GEF. The fund will: o be accountable to and function under the guidance of the COP. o support projects, programmes, policies, and other activities using thematic windows to be designed o be governed by a board of 24 members representing UN regional groupings o be serviced by a trustee that will be limited to financial management and reporting (including commingling funds for investment purposes). The trustee will be accountable to the Board. The World Bank will serve as the interim trustee subject to review after three years o be supported by an independent Secretariat The GCF will be designed and set up by a transitional committee of 40 members (15 developed countries; 25 developing countries). The UNFCCC Executive Secretary will convene the initial meeting of the transitional committee, which will be open to observers. Relevant UN Agencies, IFIs, MDBs, the UNFCCC Secretariat and GEF Secretariat are all invited to second staff to support the transitional committee. Many details about the new fund remain to be dealt with by the transitional committee, including selecting/establishing the Secretariat of the fund, the financial instruments that will be used by the fund, and the funding windows and access modalities. This includes defining the role of multilateral implementing entities, as well as for direct access, which the Cancun Agreement does include. Overarching the new fund, as well as the GEF and Adaptation Fund, will be a new Standing Committee on finance under the Convention. This body will improve coherence and coordination, rationalization of the various parts of UNFCCC funding, mobilization of resources, and MRV of financial flows. In addition, the review of the GEF’s work programme in Cancun notes that GEF and AF activities must now be reviewed and reconsidered in light of the new fund. This will review will report in COP17. In the interim, however, governments have called for increased donations to the Least Developed Countries Fund (LDCF) and Special Climate Change Fund (SCCF) managed by the GEF. 7
On sources of funds, parties formally recognize the ―fast start finance‖ pledged in Copenhagen and will report information on their delivery to the Secretariat by May 2011, 2012, and 2013. The Cancun Agreement also adopts the goal of mobilizing $100bn per annum by 2020 from multiple sources, and takes note of the work of the High-level Advisory Group’s report in this regard.
REDD+ The Cancun Agreement establishes a formal REDD mechanism, including readiness, pilot and results-based phases. Eligible activities are reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, conservation of forest carbon stocks, sustainable management of forests, and an enhancement of forest carbon stocks.
The mechanism request parties to develop a national strategy/plan, a national emission/forest reference emission level (of subnational on an interim basis), a robust national system for measurement, reporting and verification of actions (including at the subnational on an interim basis if needed), and a system for monitoring and reporting compliance with safeguards (identified in an annex to the agreement). The mechanism acknowledges that the readiness and pilot phases require significant capacity building and technical assistance. In terms of long-term, results-based performance, the agreement requests negotiations to continue on possible forms of results-based payments (i.e. public or private). The agreement does not specifically make reference to the interim REDD+ partnership or institutions; however, it calls on relevant international organizations and multilateral and bilateral channels to support the mechanism.
Technology The Cancun Agreement decided to formally establish a Technology Mechanism under the Convention. The mechanism will have three components: 1) Technology Executive Committee (TEC); 2) Climate Technology Centre (CTC); and 3) Climate Technology Network (CTN). The TEC replaces the Expert Group on Technology Transfer under the Convention from 2011.
In 2011, the TEC will design the CTC and CTN, as well as determine the criteria for selecting the host of the CTC. The TEC will include observer organizations and key resource people/organizations in this work, as is the case with the EGTT. The focus of the Technology Mechanism as a whole is extremely large, including R&D, deployment and diffusion of soft and hard technologies, national systems of innovation, development of technology action plans, and technical assistance. Intellectual Property is not referenced in the text. Within this, the CTC will focus on technology needs assessments, information provision, training, building capacity for countries to take make informed technology choices, encourage collaboration with relevant stakeholders and institutions at all levels, and facilitate the network of organizations, institutions, and centres. 8
The TEC, CTC, and CTN will report to the COP individually on an interim basis until the relationship between them is fully elaborated. Negotiations will continue in 2011, alongside the new TEC, to further articulate the remaining details of the mechanism, including the process for selection the host of the CTC.
