© 2013 Arthur Lee

Global Climate Negotiations Warsaw COP-19 Negotiations

Negotiations from 11 to (extended) 23 November 2013 Brief Assessment: Decisions Made and Decisions Deferred “Commitments” vs “Contributions” 25 November 2013 Arthur Lee

1 Photos by Arthur Lee excepted where noted

© 2013 Arthur Lee

COP19 Warsaw Decisions Made and Decisions Deferred 25 November

2

The COP19 negotiations concluded its five parallel tracks of negotiations under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol:

– Subsidiary Body on Science and Technological Advice (SBSTA)

– Subsidiary Body on Implementation (SBI)

– Conference of Parties (COP)

– Conference of Parties Serving as the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP)

– Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action (ADP, or the 2015 treaty)

Decisions were agreed to in the important areas of advancing the elements of the 2015 treaty, which has to be completed by 2015 to come into effect in 2020, replacing the Kyoto Protocol..

Nations agreed to continue work on elements of the draft negotiating text in March 2014 when the ADP meets again to formulate elements in six must-have categories: mitigation, adaptation, finance, technology development and transfer, capacity-building and transparency of action and support. These elements of the draft negotiating text are scheduled to be ready for COP20 Lima in 2014.

Another one of the few areas of progress is the 2013-2015 review of the 2 °C or 1.5 °C target. Nations agree to continue to hear input from IPCC at COP20 Lima. The science of climate change was an ever-present factor in this COP because of Supertyphoon Haiyan and will be again in COP20 because of the IPCC Fifth Assessment’s publication.

Photo by IISD coverage and Arthur Lee Marcin Korolec, Minister of Environment, Poland, presided over COP19.

ADP co-chairs Runge-Metzger and Kumarsingh convenes ADP negotiations .

© 2013 Arthur Lee

COP19 Warsaw Decisions Made and Decisions Deferred 25 November

3

Negotiators were able to agree to a new mechanism, the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage under the Cancun Adaptation Framework, associated with impacts of climate change, including extreme events and slow onset events, in developing countries that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change.

In addition to knowledge sharing and enhancing understanding of impacts, the Warsaw International Mechanism is also intended to enhance action and support, including finance, technology and capacity-building, to address loss and damage associated with the adverse effects of climate change,

However, the impasse on issues that are most relevant to business and industry could not be breached. These include:

– The Joint report of the Technology Executive Committee and the Climate Technology Centre and Network was not recognized due to strong disagreement between nations on the role of the Technology Executive Committee in relationship to the World Trade Organization and the World Intellectual Property Organization.

– New market mechanisms, non-market mechanisms made no progress at all as negotiators could not agree on how far to develop language for either mechanism, and progress on both are now tied together.

These issues on technology transfer and possible new market-based mechanisms are some of the most important issues to the private sector. Progress will have to be made in 2014 for them to be considered as part of the new agreement in 2015..

Photos by Arthur Lee Negotiators at the tech transfer negotiations shared a moment of levity.

But there was not much to celebrate later as they failed to agree to recognize the joint report of the Technology Exec Committee

and the Climate Technology Centre and Network.

© 2013 Arthur Lee

COP19 Warsaw Decisions Made and Decisions Deferred: A Brief Assessment 24 November

4

Warsaw was not expected to be a high-profile round of climate change negotiations. Over 10,000 delegates, negotiators, representatives of intergovernmental organizations non-governmental organizations, and journalists registered to attend, which is near average for the Conference of Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in its 19th Session (COP19), which is held annually.

Negotiators had some 100 issues spread through the five tracks of negotiations to negotiate, and some 50 decisions that should have been made. At the end of the second week, ministers and their lead negotiators kept up the long tradition (unfortunately) of going late nights, round-the-clock and going 24 hours beyond the scheduled close of Friday evening.

