Lima to Paris: Key issues

Nafisa Goga D’SouzaClimate Change Regional Seminar3rd and 4th March 2015, Mumbai

Southern experience with the negotiation process

Underlying Contentious Issues

• Differing North South Perspectives historical vs future emissions

• Country vs Global Interests• Changing country Alliances: Southern voices are

disparate

Negotiations Context:Moving Backwards

• Country negotiations for 20 years

• Negotiation pathway has moved backwards-from legally binding commitments to voluntarism

• Wide gap between what needs to be done and what is actually done and proposed

Status of Kyoto:First Commitment Period: 2008-2012

Targets met due to the economic collapse of Eastern European countries

Shifting the burden to developing countries

Targets violated: 1990-2012

Country Target Emissions

Canada -6% +18%

NZ Stabilisation +25%

US -7% +4.7%

Japan -6% +16%

Iceland +10% +30%

Signed 1997 at Kyoto; In force 2005; 5.2% reduction below 1990 level between 2008-2012

Overall 16 per cent cut below 1990 levels, compared with the 5.2 per cent promised

In the same period, global emissions have risen by 50 per cent, due to rapid industrialisation of eg: China

Emission Pathway: The Case of United Kingdom

Drop

by 23%

Total carbon

footprint- increase of around 10 per cent

since 1990

Energy economist Dieter Helm, University of Oxford asked recently: "What exactly is the point of reducing emissions in Europe if it encourages energy-intensive industry to move to China, where the pollution will be even worse?"

Fundamental loophole

Status of Kyoto: Second Commitment Period 2013-2020

• Second compliance period up to 2020• As of Feb 2015 only 25 countries have

ratified• Canada, Russia, Japan, New Zealand

pulled out• Represents only 14% of global emissions

Copenhagen outcome: 2009

On the one hand more than 90 countries representing some 80% of global emissions submitted pledges under the agreements.

On the other hand targets too weak: less than half of the reductions needed by 2020.

Targets of the developing world were greater than the targets of the developed world

Lima 2014: Call for Climate Action

"After two weeks of fruitless negotiations among countries on how to steer clear of irreversible damage from climate change...parties lacked a sense of urgency, refusing to step out of their comfort zones...

At the same time

“in communities across the globe momentum for change is growing.“ (ACT Alliance)

LIMA Call for Climate Action

• No new commitment from parties

• Template for negotiations in Paris

• Geneva meeting : 86 paged document by the parties

Why Paris 2015 is crucial

Must create a New International Climate Agreement by Paris-CoP 21

In order to adopt a new Protocol, a legal instrument or agreed outcome with legal force for action post 2020 will be necessary

KEY ISSUES

Low Carbon Path (Mitigation) Adaptation Loss and Damage Finance

Low Carbon Path (Mitigation)

LCP: Intended Nationally Determined Contributions

Countries collectively aim to limit average global temperature rise to 2 degrees C

Contributions in the context of their national priorities, circumstances and capabilities

Ambitious, Transparent and Equitable

INTERNATIONAL

NATIONAL

Top Down System

Bottom Up System

Sticky Issues: Low Carbon Path

• Differing North/South perspective of what INDCs should include

• Will INDCs enable countries to bridge the gap between what science requires and what is being put on the table by each country?

• Dilution: “according to national circumstances”

• Differing country positions on MRV

INDCs-Country PerspectivesPM Sheikh Hasina at Climate Summit: “INDCs must be measurable and verifiable. But, new and additional resources will be needed for their implementation.”

Nepal on behalf of LDCs: “The LDCs believe that INDCs should form the first step toward the mitigation component of the 2015 Agreement

Pakistan agrees that INDCs should reflect mitigation, adaptation, and the means of implementation, consistent with Parties' commitments under the Convention (CBDR)

President Rajapaksa at Climate Summit: “All parties to the Convention must expedite domestic preparations for INDCs”.

Supports INDCs, but must include adaptation, technology transfer and finance to be included; objected to verification

REDD Mechanism

• REDD: Reducing emissions from deforestation in developing countries;

• REDD+: forest degradation, conservation an forest management

• Mechanism being negotiated since CoP 11

• Forests accounts for 17-29% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

• Objective to mitigate Climate Change through reducing net emissions of GHGs

Adaptation

Adaptation

MILESTONES

• CoP 7: 2001-Marrakesh-LDC Work Programme

Ongoing support for NAPAs

• CoP 12: 2006- Nairobi Work Programme

SBSTA: 5 year project to address impacts, vulnerability and adaptation

• CoP16: 2010-Cancun-Cancun Adaptation Framework: Adaptation Committee established and NAPs facilitated

• During CoP 20: , countries also made significant progress in elevating adaptation onto the same level as action to cut and curb emissions.

NAPAs/NAPs15 priority areas to reduce vulnerability in coastal communities to impacts of CC-Final Report 2005, updated 2009, Currently has a comprehensive Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan

Thematic Area: Infrastructure/Climate Change Risk ManagementCompleted 2012

Not LDC; hence NAP support facilitated at Cancun in 2010 for countries not part of LDCs

Not LDC; National Climate Change Adaptation Strategy, 2011-2016 submitted 2010

NAPCC and SAPCC process

Adaptation: Issues

Requirement Utilisation ProcessCalculation of costs

Finance: Unspent Funds

Special Funds Budget US $ Mn

Expenditure

Special Climate Change Fund 107 59.8

Least Developed Countries Fund

182 47

Adaptation Fund (under KP) 33 0

Green Climate Fund (under Convention)

10 billion

US $100 billion per year by 2020

Loss and Damage: Demands

• Separate item within the Paris agreement.

• Asking for compensation regime and a displacement coordination facility

• Finance for Loss and Damage separate from adaptation finance.

What we would like to see?

• Ambitious action before and after 2020

• Strong legal framework and clear rules

• Central role for equity

• A long term approach

• Finance for adaptation and the low carbon transition

• Clear links to the 2015 Sustainable Development Goal

• Climate Action should fulfill human rights for all.

The Way Forward

• Participation in Country level advocacy on equity issues

• Southern Voices at Paris CoP needed

Faith-based Communities: Challenges

• Identity development of faith based groups

• Collective voice is increasingly a challenge because of differing orientations

• Substantive engagement in policy issues demands attention to new skill sets

Community Voices Must Be Heard