The existing technology transfer work under the UNFCCC—mainly through the GEF—will now be reviewed with a view to harmonizing work between the new mechanism and GEF programming. This discussion will report at COP17. Market Mechanisms On sectoral crediting of NAMAs (whereby actions are funded by issuing carbon credits for verified reductions) the decision proposes launching a SBSTA work stream in 2011 to design a mechanism and invites submissions from parties and international organizations. In the meantime the text encourages international organizations to pursue readiness activities. Capacity Building Cancun Agreement took a decision to enhance the capacity building support to developing countries and to strengthen amongst others relevant institutions at various levels, networks, public awareness and education, participation of various stakeholders in policy making. The reporting of the capacity building activities of both developed and developing countries is encouraged under their National Communications on more frequent basis. Further modalities regarding institutional arrangements for capacity building will be considered at COP17. Other matters (Note: important for EITs and Turkey) The LCA text includes 2 decisions under ―Other mattes‖ for Parties included in Annex I undergoing the process of transition to a market economy (EITs) and a Party whose special circumstances are recognized by the COP (Turkey). For the EITs a process was settled to consider promoting access to technology, capacity building and finance in order to enhance their ability to develop low-emission economies, and for Turkey to better implement the Convention. 2.2.
Outcome of the work of the AWG-KP (included in 1/CMP.6)
Work under the AWG-KP is mandated to continue with the results adopted ―as early as possible‖ to avoid a gap between the first and second commitment periods. Annex I Parties’ pledges for economy-wide emission reduction targets are noted and they are urged to increase the level of ambition. The decision further indicates that emissions trading and the projectbased mechanisms under the Kyoto Protocol shall continue to be available, together with measures related to LULUCF. Further work in 2011 will be based on AWG-KP’s draft texts contained in FCCC/KP/AWG/CRP.4/Rev.4. 9
The KP decision was addressed first by the plenary session, and it appears that there has been an agreement on the issue between developed and developing parties that should satisfy both temporarily, in that the text was not objected to by Russia, Japan, or Canada, each of whom had signaled in various forms that they are unwilling to accept new commitments under the Kyoto Protocol beyond the end of the first commitment period end-2012. The two page document is a commitment to continue working on determining the form for the Kyoto Protocol; the text says that there should be no gap between the first and second commitment period, which signals that there will be such a period. The text urges developed nations to increase the level of their ambition in their emissions reduction pledges, and continues emissions trading. Additionally 1990 was agreed as a base year as a single year to express commitments under the new regime, however with some flexibility to use different reference year for domestic purposes. As the negotiating text from Cancun has been transferred the way it is (with brackets and numerous options) to the 2011 year negotiations, thus all the difficult choices are still to be made, including on the “carry over” issue of importance for Russia, Ukraine and some new EU member states. 3.
Other COP/CMP decisions
3.1. Clean Development Mechanism (CDM): One of the main topics of discussion was providing a signal to the CDM market regarding the continuation of the CDM. This was put forward in a proposal by PNG but rejected by Brazil and China on the grounds that the CDM cannot continue unless the Kyoto Protocol continues and requires the establishment of a Kyoto Protocol second commitment period. Others (Saudi Arabia and Japan) rejected discussion of the topic in a contact group. Issues discussed: Increased transparency by the Board; governance; making operational a loan scheme; the Appeals procedure; regional distribution; standardised baselines. The CMP Decision (FCCC/KP/CMP/2010/L.8) requests the CDM Executive Board to:
make available to stakeholders and admitted observer organizations, training and information materials on ongoing improvements and changes to, inter alia, CDM modalities, rules, guidelines and methodologies through the existing stakeholder engagement process; examine alternative approaches to the demonstration and assessment of additionality; develop standardized baselines, as appropriate, inter alia, for energy generation in isolate systems, transport and agriculture, prioritizing methodologies that are pplicable to the LDCs and small island developing states (SIDS), among others; and revise the registration procedures to allow the effective date of registration and possible start date of the crediting period of a CDM project activity to be the date on which a complete request for registration has been submitted by the designated operational entity, where the project activity has been registered automatically. 10