Haiyan played a role in these negotiations, as the lead negotiator for Philippines Mr. Nadereve Sano announced and fasted throughout the two-weeks in solidarity with his brother and other countrymen who were dead, displaced and hungry for days. The decision to establish a loss and damage mechanism, which might not have concluded negotiations for another year or two, accelerated to an interim arrangement at Warsaw primarily because of the supertyphoon, though the Warsaw International Mechanism on Loss and Damage has no special funding at this time.

Advancing the Durban Platform was the key to a perception of success. Without the agreement reached overtime, COP19 Warsaw would have been deemed a failure. Late night debate over the word “commitment” by Brazil, China India and South Africa, weakened to the word “contributions” show a long road ahead to COP20 and COP21.

Photos by Arthur Lee.

NGOs demonstrating. NASA/Caltech JPL scientist at the U.S. Center

© 2013 Arthur Lee

COP19 Warsaw Decisions to Further Advancing the Durban Platform Details (1 of 4)

5

“Commitments” v “Contributions”: The word commitments was substituted by contributions in an eleventh-hour compromise.

Paragraph 2. Decides, …

(a) To request the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action to further elaborate, beginning at its first session in 2014, elements for a draft negotiating text, taking into consideration its work, including, inter alia, on mitigation, adaptation, finance, technology development and transfer, capacity-building and transparency of action and support;

(b) To invite all Parties to initiate or intensify domestic preparations for their intended nationally determined contributions, without prejudice to the legal nature of the contributions, in the context of adopting a protocol, another legal instrument or an agreed outcome with legal force under the Convention applicable to all Parties towards achieving the objective of the Convention as set out in its Article 2 and to communicate them well in advance of the twenty-first session of the Conference of the Parties (by the first quarter of 2015 by those Parties ready to do so) in a manner that facilitates the clarity, transparency and understanding of the intended contributions, without prejudice to the legal nature of the contributions;

(c) To request the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action to identify, by the twentieth session of the Conference of the Parties, the information that Parties will provide when putting forward their contributions, without prejudice to the legal nature of the contributions … ;

Webcast Excerpts India’s and China’s lead negotiators both challenged the word

“commitments” in the draft decision text

© 2013 Arthur Lee

COP19 Warsaw Decisions to Further Advancing the Durban Platform Details (2 of 4)

6

Paragraph 2. Decides, …

(d) To urge and request developed country Parties, the operating entities of the financial mechanism and any other organizations in a position to do so to provide support for the related activities referred to … above as early as possible in 2014; …

Paragraph 4. Also resolves to enhance ambition in the pre-2020 period in order to ensure the highest possible mitigation efforts under the Convention by all Parties by:

(a) Urging each Party that has not yet communicated a quantified economy-wide emission reduction target or nationally appropriate mitigation action, as applicable, to do so;

(b) Urging each developed country Party to implement without delay its quantified economy-wide emission reduction target under the Convention and, if it is also a Party to the Kyoto Protocol, its quantified emission limitation or reduction commitment for the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol, if applicable;

(c) Urging each developed country Party to revisit its quantified economy-wide emission reduction target under the Convention and, if it is also a Party to the Kyoto Protocol, its quantified emission limitation or reduction commitment for the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol…

Photos of COP19 Webcast Taken moments after the decision was gaveled by the COP19

President Marcin Korolec, Poland, adopting the decision to further Advancing the ADP.

© 2013 Arthur Lee

COP19 Warsaw Decisions to Further Advancing the Durban Platform Details (3 of 4)

7

Paragraph 4. …

(d) Urging each developed country Party to periodically evaluate the continuing application of any conditions associated with its quantified economy-wide emission reduction target, with a view to adjusting, resolving or removing such conditions;

(e) Urging developed country Parties to increase technology, finance and capacity-building support to enable increased mitigation ambition by developing country Parties;

(f) Urging each developing country Party that has communicated its nationally appropriate mitigation action to implement it and, where appropriate, consider further action, recognizing that nationally appropriate mitigation actions will be taken in the context of sustainable development, supported and enabled by technology, finance and capacity-building;

Webcast photos US Special Envoy Todd Stern pushes back on China’ and India’s point

about the word “commitments.” EU lead negotiator did the same.