The COP/MOP also requests the SBI to recommend procedures, mechanisms and institutional arrangements under the COP/MOP to allow for appeals against the Executive Board decisions, with a view to adopting a decision at COP/MOP 7. It requests the SBSTA to consider the issue of materiality of the DOEs with a view to recommending a draft decision on this matter for adoption by COP/MOP 7. Finally, the COP/MOP decided that funding for the loan scheme to support the development of CDM project activities in countries with fewer than 10 registered projects shall be allocated from any interest accruing from the CDM Trust Fund. This could be of an importance for the countries in the region with less than 10 CDM projects registered, which are as follows: Albania (1); Armenia (4); Azerbaijan (0); Bosnia and Herzegovina (0); Georgia (2); Kyrgyzstan (0); Macedonia (1); Moldova (4); Serbia (0); Tajikistan (0); Uzbekistan (8). 3.2. Joint Implementation (JI): Issues discussed: the financial situation (and a fee to ensure JISC financial sustainability); continuation of joint implementation (JI) in the post-2012 period; participation by countries in the process of becoming Protocol Annex B parties (the Belarus issue); JI’s future and possible merger of the two JI tracks; review and revision of JI guidelines; and further guidance to the JISC. The CMP Decision (FCCC/KP/CMP/2010/L.9) clarifies, in relation to an Annex I Party whose first commitment period QELROs have not yet been inscribed in Protocol Annex B, but that wishes to host a JI project, that: the Secretariat may accept for publication the project design documents of JI projects; and the JISC may consider these projects in accordance with the JI guidelines before the amendment to include the host party in Protocol Annex B enters into force. It also agrees to continue consideration of issuance of ERUs from those projects at CMP-7, while noting that the host party may issue and transfer ERUs only after the amendment to include it in Annex B enters into force and upon its meeting of the eligibility requirements set out in the JI guidelines.
takes note of the view of the JISC on the need for future operation of JI after the first commitment period; decides to initiate the first review of the JI guidelines at CMP7; decides to establish provisions for the charging of fees for activities under the JI Track 1 procedure in order to contribute to the administrative costs of the JISC and its supporting structures, by introducing a fee of up to US$20,000 for large-scale projects, including programmes of activities, and up to US$5,000 for small-scale projects and programmes of activities composed of small-scale project activities; and requests the JISC to make further recommendations to CMP7 on amendments to the fee structure including, inter alia, the introduction of a fixed annual fee payable by host parties. Clarifies that a Party included in Annex I to the Convention whose quantified emission limitation or reduction commitment for the first commitment period has not yet been inscribed in Annex B to the Kyoto Protocol but that wishes to host a joint implementation project, that (a) in the interest of transparency, the 11
secretariat may accept for publication the project design documents of joint implementation projects and (b) the Joint Implementation Supervisory Committee may consider these projects in accordance with the joint implementation guidelines before the amendment to include the respective host Party in Annex B to the Kyoto Protocol enters into force. This is of importance for Belarus and Kazakhstan. 3.3. Compliance: Issues discussed: Compliance Committee’s report (Bulgaria’s suspension from using the flexible mechanisms); Appeal by Croatia against a decision of the Compliance Committee’s Enforcement Branch. The CMP Decision (FCCC/KP/CMP/2010/L.2) notes the interest of the Compliance Committee in ensuring that any legal arrangements for privileges and immunities adopted by the CMP would cover members and alternate members of the Committee; and looks forward to considering the outcomes of the SBI’s work on draft treaty arrangements for privileges and immunities for individuals serving on constituted bodies established under the Kyoto Protocol. The CMP Conclusions (FCCC/KP/CMP/2010/L.7) note that: started but was unable to complete the consideration of the Croatia appeal at this session and will add to the provisional agenda for CMP-7. The Secretariat was requested to prepare a technical paper outlining: the procedural requirements, and the scope and content of applicable law for the consideration of appeals; and the approach taken by constituted bodies under other multilateral environmental agreements and other international bodies in relation to provisions for the consideration of denial of due process. 3.4. Parties’ proposals for Protocol Amendments: To be considered at CMP7. 3.5. Adaptation Fund: Adaptation Fund Board’s Report: Issues discussed: 14 project concepts have been considered and two have been approved for funding; continuation of World Bank’s mandate as interim trustee; the timeline for reviewing the Fund at CMP-7; regional workshops on accreditation (number; content, participation, costs. The CMP Decision (FCCC/KP/CMP/2010/L.6) adopted the amendments to the terms and conditions of services to be provided by the World Bank as trustee for the Adaptation Fund, on an interim basis. The CMP requested the Secretariat, subject to the availability of resources, to conduct up to three regional or sub-regional, as appropriate, workshops, with the possibility of another, as circumstances permit and as warranted, in order to familiarize parties with the process and the requirements of the accreditation of NIEs. The CMP also requested the Secretariat to collaborate with the AFB Secretariat in the conduct of and dissemination of information on the workshops above, taking into consideration the need to target workshops to potential NIEs. 12
Review of the Adaptation Fund: The CMP Decision (FCCC/KP/CMP/2010/L.5) notes that the CMP will undertake the review of the Adaptation Fund at CMP-7 and every three years thereafter; and also decides that the review will be undertaken in accordance with the terms of reference contained in the annex. 3.6.
Kazakhstan’s proposal to amend the Protocol:
The Secretariat introduced document FCCC/KP/CMP/2010/4, which relates to a proposal by Kazakhstan to amend the Kyoto Protocol to include Kazakhstan in Annex B. Informal consultations were undertaken. Kazakhstan highlighted national efforts for transition to a lowcarbon economy and development of a legal framework for a domestic cap-and-trade mechanism. Additionally Kazakhstan organized a side-event to presents in details those efforts. COP/MOP adopted a decision FCCC/KP/ CMP/2010/L.3, where notes the proposal to include Kazakhstan in Protocol Annex B with a commitment to reduce to 100% of their 1992 emissions for the first commitment period and agrees to include consideration of the item at the next session. 4.
Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI-33)
The Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI) covered a number of methodological issues, shared several issues such as technology transfer with the SBSTA, and discussed in detail the enhanced participation of non-governmental organisation. The SBI agreed a number of decisions that were sent to the COP and CMP meetings for approval. These were all approved. The topics discussed and the outcomes are listed below: 4.1.
Issues discussed: EGTT report; progress on implementing its work programme for 2010-2011; GEF report (Poznan strategic programme on technology transfer). The SBI Conclusions (FCCC/SBI/2010/L.25):
encouraged non-Annex I parties to use the updated the Technology Needs Assessment (TNA) handbook ―Conducting Technology Needs Assessments for Climate Change‖ in conducting or updating their TNAs;
notes that the pilot projects proposed and/or being implemented under the Poznan strategic programme on technology transfer mainly address mitigation and welcomes the development of a Technology Transfer Programme for Climate Adaptation, as announced by the GEF; and
notes that any activities proposed by the GEF should not prejudge the outcome of the AWG-LCA negotiations and that the GEF should align its long-term programme on technology transfer following the outcome of the negotiations. 4.2.
Annex I National Communications and GHG inventory data:
National greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory data for 1990-2007 and 1990-2008:
Issues discussed: whether to take the reports or to include explicit reference to the information in the reports, possibly indicating Annex I parties’ aggregate emissions. SBI Conclusions (FCCC/SBI/2010/L.35) noted of the reports on national GHG inventory data from Annex I parties for the period 1990-2007 and 1990-2008 and also noted, inter alia, that over the period 1990-2008, total aggregate GHG emissions excluding emissions/removals from LULUCF for all Annex I Parties decreased by 6.1%, and total GHG emissions/removals, including LULUCF, decreased by 10.4%. Status of submission and review of fifth national communications: Issues discussed: status of submission of the fifth national communications; need for a review; possibility of undertaking a centralized review in some cases. SBI Conclusions (FCCC/SBI/2010/L.36):
takes note of the status of submission and review of fifth national communications; and
recommend draft COP and CMP decisions.
Under COP Decision (FCCC/SBI/2010/L.36/Add.1), the COP concludes that the review of national communications has proven useful and should continue. The CMP Decision (FCCC/SBI/2010/L.36/Add.2) requests the Secretariat to:
prepare the compilation and synthesis of supplementary information incorporated in fifth national communications for consideration by CMP 7;
organize centralized reviews of fifth national communications for parties with total GHG emissions of less than 50 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent (excluding LULUCF), with the exception of parties included in Annex II to the Convention, for which the Secretariat will organize in-depth in-country reviews; and
conduct in-depth in-country reviews of fifth national communications for those parties referred to above that request it.
Date of sixth national communications: Issues discussed: a date for the submission of Annex I parties’ sixth national communication; indication of a date for submission of the seventh national communication. The SBI Conclusions (FCCC/SBI/2010/L.36) recommended a draft decision for consideration by the COP. The COP Decision (FCCC/SBI/2010/L.36/Add.1):
urges Annex I parties that have not yet submitted their national communications to do so as a matter of priority; and
requests Annex I Parties to submit a sixth national communication to the Secretariat by 1 January 2014, with a view to submitting a seventh national communication no later than four years after this date.