© 2013 Arthur Lee

COP19 Warsaw Decisions to Further Advancing the Durban Platform Details (4 of 4)

8

Paragraph 5. Decides to accelerate activities under the workplan on enhancing mitigation ambition in accordance with decision l!CP.l7, paragraphs 7 and 8, by:

(a) Intensifying, as from 20l4, the technical examination of opportunities for actions with high mitigation potential, including those with adaptation and sustainable development co-benefits, with a focus on the implementation of policies, practices and technologies that are substantial, scalable and replicable, with a view to promoting voluntary cooperation on concrete actions in relation to identified mitigation opportunities in accordance with nationally defined development priorities;

(b) Facilitating the sharing among Parties of experiences and best practices of cities and subnational authorities, where appropriate, in identifying and implementing opportunities to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change, with a view to promoting the exchange of information and voluntary cooperation;

(c) Inviting Parties to promote the voluntary cancellation of certified emission reductions, without double counting, as a means of closing the pre-2020 ambition gap;

(d) Considering further activities to be undertaken under that workplan at the twentieth session of the Conference of the Parties;

Webcast Excerpts ADP Co-Chair Kumarsingh sparred with Bolivian negotiator

Over a point of order.

© 2013 Arthur Lee

COP19 Warsaw Decisions on Warsaw International Mechanism on Loss and Damage Details (1 of 3)

9

Paragraph 2. Establishes an executive committee of the Warsaw international mechanism, which shall function under the guidance of, and be accountable to, the Conference of the Parties, to guide the implementation of functions referred to under paragraph 5 below;

Paragraph 3. Requests the executive committee to report annually to the Conference of the Parties through the Subsidiary Body of Scientific Technological Advice and the Subsidiary Body for Implementation and make recommendations, as appropriate;

Paragraph 4. Decides that, as an interim measure, the executive committee shall consist of two representatives from each of the following bodies under the Convention; ensuring that there is a balanced representation between developed and developing country Parties: the Adaptation Committee, the Least Developed Countries Expert Group, the Standing Committee on Finance, the Technology Executive Committee and the Consultative Group of Experts on National Communications from Parties not included in Annex I to the Convention;

Webcast Excerpts Venezuela and Bolivia both contested the order of interventions

and the handling of the intervention by ADP Co-Chair Kumarsingh..

© 2013 Arthur Lee

COP19 Warsaw Decisions on Warsaw International Mechanism on Loss and Damage (Details 2 of 3)

10

Paragraph 5. Further decides that the Warsaw international mechanism shall fulfil the role under the Convention of promoting the implementation of approaches to address loss and damage associated with the adverse effects of climate change, … in a comprehensive, integrated and coherent manner by undertaking, inter alia, the following functions:

(a) Enhancing knowledge and understanding of comprehensive risk management approaches to address loss and damage associated with the adverse effects of climate change, including slow onset impacts, by facilitating and promoting:

– (i) Action to address gaps in the understanding of and expertise in approaches to address loss and damage associated with the adverse effects of climate change, …

– (ii) Collection, sharing, management and use of relevant data and information, including gender-disaggregated data;

– (iii) Provision of overviews of best practices, challenges, experiences and lessons learned in undertaking approaches to address loss and damage;

(b) Strengthening dialogue, coordination, coherence and synergies among relevant stakeholders by:

– (i) Providing leadership and coordination and, as and where appropriate, oversight under the Convention, on the assessment and implementation of approaches to address loss and damage associated with the impacts of climate change from extreme events and slow onset events associated with the adverse effects of climate change;

– (ii) Fostering dialogue, coordination, coherence and synergies among all relevant stakeholders, institutions, bodies, processes and initiatives outside the Convention, with a view to promoting cooperation and collaboration across relevant work and activities at all levels;

Photos by Arthur Lee Consultations with delegates and Co-Chair of the ADP.