Convention Article 12.5 - Frequency of national communications (Annex I): 14
The SBI Conclusions (FCCC/SBI/2010/L.36) solely agree to continue consideration of this matter at SBI-34. 4.3.
Non-Annex I National Communications:
Consultative group of experts on non-Annex I national communications (CGE): Issues discussed: the CGE’s work; surveys; technical reports; workshops; regional training activities. In SBI Conclusions (FCCC/SBI/2010/L.33), the SBI:
calls on the CGE to implement a planned workshop on the development and long-term sustainability of processes, and establishment and maintenance of national technical teams, for the preparation of national communications, to be held in early 2011;
requests the CGE to organize at least two training activities per region in the period 2011-2012, subject to the availability of resources; and
urges parties included in Annex II, and other parties in a position to do so, to provide financial resources to enable the CGE planned activities for 2011 implementation.
Information contained in non-Annex I national communications: To be discussed at SBI-34. Convention Article 12.5 (frequency of National Communications, non-Annex I): To be discussed at SBI 34. Financial and technical support: Issues discussed: the GEF report on the status of financial and technical support for non-Annex I national communications; provision of funds and existing procedures for the preparation of national communications and problems of timely access to funds; need for direct access to funding; procedures that inhibit timely distribution of funds. SBI Conclusions (FCCC/SBI/2010/L.37):
invites the GEF to provide complete information, especially on modalities and procedures to ensure that financial resources are provided, in an efficient and timely manner, to meet the agreed full costs incurred by all developing countries in complying with their obligations under Article 12.1 (national communications);
encourages non-Annex I parties to submit project proposals for the funding of their subsequent national communications before completion of their current national communications;
recommends that COP16 request the GEF to finalize procedures to ensure the timely disbursement of funds for parties that decide to access resources for the preparation of their national communications through direct access; and
recommends that COP16 request the GEF to provide information on funding for projects that have been identified in the national communications of non-Annex I parties and subsequently submitted and approved. 15
Convention article 6 (education, training and public awareness):
Issues discussed: the intermediate review of progress in implementing the amended New Delhi Work Programme on Article 6; further support for capacity-building activities in developing countries; outcomes of the thematic regional and sub-regional workshops. The SBI Conclusions (FCCC/SBI/2010/L.26) recommended a draft decision for adoption by the COP. The COP Decision (FCCC/SBI/2010/L.26):
recognizes that ensuring the availability of sufficient financial and technical resources continues to be a challenge for adequate implementation of Article 6 for all parties, in particular developing countries;
urges the GEF, as an operating entity of the financial mechanism of the Convention, to increase access to funding for related activities; and
requests SBI-34 to develop terms of reference for a review of implementation of the amended New Delhi Work Programme, with a view to launching the review at SBI 36. 4.5.
Convention articles 4.8 and 4.9: Progress on the implementation of decision 1/CP.10 (Buenos Aires Programme of Work):
Issues discussed: implementation of adaptation activities within the Mauritius Strategy for the Further Implementation of the Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of SIDS; promoting the review and strengthening of LDCs’ NAPAs; increased financial support for national institutional arrangements on adaptation; future workshops (particularly one on response measures). The SBI Conclusions (FCCC/SBI/2010/L.34/Rev.1):
agrees to continue consideration of the issue at SBI 34 on the basis of the text annexed to the report of SBI 32;
invites developed country parties to assist in efforts to deepen the understanding of policy makers in developing country parties of costs and benefits of adaptation options;
requests the Secretariat to organize a workshop to identify challenges and gaps in implementing risk management approaches to the adverse effects of climate change;
requests the Secretariat to prepare a technical paper on how to enhance capacity for the use of modeling in the context of needs and concerns arising from the impact of the implementation of response measures;
encourages parties to provide information on their experiences and concerns arising from the impact of the implementation of response measures; and
requests the Secretariat to organize a workshop on promoting risk management approaches on the specific needs and concerns of developing country parties arising from the impact of the implementation of response measures, back-to-back with other relevant workshops. 4.6.
Capacity building: 16
Issues discussed: asking the GEF to ―increase‖ or ―continue‖ financial support. The SBI Conclusions (FCCC/SBI/2010/L.29) recommended a draft decision for adoption by the COP and another for adoption by the CMP. The COP Decision (FCCC/SBI/2010/ L.29/Add.1) asks SBI34 to continue discussing the issue with a view to completing consideration of the second comprehensive review of the framework for capacity building in developing countries at COP17. The CMP Decision (FCCC/SBI/2010/L.30) resumes consideration of the issue at SBI34. 4.7.
Protocol article 3.14 (adverse effects of response measures):
Issues discussed: a workshop covering both Protocol Articles 2.3 (adverse effects of policies and measures) and 3.14 (adverse impacts of response measures). The SBI Conclusions (FCCC/SBI/2010/L.23):
requests the Secretariat to organize a joint workshop on matters relating to Protocol Articles 2.3 and 3.14 before SBI 35;
invites parties and organizations to submit information and views on issues that should be addressed at the joint workshop by 21 February 2011 and to be compiled by the Secretariat; and
agrees to continue discussions in a joint contact group at SBI-34. 4.8.
Annex B annual compilation and accounting reports for 2010 and 2009:
The SBI Conclusions (FCCC/SBI/2010/L.32) recommended draft conclusions for adoption by the CMP. The CMP Decision (FCCC/SBI/2010/L.32) noted the annual compilation and accounting reports for Annex B Parties under the Kyoto Protocol for 2009 and 2010. 5.
Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA 33) 5.1.
Issues discussed: EGTT reports on operational modalities for the proposed technology mechanism and Options to Facilitate Collaborative Technology Research and Development. The SBSTA Conclusions (FCCC/SBSTA/ 2010/L.17) requests the Secretariat, subject to the availability of resources, to organize training workshops in French and Spanish on preparing technology transfer projects for financing non-Annex I parties and ask the Secretariat to coordinate, with relevant international organizations and initiatives, implementation of a pilot training course combining online training with face-to-face training on preparing technology transfer projects for financing. 5.2.
Methodological issues (Protocol):
Carbon capture and storage (CCS) in geological formations under the CDM: Issues discussed: Support or not of inclusion of CCS in the CDM (usual suspects). 17
Two options were put forward to the Ministerial negotiations and a decision taken that CCS could be eligible under the CDM. This decision text was adopted by the CMP during its closing plenary. Saudi Arabia welcomed the decision on CCS under the CDM. Brazil indicated that it did not support CCS under the CDM, but would not block the outcome. The SBSTA Conclusions (FCCC/SBSTA/2010/L.24) provided two options for a draft decision to be considered by the CMP. The first option decides that CCS is eligible under the CDM, provided that issues in decision 2/CMP.5 paragraph 29 are addressed; the second decides that CCS is not eligible under the CDM, unless the issues in decision 2/CMP.5 paragraph 29 are addressed. The CMP Decision (FCCC/KP/CMP/2010/L.10) states that CCS in geological formations is eligible as a project activity under the CDM, provided that the issues identified in decision 2/CMP.5, paragraph 29 are addressed and resolved in a satisfactory manner. SBSTA 35 is requested to elaborate on modalities and procedures, and decides that these will address, inter alia, selection of storage sites, monitoring plans, modelling, measuring and accounting for leakage, risk and safety assessments, liability provisions, and restoration of ecosystems and compensation for communities. Views are invited on addressing these modalities, and a technical workshop is requested before SBSTA 35; and the Secretariat are asked to produce draft modalities and procedures for SBSTA 35. Standardized baselines under the CDM: Issues discussed: the benefits of using standardized baselines under the CDM (EU); the importance of additionality and the impact on the nature of the CDM; their compatibility with the current definition and their ability to improve the efficiency and objectivity of the CDM (PNG). The SBSTA Conclusions recommends that elements from the annex to the conclusions be incorporated into the draft CMP decision on further guidance relating to the CDM (FCCC/KP/CMP/2010/L.8). This was carried out and the conclusions appeared in the CMP decision on CDM guidance. Forests in exhaustion under the CDM: Issues discussed: Inclusion of this issue in REDD+ discussions under the AWG-LCA and LULUCF discussions under the AWG-KP (EU); a technical workshop (Ethiopia, Brazil). The SBSTA Conclusions (FCCC/SBSTA/2010/ L.15) invites parties to submit by 28 March 2011 their views on the implications of including forests in exhaustion under the CDM. The SBSTA also requests the Secretariat to prepare a synthesis report of these views, and will continue considering the issue at SBSTA 35. Common metrics to calculate CO2 equivalence of GHGs: Covered under AWG-KP. Continues at SBSTA34. Technical review of Annex I Protocol partiesâ€™ GHG inventories and other information: 18
Report noted. 5.3.