Demonstrators representing people affected by climate change

© 2013 Arthur Lee

COP19 Warsaw Decisions on Warsaw International Mechanism on Loss and Damage Details (3 of 3)

11

Paragraph 5. …

(c) Enhancing action and support, including finance, technology and capacity building, to address loss and damage associated with the adverse effects of climate change, so as to enable countries to undertake actions …, including by:

– (i) Provision of technical support and guidance on approaches to address loss and damage associated with climate change impacts, including extreme events and slow onset events;

– (ii) Provision of information and recommendations for consideration by the Conference of the Parties when providing guidance relevant to reducing the risks of loss and damage, where necessary, addressing loss and damage, including to the operating entities of the financial mechanism of the Convention, as appropriate;

– (iii) Facilitating the mobilization and securing of expertise, and enhancement of support, including finance, technology and capacity-building, to strengthen existing approaches and, where necessary, facilitate the development and implementation of additional approaches to address loss and damage associated with climate change impacts, including extreme weather events and slow onset events;;

Photo

Photos by Arthur Lee Executive Secretary Chritiana Figueres talking to observers.

U.S. and Australia consults on technology transfer.

© 2013 Arthur Lee

Background: What could be the “new market mechanisms?” Subsidiary Body on Science and Technological Advice (SBSTA) Negotiations

12

The negotiations for a new market mechanism was deadlocked at COP18 Doha. No progress could be made. Therefore, the President of COP18 proposed that the modalities and procedures of how such a new mechanism could work to the Subsidiary Body on Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA), considering these elements:

(a) Its operation under the guidance and authority of the Conference of the Parties;

(b) The voluntary participation of Parties in the mechanism;

(c) Standards that deliver real, permanent, additional, and verified mitigation outcomes, avoid double counting of effort and achieve a net decrease and/or avoidance of greenhouse gas emissions;

(d) Requirements for the accurate measurement, reporting and verification of emission reductions, emission removals and/or avoided emissions;

(e) Means to stimulate mitigation across broad segments of the economy, which are defined by the participating Parties and may be on a sectoral and/or project-specific basis;

(f) Criteria, including the application of conservative methods, for the establishment, approval and periodic adjustment of ambitious reference levels (crediting thresholds and/or trading caps) and for the periodic issuance of units based on mitigation below a crediting threshold or based on a trading cap;

(g) Criteria for the accurate and consistent recording and tracking of units;

(h) Supplementarity;

(i) A share of proceeds to cover administrative expenses and assist developing country Parties that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change to meet the costs of adaptation;

(j) The promotion of sustainable development;

(k) The facilitation of the effective participation of private and public entities;

(l) The facilitation of the prompt start of the mechanism;.

© 2013 Arthur Lee

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Long Term Impacts

13

The impacts of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change have been accumulating over the long term, and in the last decade have driven national policies (draft or passed), regulatory regimes, even the IMO and ICAO, and projects that include but not limited to the following:

– EU Emissions Trading Scheme and the associated monitoring scheme.

– National legislations in the EU that implemented the EU ETS in early 2000’s to 2005

– Stimulus money in the EU and US for CCS and renewable energy technologies

– Senate and other Congressional bills (USA) over the last several years

– New Zealand’s implementation of an emissions trading scheme that caps emissions including carbon content of fuels, which remains in place though New Zealand will not enter the second commitment period of the KP.

– Australian National Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting System (NGERS)

– Australian Clean Energy Futures Bills (in the process of being repealed by he Abbot Government)

– California’s AB32 and implementing regulations

– Various discussion papers and policies being considered in the larger rapidly developing nations (the BASIC nations of Brazil, South Africa, India, and China).

– Kazakhstan imposes emission limits and initiates a national emissions trading scheme as it enters the second period of the KP.

– Changes to international shipping and aviation energy efficiency and operational efficiency standards

– Clean Development Mechanism projects

Long term impacts can continue to accumulate as the negotiations drive more developing nations to enact laws and regulations for GHG monitoring, reporting, verification, and on technology transfer criteria, and also adaptation actions affecting infrastructure, land use, and access to resources.