Methodological issues (Convention):
Emissions from international aviation and maritime transport: Issues discussed: Reports of ICAO and IMO - ICAO highlighted a comprehensive resolution on aviation and climate change adopted in October 2010 and IMO noted efforts to develop a comprehensive mandatory regulatory framework and market-based mechanisms to substantially reduce GHG emissions from maritime transport by 2020, there was support for these as the principle forum for addressing emissions from international aviation and maritime transportation, G77/China stressing the principles of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities. The EU stressed the importance of tackling bunker fuels and recommending using AWG-LCA to do so. The SBSTA Conclusions (FCCC/SBSTA/2010/ L.19) show no progress has been made and notes the information provided by the ICAO and IMO and invites them to report at future sessions of the SBSTA. Annual report on the technical review of GHG inventories from Annex I parties under the Convention: Reported noted. Revision of the UNFCCC reporting guidelines on annual inventories for Annex I parties: Issues discussed: meetings on use of models and measurements in GHG inventories and on methodological issues related to reporting on harvested wood products, wetlands and nitrous oxide emissions from soils. The SBSTA Conclusions (FCCC/SBSTA/2010/ L.18):
agrees that in the revised UNFCCC Annex I reporting guidelines, the agriculture and LULUCF sectors should continue to be separate as in the current UNFCCC Annex I reporting guidelines;
agrees that separate reporting of agriculture and LULUCF requires an allocation of the agriculture, forests and other land uses categories in the 2006 IPCC Guidelines to the agriculture and LULUCF sectors with a view to ensuring completeness and avoiding duplication of reporting of individual categories and/or sub-categories; and
agrees that this may include revisiting the allocation of categories in the current UNFCCC Annex I reporting guidelines;
requests the Secretariat to organize a third workshop under the work programme, to be held in early 2011, and a fourth workshop in the second half of 2011.
Greenhouse gas data interface: Continues at SBSTA 34. 5.4.
Nairobi Work Programme (NWP): 19
Issues discussed: reviewing of the NWP and its continuation. The SBSTA Conclusions:
welcomes engagement of a wide range of organizations in NWP implementation and requests the Secretariat to continue to further engage relevant organizations;
agrees to continue the review of the NWP and complete this by SBSTA-34;
agrees to continue activities under the NWP, while the review is under way; and
invites parties and organizations to provide views and information on progress made and gaps, as well as views on new activities to achieve the objective of the NWP, to inform the review, by 28 March 2011. 5.5.
Research and systematic observation:
Issues discussed: progress reports on activities of the updated GCOS implementation plan. The SBSTA Conclusions (FCCC/SBSTA/2010/ L.22):
urges parties to work towards the full implementation of the ―Update of the Implementation Plan for the GCOS in Support of the UNFCCC;‖
encourages coordination of activities through regional centers and action plans;
welcomes progress on the workplan for the development of standards and protocols for terrestrial essential climate variables and encourages parties to facilitate development of standards;
invites GTOS to report at SBSTA 35 and CEOS to provide a report on major achievements by SBSTA 37; and
invites parties to provide views on international climate change research programmes and organizations and on the research dialogue by 31 January 2011. 5.6.
Scientific, technical and socio-economic aspects of mitigation:
Impacts that negotiations on enhanced mitigation by the AWG-LCA and AWG-KP on SBSTA’s work were noted. 5.7.
Protocol article 2.3 (adverse effects of policies and measures):
Discussed with SBI Convention Article 3.14. The SBSTA Conclusions (FCCC/SBSTA/2010/ L.16): requests the Secretariat to organize a joint workshop on matters relating to Protocol Articles 2.3 and 3.14 before the 35th meetings of the subsidiary bodies (SB);
invites parties and organizations to submit information and views on issues that should be addressed at the joint workshop by 21 February 2011 and to be compiled by the Secretariat; and
agrees to continue discussions in a joint contact group at SB 34.
Other useful information 20
06 Jun - 17 Jun 2011: Meetings of the UNFCCC Convention Bodies, Bon Germany 28 Nov - 09 Dec 2011: COP17/CMP7, Durban, South Africa The place and time for the two additional meetings of the AWGs is to be decided. There was no decision on the location of COP 18, which both Qatar and South Korea have offered to host.
Useful websites: The website www.faststartfinancing.org provides the latest updates on these commitments which indicate that countries will meet this commitment. At http://www.climatefinanceoptions.org/ you can find a Platform, which aims at providing comprehensive guidance on financial options available for climate action in developing countries. Here you can find information on where to access the wide range of funds available from multilateral and bilateral institution, as well as public and private sources. You can learn more on how these funds are governed and whether your project is eligible. Table summarizing the Cancun outcomes in some areas:
CLEAN DEVELOPMNET MECHANISM (CDM)
Progress or Decisions
Indications CDM will be part of new post Cancun conference decided that next year (at the next Climate Change 2012 scheme, despite on-going Conference in South Africa), one or more new market based uncertainty over the future of the Kyoto mechanism will be established Protocol Any such new mechanism will maintain and build upon existing mechanisms, including those established under the Kyoto Protocol (like the CDM)
Carbon Capture and Storage as CDM
Is now eligible under the CDM
15 specific issues need to addressed and recommendations made over next one year
Loan scheme for CDM
Applicable to countries with fewer than 10 registered projects
Editorial errors in project documents
Request to EB made
EB requested that editorial errors should not delay CDM completeness check process
Request made to EB
Executive Board to examine alternative approaches to the demonstration and of additionality
Issue of materiality for DOEs
Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice to consider the matter EB urged to speed up
Recommendation needs to be made by the next Climate Change Conference in South Africa
Appeals against EB
Decision to be made in next Climate Change conference in South Africa
Subsidiary Body for Implementation to study the matter and submission made by EB; and to make recommendations next year
Effective date of registration of CDM project
Procedures for registration requested to be revised
To allow the start date of the crediting period to be the date on which a complete request for registration has been submitted by the DOE
Peaking of emission
No concrete decision
Countries recognized that the time frame for peaking will be longer in developing countries
Work to be undertaken for identifying a timeframe for global peaking of greenhouse gas emissions
Time delay in Completeness check
Countries, project participants, as well as international industry organizations or admitted observer organizations can make submissions of standardized baselines through designated national authority
Continuation CDM Post 2012
Long term emissions targets
EB advised to take necessary measures to ensure that the average time between the receipt of a submission and the commencement of the completeness check is less than 15 calendar days in 2011
encourages governments to prepare low-carbon development strategies in the context of sustainable development
Proposals put forward at Copenhagen have been noted in 1/CP.16
Voluntary emission targets already adopted by many governments (like India and China) could become legally binding in future
Monitoring, Verification Reporting
Extension of Kyoto
“Cancun Adaptation Framework” to be established
If international financial support is requested for a domestic plan, it will be subject to international measurement, reporting and verification
A registry to record nationally appropriate mitigation actions seeking international support will be established
Updates on national GHG inventory and action plans to be submitted every two years
Countries could not decide on second commitment period, but have to prevent a gap
Objective is planning, prioritizing and implementing adaptation actions, including projects and programmes at global level
An Adaptation Committee established
to take framework forward to be
New and additional resources to tune of $30 billion by developed countries in next 3 years
Developed countries commit to mobilize $100 billion per year by 2020
Funds can come from public and private sector
Green Climate Fund
operating entity of the financial mechanism of the UNFCCC,
Under the COP World bank invited to be interim trustee support projects, programmes, policies, and other activities using thematic windows to be designed
Developing countries will provide updates on progress on their climate change action plans
Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD)
Balanced allocation to be made between adaptation and mitigation
alongside the GEF
A new “Technology Mechanism“ established
Mechanism will consist of Technology Executive Committee and Climate Technology Centre and Network
Network shall consist of national, regional, sectoral and international technology organizations and initiatives
Developing countries to develop national strategy, baselines, monitoring system
Plans may be internationally funded in future
REDD + mechanism officially approved