© 2013 Arthur Lee

Global Negotiations and Parallel to the History of the Scientific Assessments The current climate change negotiations by over 190 nations is part of a process that has gone on since the early 1990’s, in parallel to the

development of four scientific assessments carried out by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which began in 1988 and culminated in the first global scientific assessment of 1990. The current UN negotiation round is called “COP17,” hosted by South Africa. The IPCC has been convening several hundred scientists, engineers, technologists, and economists for the next three years to conduct the Fifth Assessment.

14

IPCC “Policy-Relevant, Not Policy

Prescriptive Science”

1990 First Assessment Report “…emissions resulting from human activities are substantially increasing

the atmospheric concentrations…”

1995 Second Assessment Report “…balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global

climate …”

2001 Third Assessment Report “…new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over

the past 50 years is attributable to human activities.”

2007 Fourth Assessment Report “Most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since

the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic (human) greenhouse gas concentrations. “

2013 Fifth Assessment Report “It is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause

of the observed warming since the mid-20th century.”

UNFCCC “Common But Differentiated

Responsibilities”

1992 Rio Summit: UNFCCC signed

1994 UNFCCC entered into force

1995 COP1: Berlin Mandate provided differentiated approaches for Annex I and non-Annex I (“developing”) countries

COP3 negotiations resulted in the 1997 Kyoto Protocol

2005 Kyoto Protocol entered into force COP/MOP 1 held in Montreal, Canada

2009 Copenhagen Accords; 2010 Cancun Agreements; 2011 Durban Platform; 2012 Doha Climate Gateway

2013 COP19 Warsaw

© 2013 Arthur Lee

Appendix Brief History of Global Climate Negotiations

15 Photos by Arthur Lee excepted where noted

© 2013 Arthur Lee

Global Climate Change Negotiations: Background and Brief History

Arthur Lee Observer from the Business & Industry NGO Community Updated: December 2012

All photos by Arthur Lee except where noted.

© 2013 Arthur Lee

Primer on the UNFCCC and the Complex Negotiations (1 of 10)

This primer is to provide a brief, high-level description of selected history and the complexity of the process of these UN negotiations.

The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change is an international treaty that was signed by President George Bush in 1992 at a summit at the Rio de Janeiro. The international treaty is called a Framework for good reasons. It is only a framework and details were left to be further negotiated over time. The UNFCCC was ratified by over 184 nations in 1994 and came into force as international law at that time.

The UNFCCC recognizes the science of climate change, talked about “preventing dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system,” and sets out a framework for nations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions voluntarily. The UNFCCC sets out two subsidiary negotiating bodies called:

Subsidiary Body on Implementation (SBI)

Subsidiary Body on Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA)

..that convenes twice a year to negotiate all kinds of details in rough categories according to its names. In practice, the thousands of negotiators who come to the SBI and SBSTA meetings complete their negotiations of each set of details and then towards the second meeting (end of the year) join the Conference of Parties (COP) to table their completed texts to the ministers who attend the COP, where the ministers then make their decisions. At each COP, there are always decisions made.

17

Pho

tos

by A

rthur

Lee

Photo: Screenshot from UNFCCC webcast

© 2013 Arthur Lee

Primer on the UNFCCC and the Complex Negotiations (2 of 10) From the Berlin Mandate to the Kyoto Protocol

At COP1 Berlin, Parties to the Convention agreed to the Berlin Mandate, which mandated a roadmap to completing negotiating a Protocol by COP3 at Kyoto.

In December 1997 at COP3 at Kyoto, the over 184 nations after long two weeks of round-the-clock negotiations came up with the Kyoto Protocol, which was a legally binding international treaty. In 2005, it entered into force when a threshold number of nations and their emissions were accounted – 55 nations with at least 55% of emissions – submitted their instruments of ratification to the United Nations.

In these negotiations, the importance of having texts, and making progress towards texts, is paramount. Each decision, whether it is a relatively simple one to a complex text of the Kyoto Protocol, can still represent years of negotiating efforts. For example, the Marrakech Accords that set out the first complete set of rules and criteria for the clean development mechanism (Article 12 of the Kyoto Protocol) took at least two years to complete. After they were completed, negotiations in subsequent years then turned to operationalizing the CDM Executive Board and its “modalities and procedures,” which means in practice what the Executive Board does, how it does its work, and its membership and processes. In many ways, that is still going on in the current negotiations with the focus on streamlining, reforming, and refocusing geographically its modalities and procedures.

Other mechanisms, such as the Joint Implementation provisions (Article 6 of the Kyoto Protocol), took another two years of negotiations before a Joint Implementation Steering Committee (JISC, similar to the function of the CDM Executive Board) was operationalized with modalities, procedures, and getting the members in place to actually start doing any work of reviewing and approving Joint Implementation projects.

18

© 2013 Arthur Lee

Primer on the UNFCCC and the Complex Negotiations (3 of 10) From COP13 or CMP3

The Conference of Parties (COP) when serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol is called COP/MOP or CMP (short). COP13 in Bali was also the meeting of CMP3.

The CMP decides on issues negotiated specifically under the Kyoto Protocol, such as the Clean Development Mechanism.

For example, with Canada’s withdrawal from the KP in 2011, both the US and Canada will become observer states in the CMP negotiations because they are not Parties to the KP.

In 2007, with lack of sufficient progress since the entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol (since 2005), the nations which are “Parties” to the Kyoto Protocol again negotiated in a two-week period, round-the-clock, and with great emotional outbursts, settled on the Bali Action Plan. The Bali Action Plan put all Parties on a negotiating roadmap towards COP15 to complete negotiations about two major issues:

– The continuation (or not) of the Kyoto Protocol. Certainly in the minds of developing nations, there was no question that the KP must continue

– The beginning of negotiations about “long term cooperative action” which numerous nations, including the US, EU, Australia, Canada felt would be the way towards a new comprehensive agreement for all nations

For these two purposes, two plenary bodies are used to negotiate such issues.

– Ad Hoc Working Group on the Further Commitments of the Kyoto Protocol (AWG-KP)

– Ad Hoc Working Group on Long Term Cooperative Action (AWG-LCA)

19

© 2013 Arthur Lee

Primer on the UNFCCC and the Complex Negotiations (4 of 10) COP15 or CMP5 at Copenhagen

For over two years and amidst numerous added negotiating rounds, the more than 100 nations met and finally tried to fashion several texts for negotiations at COP15 Copenhagen. However, as we all know now, agreement was never reached for the “further commitments of the Kyoto Protocol” and the LCA negotiations yielded a three page document, which was never completely agreed in plenary by the entire COP17 body at Copenhagen, became this “political agreement” called the Copenhagen Accord. Given all the reviews of failure given by observers and the media with high expectations, this was a remarkable political agreement personally negotiated between several heads of governments, including the Presidents of the US, China, Brazil, and Prime Minister of India, but sidelining the European Union leaders.

In hindsight, the key success of the Copenhagen Accord was that the negotiations themselves compelled a number of nations to pledge a series of commitments and actions, not necessarily targets with time tables, that would show to the world that these nations can take on such responsibilities. Outside of the Copenhagen Accord, there were also decisions that continued the negotiating tracks of a large number of decisions, including a decision text that kept alive the CCS in CDM issue. Other decision texts kept alive the issues of sectoral credit trading and longer term future of additional market mechanisms

20

© 2013 Arthur Lee

Primer on the UNFCCC and the Complex Negotiations (5 of 10) COP16 or CMP6 at Cancun

The Copenhagen Accord never received formal recognition by the entire body of the COP. However, throughout 2010 and into the COP16 negotiating sessions, negotiators met to parse out all the elements of the Copenhagen Accord and set them up for formal negotiations and codifications as decisions by the supreme body of the UNFCCC, the COP. Therefore, at COP16, again with round-the-clock negotiations and on the verge of failure throughout two-weeks, the Cancun Agreement was reached.

While this sounds impressive, it is in practice a series of decisions codified by the AWG-LCA that flesh out slightly the commitments made by nations in the Copenhagen Accord, including the Green Climate Fund. COP16, as with other COPs, also saw a series of other decisions that continued life in CDM “rulemakings” and, in fact, put much more positive life into the CCS in CDM issue. CCS was finally decided by the COP that it will be allowed as an eligible project technology for the clean development mechanism, and that a whole set of modalities and procedures will have to be elaborated and approved by COP17. The COPs have also compelled, through a series of decisions over time, two other UN treaty agencies, the International Maritime Organization and the International Civil Aviation Organization, to establish new efficiency standards, ship design and operational standards, and a push towards market-based mechanisms for these tow international sectors of commerce.

21

© 2013 Arthur Lee

After over 70 hours of round-the-clock negotiations at the end, and setting the record for the longest COP negotiations (to early Sunday morning after two weeks), negotiators from over 180 nations agreed to mandate the negotiations in the next four years towards a “protocol, legal instrument, or an agreed outcome with legal force” applicable to all Parties under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.

The negotiators further agreed to set a second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol from 1 January 2013 to either end of 2017 or end of 2020, with the end date to be negotiated at COP18 Qatar. All commitments already pledged by nations under the Kyoto Protocol (KP) will be translated into quantified emission limitation and reduction commitments (QELROs) by COP18.

At COP16 Cancun, Japan, Canada, and Russia stated they will not sign onto a second commitment of the Kyoto Protocol,

Canada withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol on 13 Dec 2011.

Australia is prepared to consider submitting information on its QELRO … following the necessary domestic processes …

22

Photos: Screen shots of the webcast between 2:30 and 3:30 am Sunday 11 Dec. European Commissioner Connie Hedegaard and India’s Minister Jayanthi Natarajan confronted each other’s point of issue on “legal outcome.”

Primer on the UNFCCC and the Complex Negotiations (6 of 10) COP17 or CMP7 Durban

© 2013 Arthur Lee

Primer on the UNFCCC and the Complex Negotiations (7 of 10) Cancun Agreement is made effective with a series of decisions at COP17.

The negotiators agreed to a whole series of decisions negotiated via multiple tracks, including the operationalization of the Green Climate Fund, which is likely to be the center piece for the transfer of monies and the source of funds for a large number of mitigation and adaptation actions in the future.

At Cancun, nations agreed to the establishment of a Green Fund with a fast start of $30 billion by 2012 and long term mobilization of $100 billion per year by 2020, which could include private sector funding. The Fund will be staffed by people from multilateral development banks, World Bank, and Global Environment Facility. At COP17, the Republic of Korea, Germany and Denmark agreed to contribute to the start-up cost of the Green Climate Fund.

Decisions were reached on:

Operationalizing the Adaptation Committee and formulating the information for national adaptation plans

Agreeing to the modalities and procedures of the Technology Executive Committee with a network of regional technology centers

Agreeing to the modalities and procedures for conducting CCS projects in the developing world under the Clean Development Mechanism.

Decision was reached favorably for nations and business representatives who support market-based mechanisms. There will be a new market-based mechanism in the long term action framework, which will continue to be negotiated.

23

Photo from UNFCCC webcast

Photo Arthur Lee

© 2013 Arthur Lee 24 Photo: IISD coverage of COP17.

Primer on the UNFCCC and the Complex Negotiations (8 of 10) At a crucial period 2:55 am to 3:40 am Sunday morning, 11 December 2011, the Durban Platform was agreed (COP-17)..

© 2013 Arthur Lee 25

Kyoto Protocol is extended from 2013 to 2020 with emission reductions submitted by nations with roughly 14% of global emissions (according to an EU press statement). Carry-over of emissions allowances is allowed, though most nations have declared not to use them in the second period. Access to the Kyoto flexibility mechanisms is allowed only to those nations agreeing to the second commitment period. Australia and Kazakhstan have now signed up to the second period.

The Clean Development Mechanism’s (CDM) 2% share of proceeds that goes to the Adaptation Fund is maintained at 2%. However, the transfer of emissions allowances in Joint Implementation projects (conducted between Annex I nations) will now be subject to the same 2% proceeds going to the Adaptation Fund. The CDM will continue to be in effect with no gap as of 1 January 2013.

The Long Term Cooperative Action track, which developing nations did not want to close, is now closed with several issues deferred to future negotiations in the technical bodies of the Convention, called the Subsidiary Body on Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA) and the Subsidiary Body on Implementation (SBI). For example, new market mechanism modalities and procedures are now deferred to SBSTA negotiations. Non-market approaches will also be considered in a new work program under SBSTA.

Sou

rce:

IIS

D n

ews

cove

rage

Primer on the UNFCCC and the Complex Negotiations (9 of 10) Doha Climate Gateway: Kyoto Protocol and Flex Mechanisms Extended; New Market Mechanism Deferred

Photo Arthur Lee

© 2013 Arthur Lee 26

The issue of “loss and damages” will be taken up for future negotiations in a new institutional mechanism under the UNFCCC with modalities and procedures to be elaborated at COP19 Warsaw. These negotiations will likely enter into issues such as: the risk of slow onset events (e.g., sea level rise) and extreme events; non-economic loss and damages; impacts of climate change integrated into climate-resilient development processes; and how impacts of climate change are affecting patterns of migration, displacement and human mobility.

With the closing of the LCA track, nations will now focus negotiations towards “a protocol, another legal instrument or an agreed outcome with legal force” to be completed by COP21 in 2015, and to come into force by 2020. The Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action (ADP) is the single track of negotiations under the UN Framework Convention with a negotiating text to be prepared by May 2015 to be ready for completing negotiations at COP21. Therefore, elements of the draft negotiating text will have to be considered at COP20.

In 2012, the ADP has begun considering these elements: (a) Application of the principles of the Convention; (b) Building on the experiences and lessons learned from other processes under the Convention and from other multilateral processes, as appropriate; (c) The scope, structure and design of the 2015 agreement; (d) Ways of defining and reflecting enhanced action. It will also consider, in 2013, ways to increase “ambition” of emissions reductions before 2020 in a second work stream.

Sou

rce:

IIS

D n

ews

cove

rage

Primer on the UNFCCC and the Complex Negotiations (10 of 10) Doha Climate Gateway: To consider loss and damage; Durban Platform to begin discussion of scope and structure

© 2013 Arthur Lee 27

Warsaw was not expected to be a high-profile round of climate change negotiations. Over 10,000 delegates, negotiators, representatives of intergovernmental organizations non-governmental organizations, and journalists registered to attend, which is near average for the Conference of Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in its 19th Session (COP19), which is held annually.

Negotiators had some 100 issues spread through the five tracks of negotiations to negotiate, and some 50 decisions that should have been made. At the end of the second week, ministers and their lead negotiators kept up the long tradition (unfortunately) of going late nights, round-the-clock and going 24 hours beyond the scheduled close of Friday evening.

Haiyan played a role in these negotiations, as the lead negotiator for Philippines Mr. Nadereve Sano announced and fasted throughout the two-weeks in solidarity with his brother and other countrymen who were dead, displaced and hungry for days. The decision to establish a loss and damage mechanism, which might not have concluded negotiations for another year or two, accelerated to an interim arrangement at Warsaw primarily because of the supertyphoon, though the Warsaw International Mechanism on Loss and Damage has no special funding at this time.

Advancing the Durban Platform was the key to a perception of success. Without the agreement reached overtime, COP19 Warsaw would have been deemed a failure. Late night debate over the word “commitment” by Brazil, China India and South Africa, weakened to the word “contributions” show a long road ahead to COP20 and COP21.

Photos by Arthur Lee.

Primer on the UNFCCC and the Complex Negotiations (11 of 11) COP19 Warsaw Advancing the Durban Platform and the Warsaw Mechanism for Loss and Damage